Russian Cyber Hacks on U.S. Electoral System Far Wider Than Previously Known

• Attackers said to take measure of voting systems, databases
• A ‘red phone’ warning to the Kremlin from Obama White House

Go to Original
By Michael Riley and Jordan Robertson

Russia’s cyberattack on the U.S. electoral system before Donald Trump’s election was far more widespread than has been publicly revealed, including incursions into voter databases and software systems in almost twice as many states as previously reported.

In Illinois, investigators found evidence that cyber intruders tried to delete or alter voter data. The hackers accessed software designed to be used by poll workers on Election Day, and in at least one state accessed a campaign finance database. Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter. In all, the Russian hackers hit systems in a total of 39 states, one of them said.

The scope and sophistication so concerned Obama administration officials that they took an unprecedented step -- complaining directly to Moscow over a modern-day “red phone.” In October, two of the people said, the White House contacted the Kremlin on the back channel to offer detailed documents of what it said was Russia’s role in election meddling and to warn that the attacks risked setting off a broader conflict.

The new details, buttressed by a classified National Security Agency document recently disclosed by the Intercept, show the scope of alleged hacking that federal investigators are scrutinizing as they look into whether Trump campaign officials may have colluded in the efforts. But they also paint a worrisome picture for future elections: The newest portrayal of potentially deep vulnerabilities in the U.S.’s patchwork of voting technologies comes less than a week after former FBI Director James Comey warned Congress that Moscow isn’t done meddling.

“They’re coming after America,” Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee investigating Russian interference in the election. “They will be back.”

A spokeswoman for the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Washington declined to comment on the agency’s probe.

Kremlin Denials

Russian officials have publicly denied any role in cyber attacks connected to the U.S. elections, including a massive “spear phishing” effort that compromised Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee, among hundreds of other groups. President Vladimir Putin said in recent comments to reporters that criminals inside the country could have been involved without having been sanctioned by the Russian government.

One of the mysteries about the 2016 presidential election is why Russian intelligence, after gaining access to state and local systems, didn’t try to disrupt the vote. One possibility is that the American warning was effective. Another former senior U.S. official, who asked for anonymity to discuss the classified U.S. probe into pre-election hacking, said a more likely explanation is that several months of hacking failed to give the attackers the access they needed to master America’s disparate voting systems spread across more than 7,000 local jurisdictions.

Such operations need not change votes to be effective. In fact, the Obama administration believed that the Russians were possibly preparing to delete voter registration information or slow vote tallying in order to undermine confidence in the election. That effort went far beyond the carefully timed release of private communications by individuals and parties.

One former senior U.S. official expressed concern that the Russians now have three years to build on their knowledge of U.S. voting systems before the next presidential election, and there is every reason to believe they will use what they have learned in future attacks.

Secure Channel

As the first test of a communication system designed to de-escalate cyber conflict between the two countries, the cyber “red phone” -- not a phone, in fact, but a secure messaging channel for sending urgent messages and documents -- didn’t quite work as the White House had hoped. NBC News first reported that use of the red phone by the White House last December.

The White House provided evidence gathered on Russia’s hacking efforts and reasons why the U.S. considered it dangerously aggressive. Russia responded by asking for more information and providing assurances that it would look into the matter even as the hacking continued, according to the two people familiar with the response.

“Last year, as we detected intrusions into websites managed by election officials around the country, the administration worked relentlessly to protect our election infrastructure,” said Eric Schultz, a spokesman for former President Barack Obama. “Given that our election systems are so decentralized, that effort meant working with Democratic and Republican election administrators from all across the country to bolster their cyber defenses.”

Illinois Database

Illinois, which was among the states that gave the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security almost full access to investigate its systems, provides a window into the hackers’ successes and failures.

In early July 2016, a contractor who works two or three days a week at the state board of elections detected unauthorized data leaving the network, according to Ken Menzel, general counsel for the Illinois board of elections. The hackers had gained access to the state’s voter database, which contained information such as names, dates of birth, genders, driver’s licenses and partial Social Security numbers on 15 million people, half of whom were active voters. As many as 90,000 records were ultimately compromised.

But even if the entire database had been deleted, it might not have affected the election, according to Menzel. Counties upload records to the state, not the other way around, and no data moves from the database back to the counties, which run the elections. The hackers had no way of knowing that when they attacked the state database, Menzel said.

The state does, however, process online voter registration applications that are sent to the counties for approval, Menzel said. When voters are added to the county rolls, that information is then sent back to the state and added to the central database. This process, which is common across states, does present an opportunity for attackers to manipulate records at their inception.

Patient Zero

Illinois became Patient Zero in the government’s probe, eventually leading investigators to a hacking pandemic that touched four out of every five U.S. states.

Using evidence from the Illinois computer banks, federal agents were able to develop digital “signatures” -- among them, Internet Protocol addresses used by the attackers -- to spot the hackers at work.

The signatures were then sent through Homeland Security alerts and other means to every state. Thirty-seven states reported finding traces of the hackers in various systems, according to one of the people familiar with the probe. In two others -- Florida and California -- those traces were found in systems run by a private contractor managing critical election systems.

(An NSA document reportedly leaked by Reality Winner, the 25-year-old government contract worker arrested last week, identifies the Florida contractor as VR Systems, which makes an electronic voter identification system used by poll workers.)

