The Senate Committee has accused Russia of cyber attacks on the infrastructure of elections in the United States

The Senate Committee has accused Russia of cyber attacks on the infrastructure of elections in the United States

WASHINGTON, may 9 — RIA Novosti. The U.S. Senate Committee on intelligence circulated a six-page unclassified excerpt from the report, which accused Russia of attempts to interfere in the elections in 2016 but has not confirmed any effect of this “intervention”.

“In 2016, cyberdeadly associated with the Russian government spent an unprecedented coordinated cybercampaign against election infrastructure States,” the report said. It is argued that the objectives of the cyber attacks were from 18 to 21 statewide.

“At least in six States associated with Russian leaders went on scan and had attempts of intentional access on the voting web sites”, — said in the document.

In addition, the Committee argues that Russia has taken “a wide range of intelligence activities aimed at the voting process in the United States.”

“This started at least in early 2016, continued until election day and included the traditional gathering of information, as well as operations, possibly aimed at discrediting the integrity of the voting process in American elections and election results”, — reported in the document.

While the Committee stated that “intervention” does not affect the outcome of elections. “The Committee saw no evidence that they changed votes,” the report said.

In addition, the document of the Senate Committee contains a number of recommendations for the protection from foreign interference in elections.

The investigation of the “Russian intervention”
At the end of April, the intelligence Committee of the house of representatives presented the full 250-page declassified version of the report on the “Russian case”. In a detailed document made public earlier brief concluded that Russia intervened in U.S. elections in 2016, but no “collusion” between the headquarters of Donald trump and Moscow was not.

Comments

comments