Russia blamed for federal court system hack that exposed cases and info on confidential informants
The hack, which Politico first reported last week, is believed to have compromised information about confidential sources in criminal cases across numerous federal districts.
It's not immediately clear which Russian entity was involved, several people familiar with the matter told the New York Times.
The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, which manages the electronic court records system, declined to comment on the reported revelations.
Some criminal case searches involved people with Russian and Eastern European surnames, the outlet reported.
Court system administrators informed Justice Department officials, clerks and chief judges in federal courts that 'persistent and sophisticated cyber threat actors have recently compromised sealed records,' according to an internal department memo seen by the Times.
Some records related to criminal activity with international ties were also believed to have been targeted. Chief judges were also warned last month to move cases fitting this description off the regular document-management system, the outlet reported.
Margo K. Brodie, chief judge of the Eastern District of New York, ordered 'documents filed under seal in criminal cases and in cases related to criminal investigations are prohibited from being filed' in PACER, a public database for court records.
The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts issued a statement last week saying that it is taking steps to further protect sensitive court filings, noting that most court documents filed in the system are not confidential.
'The federal Judiciary is taking additional steps to strengthen protections for sensitive case documents in response to recent escalated cyberattacks of a sophisticated and persistent nature on its case management system. The Judiciary is also further enhancing security of the system and to block future attacks, and it is prioritizing working with courts to mitigate the impact on litigants,' August 7 statement read.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump ‘did not like' moment Macron called him out over Putin during high-stakes call with European leaders
Donald Trump 'did not like' being called out by Emmanuel Macron during a high-stakes call with European leaders, ahead of his bilateral meeting with Vladimir Putin. The French president took 'very tough positions,' and reportedly told Trump Wednesday that a meeting was 'a very big thing' to give Putin, sources familiar with the call told Axios. "Trump didn't like that,' the source added. The U.S. president is set to meet with his authoritarian Russian counterpart on Friday in Alaska, the first time Putin has set foot on American soil since 2015. The pair will discuss bringing about an end to the Russian war in Ukraine, which has raged since February 2022. Trump told the European leaders, which included Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, that his goals for the summit were to secure a ceasefire and to better understand whether a full peace is possible. As well as Macron's hardline position, Axios reported that German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte were both "very active" on the call, and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni"raised some good points." Zelensky, who at this stage will not be present at Friday's meeting, told Trump that Putin 'cannot be trusted,' the outlet's source added. Speaking to reporters following the meeting on Wednesday, Trump said that he could not guarantee success on the ceasefire, and his administration previously described the meeting as a However, Trump also added that Putin would face 'severe consequences' if the Russian leader does not agree to a ceasefire, though he did not specify exactly what those consequences would be. Russia is likely to resist Ukraine and Europe's demands strongly and previously said its stance had not changed since it was set out by Putin in June 2024. When asked if Russia would face any consequences if Putin does not agree to stop the war after Friday's meeting, Trump responded: 'Yes, they will.' Asked if those consequences would be sanctions or tariffs, Trump told reporters: 'I don't have to say, there will be very severe consequences." The president also described another aim of the meeting as "setting the table" for a quick follow-up that would include Zelensky. "If the first one goes okay, we'll have a quick second one," he said. "I would like to do it almost immediately, and we'll have a quick second meeting between President Putin and President Zelenskiy and myself, if they'd like to have me there." Trump did not provide a time frame for a second meeting.
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Judge weighs whether Trump violated federal law by deploying National Guard to Los Angeles
A federal judge in San Francisco is weighing whether the Trump administration violated federal law by sending National Guard troops to accompany immigration agents on raids in Southern California. A three-day trial on the matter concluded Wednesday. California has argued the troops violated the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits military enforcement of domestic laws. Lawyers for the administration said the law doesn't apply because President Donald Trump called up the National Guard under an authority that allows their deployment if "the president is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.' Federal and military officials were called to testify, and the trial's third day largely focused on weedy arguments about the 1878 law and whether the court even had a role in determining the limits of presidential power. Trump deployed 4,000 National Guard members and later 700 Marines to Los Angeles in June after protests in response to immigration raids around the city. They were originally deployed to protect federal property, including a detention center targeted by protesters. The Guard members later began guarding agents as they continued arresting people suspected of being in the U.S. illegally. Between 250 and 300 Guard troops remain and have been activated through November. Wednesday's arguments Deputy Assistant Deputy Assistant Attorney General Eric Hamilton said Wednesday that the Posse Comitatus Act does not apply because the Guard was deployed under a section of U.S. Code that allows the president to call any state's guard into federal service when the country 'is invaded,' when 'there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government,' or when the president is unable 'to execute the laws of the United States.' He said Guard members weren't engaged in law enforcement and were just providing backup security for federal agents. 'If the purpose is the protection of law enforcement officers, it isn't law enforcement in the first place,' he said. 