From what I understand of the story it started with an email sent to internal activists explaining why there were some performance issues with internal campaign tools. The attack was just a DDoS but once it hits the press it takes on a life of its own. Simplified technical details for a non-technical activist base get used to create a story, it's interesting to see how the sausage gets made but other than referring to the government body for cyber attacks as a matter of protocol I don't think there's much to it.<p>As an aside Labour really do seem to have a pretty good technical team. Both the party and the loosely affiliated activist group Momentum have built a variety of campaign tools which have helped organise and mobilise large canvassing efforts. I've been impressed by what they've managed to put together. It sounds like they shared ideas and expertise with Bernie's campaign team in the US when it comes to building these tools.
I would be interested if they could release all pertinent logs. I think it would be something interesting to spool through.<p>For instance "large scale attack" makes me assume a DDoS, which is hardly the level of attack I'd expect to risk data exfiltration unless it is used as a distraction.<p>So I'm not sure what "large-scale" means in this context; eitherway, pcaps plz.
It would be nice to have some context and by that, a weekly data volume in attacks and types of attacks as well as normal visitors. May be a case of they scale and this is just normal. Equally the same data upon other parties, again over time and also be great to see previou election spikes in visitors and atatcks.<p>But for many, this is just part and parcel of the state of play of the internet and politics upon that stage.<p>I'd not rule this out as a tactical PR release to sway hearts and minds style approach. But then, I tend to be over pragmatic when it comes to anything political when the minutia is missing along with the context it brings.