Hak on the right

"The US government officially did not have responsible for the penetration of which were reported, to any legal entity or the country."

So carefully put the White House spokesman Josh Ernest, when he was asked to comment on the actions of Russian hackers who hacking databases in Arizona and Illinois.

President Obama, when he was asked about hacks, stopped literally in a hemisphere.

“I know that experts attribute it to Russians.” He said in an interview with NBC News. “We know that the Russians are hacking our systems. Not only state, but also private. I cannot judge the motives of all these leaks. I know that Donald Trump repeatedly expressed admiration to Vladimir Putin.”

“It seems that you assume that Putin prefers to see Trump in the White House,” the journalist pushed him.

“I judge only by the words of Trump himself,” the president answered. “And I think that Trump is illuminated by the Russian press very benevolently.”

"Do you think it is possible that the Russians will try to influence the elections in the USA?" - the journalist insisted.

“Everything is possible,” Obama said.

But what exactly is possible?

In March 2007, the subcommittee of the lower house of Congress for the election held a public hearing about the reliability of American voting machines. Princess University Princess Edward Felten demonstrated in action one of the most common Diebold production devices. The list included two - George Washington and Benedict Arnold (the name of the general, during the war for the independence of the enemy, became synonymous with the word "traitor"). Felten voted three times for Washington, but Arnold came out with the winner with a score of 2: 1. The result "corrected" the virus with which the professor infected the car.

The unreliability of the electronic voting method has led to the fact that now the will is duplicated using a receipt that remains with the voter. Nevertheless, the system is vulnerable. After all, the data from each car is entered in terminals, then transmitted further - at any stage they can be distorted. With a significant difference with eczit regulations, the voting results will cause suspicion. Therefore, it is necessary to falsify the results where a stubborn struggle is expected.

We were hypnotized and reassured by the latest surveys that promises a slight victory by Hillary Clinton. However, its advantage gradually melts. From eight percentage points it has decreased to 4-5. And the sociological service Rasmussen, according to the results of her survey, on September 1, put Donald Trump in first place.

Do not forget that each state elects the president separately according to the majority system: the winner receives all state electors. Both parties have their own traditional electorate, which provides the candidate with a victory where he is the majority. But for the election of these electors, these electors. Therefore, the main fight is now going on for the "front -line" states where no candidate has a guaranteed advantage. Clinton and Trump are stubborn struggle, in particular, in one of the key states - Florida. According to the latest survey , Hillary’s separation from Trump is only two percentage points there, 44:42, with 14 percent of the undefined voters and a 4 percent statistical error. Arizona also belongs to the front -line states, where the hacking of the voter database took place. Trump is currently ahead , but not much. With such dense rivalry, a distorted result may not cause suspicion.

It is easy to plant a virus in the car. Experts claim that this will cost only $ 15 and will not require much skill. In addition, in five states, cars do not give out receipts to voters. In ten more, they are not given out in all areas.

And what gives access to the registration data of voters? They can be confused: replace the addresses or phone numbers. Such confusion has already taken place during the primaries. As a result, voters were not allowed to vote.

The virus does not have to be engaged in fraud - this can also be done by employees of election commissions. In New York, for example, after the primaries, two employees were fired, who removed at least 120 thousand names from the voter lists.

Finally, the system can be disabled using DDOS attack.

Any of the incidents listed above will enable the loser to dispute the result.

Criminations in the electoral systems happened before, but did not attract special attention to themselves: who is interested in the elections of a member of the school council in any outback? But if you build them in chronological order, it is difficult to get rid of the impression that hackers conducted field tests for the last 6-8 years, checked the system for strength without a certain plan. In 2008, sites of both candidates, Obama and McCain were attacked. In 2012, Mitt Romny’s website was disabled for several hours - hackers deprived him of donations that he could get during this time. Last year, the White House's mail server was hacked .

They add nervousness to the campaign of Julian Assange to present Hillary Clinton "October Surprise" in the form of a new incriminating evidence.

It is possible that hackers took possession of more thin technologies. Here, let's say, the story with the husband of the closest adviser Hillary Clinton Khuma Abedin. Former Congressman Anthony Wiener for the third time came across sexual correspondence with an extraneous lady. Huma this time could not stand it and announced that she had parted with the wrong spouse. It is clear that this story was poorly affected by her self -control. But where did the New York Post take this correspondence, what kind of mysterious brunette, a supporter of Trump and a member of the National Rifle Association? There are no answers to these questions. The work of hackers? It may very well be.

In fact, even the very possibility of falsification is important, but reasoning about it. They inspire voters with doubt about the reliability of the result. Currently, 34 percent of the Americans are sure that the voting results will be fabricated. This, perhaps, is the main goal of hacks.

What did Vladimir Putin have recently told us about the American elections? But what :

Here they teach everyone how to live, and they teach democracies. And what, do you think that there are democratic elections of the president, or something? .. Look: twice in the history of the United States, the President of the man was elected by a majority vote of electors, and there were fewer voters behind these electors. Is this democracy, or what? And when they say to us: “Do not climb, this is not your business, we are so used to it,” - I want to say: “Well then, do not go to us. What are you climbing? Understand at first.”

Who climbs to whom is the question.