'On top of that, there's the fact that a (president's) constitutional inherent protective power is at work. That is itself an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act.' California Deputy Attorney General Meghan Strong argued the troops' role went beyond providing protection to federal agents and buildings. The troops, she said, had 'an active, direct role' enforcing the law when they detained people at least in two occasions and set up roadblocks and perimeters blocking access to public streets. 'For all the pretense and wordsmithing defendants have tried to employ, the facts are inescapable: The activities defendants have ordered Task Force 51 troops to engage in across Southern California violate the Posse Comitatus Act,' she said. Task Force 51 was the name of the command post activated to coordinate the troops deployment deployment. The Trump administration, she said, broke the law by using the troops to illegally enforce civilian law and operate as a single force with federal immigration officers, who often don military garb. California is asking Judge Charles Breyer to order the Trump administration to return control of the remaining troops to the state and to stop the federal government from using military troops in California 'to execute or assist in the execution of federal law or any civilian law enforcement functions by any federal agent or officer.' Judge weighs whether troops crossed the line 'The question in this case is whether the troops that have been stationed in Los Angeles have or have not crossed that line,' said David Levine, a professor at UC College of the Law San Francisco. 'Are they acting as military or are they acting as police? They can't act as police. They can only act within their bounds.' Troops deployed to Southern California received at least 60 requests for assistance from federal officials and responded to the majority of them, Hamilton told the judge. Army Maj. Gen. Scott Sherman, who commanded Task Force 51, said there were some times when troops outnumbered federal officers. He said that during an immigration enforcement at an illegal marijuana growing operation in Mecca, a desert community about 140 miles (225 kilometers) east of Los Angeles, about 300 task force soldiers were present, compared to 200 federal law enforcement agents. National Guard troops also accompanied federal immigration officers on raids at two state-licensed marijuana nurseries in Ventura County and to an operation at MacArthur Park in downtown Los Angeles intended as a show of force against people in the U.S. illegally and those protesting the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. Sherman testified during the second day of the trial that he raised concerns the deployment could violate the Posse Comitatus Act. He said soldiers were trained on the law and given materials that included a list of specific activities prohibited by the act, including doing security patrols and conducting traffic control, crowd control and riot control. Sherman said that while the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits troops from carrying out those actions, he was told by his superiors that there was a 'constitutional exception' that permitted such activities when the troops are protecting federal property or personnel.
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump's National Guard takeover of DC gets trolled: ‘Did they bust somebody for pairing Chardonnay with a steak?'
Night two of Donald Trump's takeover of the District of Columbia was met with a fair share of social media mockery from some residents of Washington, D.C., who took to Reddit, Twitter and other social media sites to vent. While videos and photos of agents patroling the cities swankiest (and safest) areas drew much of the attention, one video circulated on a pair of D.C. subreddits over Monday and Tuesday evening showed a group of armed federal agents confronting a group of younger Black men as they were hanging out on the porch of one the young men's homes. The agents in the video confront the group over alleged marijuana smoking — which is legal under D.C. law but only when inside a private residence. 'Tell your be smoking outside, don't be drinking outside. Because Donald Trump is tired of it,' one U.S. Park Police officer tells the group says in the video. One of the men replied, 'My favorite part is that 'Donald Trump doesn't like to see it'. 'Well, I'm not particularly fond of gauche amounts of gold or overweight people wearing skin-tight golf wear. So we're even I suppose,' he snarked. On Monday, the president announced at a White House press conference that he was deploying D.C.'s detachment of the National Guard and taking over control of D.C.'s Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) from city leaders, citing crime that he and his officials claim is out of control in the District. City leaders deny this. Photos and images of agents in the wealthy neighborhood of Georgetown and down by the wharf area drew some of the most intense heckling. 'Georgetown? Did they bust somebody for pairing Chardonnay with a steak?' wrote Robbie Sherwood, communications director for the Arizona House Democrats, on X. 'They ain't gonna find anyone but a millionaire walking their Shih Tzu,' another DC denizen tweeted. 'I still travel to DC, about 6 times a year, meeting friends for dinner in Georgetown is par for the course- and always enjoyable. Taking DEA/FBI agents off drug/CI/white collar cases, etc. for performative B.S. is an obscenity,' Luis Moreno, a former U.S. ambassador to Jamaica, tweeted. Reason reporter Billy Binion pointed out: 'This is laughable. There has been *one* violent crime reported in Georgetown since January. Arrests on the first night of Trump's semi-federalization of DC totaled under three dozen, compared to the hundreds of officers and agents deployed around the city. That disproportionate ratio could swing further out of whack once the full deployment of DC's National Guard detachment is carried out. Little sympathy emerged online for Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat who continues to tread a fine line between pushing back against Trump and Republicans' criticism of her administration and leadership of the city and a desire to not provoke further repudiation from the federal government. As many residents aimed their insults at the White House and the geared-up agents strolling along the Georgetown waterfront, a few remarked that the Democratic mayor had seemingly 'abandoned' the city to its fate. Bowser, at a meeting Tuesday, took a slightly stronger tone as she warned residents and businesses. 'This is a time where community needs to jump in and we all need to, to do what we can in our space, in our lane, to protect our city and to protect our autonomy, to protect our Home Rule, and get to the other side of this guy, and make sure we elect a Democratic House so that we have a backstop to this authoritarian push,' she said.
