Cybersecurity expert weighs in on Trump’s claim his campaign was hacked by Iran

Former President Trump claims his campaign was “hacked by the Iranian government.” It comes after the Office of the Director of National Intelligence warned in late July it continues to observe foreign influence operations by Russia, China and Iran aimed at disrupting November’s election and undermining American democracy. Geoff Bennett discussed more with Chris Krebs of Sentinel One.
Geoff Bennett:
We’re going to shift our focus now back to the new reports that U.S. elections continue to be targeted by foreign actors, with Microsoft outlining what it says was an Iranian cyberattack on an active presidential campaign.
The company declined to specify which campaign was affected, but, on Saturday, former President Donald Trump said on TRUTH Social that it was his, posting that one of his campaign’s Web sites was hacked by the Iranian government.
It comes after the office of the director of national intelligence warned in late July that it continues to observe foreign influence operations by Russia, China and Iran aimed at disrupting November’s election and undermining American democracy.
To help put these new reports in context, we’re joined now by Chris Krebs. He’s the chief intelligence and public policy officer at SentinelOne and the former director of Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.
Thanks for being with us.
Christopher Krebs, Former Director, U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency: Thanks for having me. Good to be here.
Geoff Bennett:
So what stands out to you about this apparent cyberattack on the Trump campaign? What would Iran stand to gain by hacking the campaign and distributing potentially sensitive information?
Christopher Krebs:
Well, I think it’s important to note that the hack piece and the leak piece are separate. We may not have certainty whether they’re actually related, whether this Robert individual that anonymously e-mailed Politico, Washington Post others is sharing information that was stolen from the Trump campaign.
That’s, I think, just something that we need to kind of set out. But I think what’s most significant and what’s most remarkable about this activity is that it, to me, signifies what I have been calling the Russification of Iranian information operations.
What that means is, when you look at the 2016 election, as laid out in the intelligence community assessment of 2017, it characterized the Russian efforts to interfere in that election along three prongs.
First is going after election infrastructure. The second is hacking campaigns and leaking information. The third is this broader disinformation operation. And if you go and look at that Microsoft report from this past Friday, it talks about Iranians trying to continue to stoke discord and discontent across the nation, about hacking a county election official and, yes, hacking a campaign.
So what we’re seeing again is kind of echoes of the past, but from a different country. And what do they gain? Chaos. That’s the immediate point is getting in there and undermining the electoral process and also targeting specifically someone that they don’t have a lot of affection for. And that’s former President Trump.
Geoff Bennett:
When it comes to foreign influence campaigns by countries like Russia, China, Iran, do they have similar goals?
Christopher Krebs:
Absolutely not, right?
I think the one goal that they likely do share is chaos. It’s undermining our confidence in our government’s ability and democracy in general to provide us the basic services and look out for us. I think that is, again, the top-line strategic objective.
But, in some cases, they may have preferences. They may want one candidate vice the other. But a lot of the times, it is also about targeting audiences back home to show them, hey, look things aren’t that great over there. You’re better off here with us as your leaders.
And that obviously is not the case, particularly for Russia.
Geoff Bennett:
In this instance, it’s the Trump campaign saying that they were targeted by Iran. Should we also expect similar actions taken against the Harris campaign or the Biden campaign previously?
Christopher Krebs:
I think, absolutely. I think what we’re seeing right now, it’s almost like an iceberg. You just see the part, the tip that’s out of the water.
There’s a lot more that’s going on that either has not been discovered yet or has not been publicly reported yet. I fully expect both the Biden campaign previously and the Harris campaign to have been targeted. And it’s likely happening right now this very moment, continuing to happen, much like the Trump campaign will continue to be targeted.
And that will continue going forward. And that will also be from any manner of threat actor, whether it’s China Russia, Iran, even North Korea and others.
Geoff Bennett:
We know what happened back in 2016, when the Clinton campaign was targeted by Russia. Those leaks were extremely damaging and ultimately you could argue were a major factor in the outcome of that election.
How do we navigate this imperative of making sure that the public is adequately informed without elevating the works of a bad actor?
Christopher Krebs:
Yes, well, I think this does speak to journalistic ethics and responsibility of platforms that receive this information, outlets that receive the information and using good judgment on whether it’s appropriate to release.
I think the second aspect is, actually, it’s the voters. They need to be attuned to the fact that foreign adversaries, our enemies, are trying to get into our heads. We are the targets here. It’s not just the campaigns. It’s not the election system itself. It’s the American voter. And we have to keep in mind that American voters decide American elections.
And we need to take a beat, take a pause, understand that we’re the target and not let them be successful.
Geoff Bennett:
How can Americans make sure that the information that they’re accessing and consuming, especially online and especially via social media, is trustworthy?
Christopher Krebs:
Yes, I — it just goes that thing of going to credible, authoritative voices. So if you have a question about an election, don’t listen to some random person on X or Facebook or whatever.
Go to the election official web page. They have FAQs set up that are primed for just those sorts of inquiries and research. And if something that you see online really resonates with you and kind of gets the lizard brain going, again, pause for a moment, ask why you’re being served that information, why you’re being targeted, and then feel free to do a little bit of research and to confirm what you’re reading.
Geoff Bennett:
I also want to ask you about a recent social media post by Donald Trump, where he falsely claimed that Kamala Harris was basically inflating her crowd sizes via artificial intelligence.
It’s one thing when we talk about disinformation from a foreign actor, but when you have this kind of bad information put out by, in this case, the nominee of a major party, what are the implications of that?
Christopher Krebs:
Well, I think you have to kind of accept the fact that, in elections for decades, if not longer, there have always been overstatements, misrepresentations, and in some cases flat-out lies. That’s just part of the process. That’s part of elections in the United States.
But I think it’s that overarching information ecosystem right now that I talk to that’s being targeted, that’s being undermined, that’s being corrupted by actors outside and in. And the incentive structures, meaning, how do they benefit from this, what kind of angst and anger do they get generated, that is in favor of these stories, of these bold-faced lies.
So I would expect that we’re going to see more of it, until the voters hold people accountable for lying to them.
Geoff Bennett:
Chris Krebs, thanks so much for your insights. Appreciate it.
Christopher Krebs:
Thanks so much.