Denying Trump’s Denial, US Intel Chief Says There’s More Evidence of Russian Hacking

Russian President Vladimir Putin is seen here attending the Business Russia Congress in Moscow Tuesday.

Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP

AA Font size + Print

Russian President Vladimir Putin is seen here attending the Business Russia Congress in Moscow Tuesday.

The nation’s top intelligence official says “forensic and other” evidence proves Russian election interference.

At Wednesday’s debate, Donald Trump said that Hillary Clinton “has no idea whether it’s Russia” who hacked into the private networks of her campaign’s allies, then released the information to Wikileaks and the world. “Our country has no idea.”

This morning, without calling out Trump by name, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said, um, yeah, we do.

The cybersecurity community has attributed that attack and leak to FANCY BEAR, a group also known as APT 28. Defense One asked Clapper if the intelligence community has identified specific people associated with the group? Specific buildings? Units? How good is the attribution and how strong is the connection to nation-state backing?

In response, Clapper cited his office’s Oct. 7 press release. “We wouldn’t have made it unless we were very confident. I’m not going to discuss the underlying evidentiary basis for it, but I can say with confidence, it speaks for itself,” he said.

The statement reads: “The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process.”

Clapper also hinted that the intelligence community had more information about the groups than has yet been made public.

“That’s one of the reasons we waited for as long as we did to make the statement, was to ensure that we had sufficient evidence both forensic and otherwise, to reach the conclusion we reached as articulated in the statement. I don’t think I need to say anything more about it, other than the fact the statement speaks for itself. It was mainly addressed to the American electorate, not to any foreign nation-state.”

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence collects and coordinates for the President the information and analysis from the 17 agencies that make up U.S. national intelligence collection.

Speaking at an American Enterprise Institute event on Wednesday, the NSA’s Curt Dukes said that U.S. Cyber Command was the leading investigatory agency.

“It was US Cyber Command, with support from the Information Assurance Directorate” said Dukes, NSA’s deputy national Manager for National Security Systems. “U.S. Cyber Command led the activity. I can’t get into who the actors are.”

Close [ x ] More from DefenseOne

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Software-Defined Networking

    So many demands are being placed on federal information technology networks, which must handle vast amounts of data, accommodate voice and video, and cope with a multitude of highly connected devices while keeping government information secure from cyber threats. This issue brief discusses the state of SDN in the federal government and the path forward.

  • Military Readiness: Ensuring Readiness with Analytic Insight

    To determine military readiness, decision makers in defense organizations must develop an understanding of complex inter-relationships among readiness variables. For example, how will an anticipated change in a readiness input really impact readiness at the unit level and, equally important, how will it impact readiness outside of the unit? Learn how to form a more sophisticated and accurate understanding of readiness and make decisions in a timely and cost-effective manner.

  • Cyber Risk Report: Cybercrime Trends from 2016

    In our first half 2016 cyber trends report, SurfWatch Labs threat intelligence analysts noted one key theme – the interconnected nature of cybercrime – and the second half of the year saw organizations continuing to struggle with that reality. The number of potential cyber threats, the pool of already compromised information, and the ease of finding increasingly sophisticated cybercriminal tools continued to snowball throughout the year.

  • A New Security Architecture for Federal Networks

    Federal government networks are under constant attack, and the number of those attacks is increasing. This issue brief discusses today's threats and a new model for the future.

  • Information Operations: Retaking the High Ground

    Today's threats are fluent in rapidly evolving areas of the Internet, especially social media. Learn how military organizations can secure an advantage in this developing arena.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.