On Sunday, the French chose Emmanuel Macron as the new president of France. The vote was conclusive, and Macron beat his main right-hand opponent Marine Le Pen by a landslide. Despite Macron’s apparent apparent victory, however, in reality – behind the scenes – all hell broke out in the days that elapsed until the election.
A massive cyberattack that targeted Macron for an unknown period suddenly bore fruit Friday night. At that time, a massive flight of the new French President was dumped on the Internet, waving a lot of feathers and causing panic among the supporters of Macron.
Unlike the period before the US elections, however, the leak came too late to affect the outcome of the election. A national ban on reporting candidates to the elections for 44 hours before the vote resulted in a complete media failure on the leak. Despite a general debate on the leak on French social networks, citizens were reluctant to start.
Fingers in the ears
The news about US electoral piracy and a widespread belief in Europe that Trump is not the “breath of fresh air” that large parts of American citizens seem to believe it is, has given the French l Pulse to reflect twice. The result is that Macron’s leak fell widely on deaf ears.
Not wanting to succumb to the last-minute influence of an unknown foreign force, the French and the media held their place. The French media respected the prohibition of electoral reporting and ignored what most people felt was an eleventh hour attempt to counter the process.
This sentiment was perpetuated by the Twitter comments of Le Pen’s supporters about the escape. Florian Philippot, a senior official of the National Front, commented:
“Will Macron leaks teach us things that investigative journalism deliberately killed? It’s amazing, this sinking of democracy.
The French (who have become skeptical) consider these types of comments as an ultimate effort to influence the race. The French contemplated them with contempt. In any case, it seems possible that the flight of Macron did indeed help to seal the case for the former banker of Rothschild rather than the reverse.
One-sided Hacking Campaign
In the United States, electoral piracy had no impact on one side of the race (Hillary Clinton and the National Democratic Committee). The same thing ended up being true in France, where the target of electoral piracy was also extremely unilateral. However, the reality is much more likely to be that the pirates have penetrated as many political candidates as possible while searching for dirt.
This is the belief of Gabi Siboni, senior researcher at the Israel Institute for National Security Studies (INSS). Siboni suggested that, because “piracy can happen over time,” the attacks may have taken place before it was known that Macron was the runner before.
In this spirit, Siboni is of the opinion that it is likely that “many candidates” have been penetrated. According to Siboni, countries simply do not have the means to protect political candidates. On that point, we certainly agree.
The heart of the problem
The sad truth is that, despite the danger that piracy causes to the democratic process, governments do not want to be content with robust cyber security. In the United States, the recent Wikileaks “Vault 7” escape the CIA, demonstrate that the government and its intelligence agencies prefer to keep the electronic infrastructure vulnerable to attacks.
Strong encryption is repeatedly vilified by governments around the world. In the UK, the “Snooper Charter” created a shadow on strong encryption within the nation, making it a legal obligation for companies to provide backdoors in their products and services. As if that was not enough, it has recently emerged that the UK is also planning to increase these capabilities (to start real-time mass surveillance of citizens).
Theresa May, who was Bill’s driving force behind the investigative powers (known as the Snooper Charter) in his position as Secretary of the Interior, will no doubt see that the proposed extensions (known as Regulations On the investigative powers (technical capacity 2017) are passed, Once it will have won the general elections of the United Kingdom next month.
Backdoors and cyber-insecurity
In the United States, it was reported last week that FBI director James Comey hopes that the Trump administration will also pass a law that requires backdoors in the United States. With the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Senate in the hands of Trump, it seems very likely that Comey gets his wish.
Let me be clear: Comey, the alphabet organizations and the Trump administration are a direct enemy of cybersecurity and, as such, are the enemies of democracy.
When we talk about electoral piracy, it is not the voting counters themselves that we are talking about. What we are discussing is the ability to hack information about candidates and to disseminate (or not to disseminate) that information in order to create a desired outcome.
Strong encryption is the essence of cybersecurity. It is the only drug for the disease that the world is currently suffering. Unfortunately, this disease is perpetually perpetuated by governments and the paymasters who drive the political system behind the scenes. The media, the banks and the military industrial complex – all are under the influence of very few hands, and these institutions work in collusion.
As such, despite falling into the spheres of “conspiracy” (in the minds of many people), it seems very likely that the ebb and flow of opinions of citizens around the world are directly influenced and massed By the will of these few entities.
On this point, you can stay on the fence. However, there is no doubt that if governments do their utmost to perpetuate cyber-insecurity, there is certainly something curved, which does not contribute to the democratic process.