FBI and DHS warn U.S. officials of possible Russian cyberattacks linked to invasion of Ukraine

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

The Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Homeland Security on Monday warned law enforcement, military and others charged with overseeing critical U.S. infrastructure to be prepared for potential Russian cyberattacks in conjunction with a possible invasion of Ukraine.

During a Monday afternoon conference call, the nation’s top cybersecurity officials briefed state and local government agencies and cybersecurity personnel, warning them to look out for signs of Russian activity on their networks. The federal officials also urged those on the call to dramatically lower their threshold for reporting suspicious activity.

A Russian invasion of Ukraine could begin at any time, the officials said, and the military action is also likely to be accompanied by cyberattacks targeting both Ukrainian and U.S. networks. Officials underscored that the U.S. believes Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is likely to begin with aerial bombings and missile attacks and in conjunction with cyber operations.

Two people who were on the call told Yahoo News that they were alarmed by how many people on the call appeared not to know the process for reporting suspicious cyberactivity.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/exclusive-fbi-and-dhs-warn-us-officials-of-possible-russian-cyber-attacks-linked-to-invasion-of-ukraine-220516786.html

[sprinkleeninow]

1. "...invasion likely...to begin with aerial bombings and missile attacks..."

GOD, NO!!

[Irish_Dem]

2. Sadly, this is the standard way to start a battle, Sprinkle. :(

You do air strikes and missiles first. It is called softening the target. It means you don't need as many ground troops, and you don't have as many wounded ground troops.

Unfortunately it means more civilian deaths and destruction of infrastructure.

You can do more or less of the air strike and missiles. If you want to get really ugly you do a lot. This would be called massive air strikes.

When Eisenhower planned D-Day, he told Churchill he would resign if the British generals were allowed to do the massive air strikes they wanted.

Eisenhower would not stand by and let the capitals of Europe be destroyed and a huge number of civilian casualties take place.

Churchill agreed, because once the war was over, the Allies would have to put Europe back together and unite it.
Eisenhower stayed on the job.

[sprinkleeninow]

3. Yes, easy for rus, difficult (tragic) for the Ukrainians.

Infrastructure destroyed.

Will 'he' really, really toss a match and be the cause of an atrocious conflagration?

[Irish_Dem]

4. We don't know what he will do. He is psychologically capable

of several options, given that he is a ruthless, cruel sociopath who uses Machiavellian tactics to get his way. He is a very wealthy man who will go to almost any length to get what he wants.

He is certainly capable of blowing up Ukraine, and not blinking an eye.

I also think he would threaten annihilation to get what he wants. But the bluff is a very expensive one, it has cost him a fortune to amass all these troops, to feed them, etc. And the longer the soldiers sit and twiddle their thumps, the madder they get.
And the world does not like negotiating with terrorists.

Either way he goes, there will be fall out.

Edit to add: the rest of the world thinks he will push the button, that is why they are evacuating their people from the Ukraine.

[sprinkleeninow]

5. That occured to me today. The expense of having troops positioned,

weaponry and also the positioning of ships wherever they were sent.

I pray that this realization isn't going to translate into definite invasion.

[Irish_Dem]

6. Probably not, since the bluff is still much cheaper than war.