Russian bank threatens researcher with CFAA suit over DNS request data

In a document obtained by CyberScoop, Alfa Bank notified Indiana University computer researcher L. Jean Camp that it’s pursuing “all available options” after Camp’s research suggested the bank engaged in some form of communication with the Trump Organization. Washington-based law firm Kirkland & Ellis sent the letter on the bank’s behalf on March 17.

Among the options listed is litigation under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act’s civil action provision, which allows companies to sue for damages in the event of unauthorized computer access. Foreign entities can bring cases to U.S. federal courts under a CFAA provision that allows private causes of action.

Camp’s research has pointed to Alfa Bank’s servers making an unusually high amount of DNS lookups to Trump Organization servers, particularly during a period of time in the summer of 2016. The possible connection was first revealed in October by Slate, but the bank claimed the most likely explanation was spam marketing due to bank executives’ use of Trump hotels.

More: https://www.cyberscoop.com/alfa-bank-l-jean-camp-donald-trump-cfaa-suit-dns-data/

FBI Director Comey confirms the bureau is investigating Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election

By Ellen Nakashima and Karoun Demirjian March 20 at 10:50 AM

FBI Director James B. Comey acknowledged on Monday the existence of a counterintelligence investigation into the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 election, and said that probe extends to the nature of any links between Trump campaign associates and the Russian government.

Testifying before the House Intelligence Committee, Comey said the investigation is also exploring whether there was any coordination between the campaign and the Kremlin, and “whether any crimes were committed.”

The acknowledgment was an unusual move, given that the FBI’s practice is not to confirm the existence of ongoing investigations. “But in unusual circumstances, where it is in the public interest,” Comey said, “it may be appropriate to do so.”

Comey said he had been authorized by the Justice Department to confirm the wide-ranging probe’s existence.

Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-director-to-testify-on-russian-interference-in-the-presidential-election/2017/03/20/cdea86ca-0ce2-11e7-9d5a-a83e627dc120_story.html?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.948f29dd1c25

Comey Confirms F.B.I. Investigation of Russian Election Interference, Links to Trump Campaign

■ James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director, confirmed an F.B.I. investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election.

■ The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence convened on Monday for the first public hearing on Russia’s efforts to influence the election.

■ The hearing’s featured witnesses: the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, and Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/20/us/politics/intelligence-committee-russia-donald-trump.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share

...snip

Although it would appear that both groups were seeking much the same information, from the two radically different responses it is evident that the content of those briefings were not the same. What may have made the difference is who Comey was addressing in each briefing. He trusted those in the Senate briefing with highly confidential information but the same cannot be said for the briefing given to Nunes and Schiff.

If there was someone in that House briefing that Comey didn’t trust, it was Devin Nunes. The circumstantial evidence against Nunes is certainly piling up:

*He was on Trump’s transition team which was chockablock with Russiaphiles

*As chairman of the House Intel Committee, he initially refused to investigate Trump-Russia but focussed instead on White House and agency leakers

*As directed by the White House, he told media contacts (as provided for him by Sean Spicer) there was nothing to any of the Kremlingate stories

*His apparent agreement to investigate Trump-Russia after all came shortly after his total denial of the Kremlingate stories; he should have recused himself but refused to do so

*Having agreed to investigate Trump campaign ties to Russia, he has since spent his time avoiding such an investigation and diverted his committee down the garden path of non-existent wiretaps

*Comey has given two briefings to Nunes’ committee and both times the briefings were very general, whereas Comey’s briefings to Upper Chamber have resulted in tight-lipped and very worried senators.

Thus far Nunes remains on my list of GOP congressmen who are likely to be involved to some extent in Kremlingate while Chuck Grassley is in the clear.

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2017/03/16/1643906/-Wednesday-15-2017-Director-Comey-gave-Two-Briefings-on-Capitol-Hill

When The New York Times Helped Trump By Putting The Brakes On The Russian Hacking Story

Talk about strange bedfellows joining forces to produce an unlikely media alliance.

That’s what happened when The New York Times reported on October 31, 2016, that FBI officials had not been able to uncover any evidence that Russian operatives, through allegedly hacking Democratic emails, were trying to help elect Donald Trump.

“Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia,” read the October 31 Times headline which relied on unnamed “law enforcement officials.”

Acting as an almost unofficial time-out, and one that came with the Times’ seal of approval, the article helped put the media brakes on the unfolding Russian hacking story; the same Russian hacking story that has now morphed into a full-scale Trump scandal.

The message on October 31 from the Times’ sources was unmistakable: There’s no conclusive connection between Trump and the Russians, and the Russians’ efforts were “aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump.” (Question: How do you not pick sides in a two-person election if you only undermine one of the candidates, the way Russian hackers only undermined the Democrat?)

Lots more here.