In Illinois, investigators also found evidence that the hackers tried but failed to alter or delete some information in the database, an attempt that wasn’t previously reported. That suggested more than a mere spying mission and potentially a test run for a disruptive attack, according to the people familiar with the continuing U.S. counterintelligence inquiry.

States’ Response

That idea would obsess the Obama White House throughout the summer and fall of 2016, outweighing worries over the DNC hack and private Democratic campaign emails given to Wikileaks and other outlets, according to one of the people familiar with those conversations. The Homeland Security Department dispatched special teams to help states strengthen their cyber defenses, and some states hired private security companies to augment those efforts.

In many states, the extent of the Russian infiltration remains unclear. The federal government had no direct authority over state election systems, and some states offered limited cooperation. When then-DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson said last August that the department wanted to declare the systems as national critical infrastructure -- a designation that gives the federal government broader powers to intervene -- Republicans balked. Only after the election did the two sides eventually reach a deal to make the designation.

Relations with Russia remain strained. The cyber red phone was announced in 2011 as a provision in the countries’ Nuclear Risk Reduction Centers to allow urgent communication to defuse a possible cyber conflict. In 2008, what started during the Cold War as a teletype messaging system became a secure system for transferring messages and documents over fiber-optic lines.

After the Obama administration transmitted its documents and Russia asked for more information, the hackers’ work continued. According to the leaked NSA document, hackers working for Russian military intelligence were trying to take over the computers of 122 local election officials just days before the Nov. 8 election.

For more on Russia's cyber attacks, check out the Decrypted podcast:

While some inside the Obama administration pressed at the time to make the full scope of the Russian activity public, the White House was ultimately unwilling to risk public confidence in the election’s integrity, people familiar with those discussions said.

Revealed: reality of life working in an Ivanka Trump clothing factory

Workers complain of verbal abuse, impossible targets and ‘poverty pay’ so bad they have to live away from their children

Go to Original
By Krithika Varagur

The reality of working in a factory making clothes for Ivanka Trump’s label has been laid bare, with employees speaking of being paid so little they cannot live with their children, anti-union intimidation and women being offered a bonus if they don’t take time off while menstruating.

The Guardian has spoken to more than a dozen workers at the fashion label’s factory in Subang, Indonesia, where employees describe being paid one of the lowest minimum wages in Asia and there are claims of impossibly high production targets and sporadically compensated overtime.

The workers’ complaints come only a week after labour activists investigating possible abuses at a Chinese factory that makes Ivanka Trump shoes disappeared into police custody.

The activists’ group claimed they had uncovered a host of violations at the plant including salaries below China’s legal minimum wage, managers verbally abusing workers and “violations of women’s rights”.

In the Indonesian factory some of the complaints are similar, although the wages paid to employees in Subang are much lower.

Here we look at life inside the factory through interviews with workers, all who have asked for their details to be changed to avoid losing their jobs.

“We don’t like Donald Trump’s policies”

Alia is nothing if not industrious. She has worked in factories on and off since leaving her provincial high school, through the birth of two children, leading up to her current job making clothes for brands including Ivanka Trump at the PT Buma Apparel Industry factory in Subang, West Java.

Throughout her marriage to her husband, Ahmad, one or both of them has always worked. And yet, says Alia, the couple can never think about clearing their debts. Instead, what she has to show for years of work at PT Buma is two rooms in a dusty boarding house, rented for $30 a month and decorated with dozens of photos of their children because the couple can’t dream of having enough money to have them at home. The children live, instead, with their grandmother, hours away by motorcycle, and see their parents just one weekend a month, when they can afford the gasoline.

Alia makes the legal minimum wage for her job in her province: 2.3 million rupiah, or about $173 a month – but that legal minimum is among the lowest in Indonesia as a whole, and as much as 40% lower than in Chinese factories, another labour source for the Ivanka Trump brand.

PT Buma, a Korean-owned garment company started in Indonesia in 1999, is one of the suppliers of G-III Apparel Group, the wholesale manufacturer for prominent fashion brands including Trump’s clothing.

Many Buma workers know who Ivanka Trump is. Alia noticed her labels popping up on the clothes about a year ago.

Ahmad, who also works in the local garment industry and who, like his wife and most of the workers at her PT Buma factory, is an observant Muslim, said: “We don’t like Donald Trump’s policies.”

He had followed news of the so-called Muslim ban on TV this year. “But we’re not in a position to make employment decisions based on our principles,” he said.

When Alia was told the gist of Ivanka Trump’s new book on women in the workplace, she burst out laughing. Her idea of work-life balance, she said, would be if she could see her children more than once a month.

There are currently 2,759 workers at Buma, according to the regional manpower office, of which the total unionised workforce is about 200, split between two unions.

For the majority of non-union Buma workers, their job is a run-of-the-mill hardship to be endured. About three-quarters of them are women, many are mothers and several, like Alia, devote almost all their income to children with whom they can’t afford to live.

Sita, 23, is one such worker. She had to drop out of college when her parents got sick, and started working at Buma last year. She told the Guardian that her contract will be terminated soon, after seven months of work.

“That’s one of the company’s ways to cope with extra expenses,” she said. As a contract worker, she will not get any severance. “I can’t stand it any more. I work unpaid overtime every day and still earn just 2.3 million [rupiah] a month. I’m planning to move from Subang, where the minimum wage is too low. But I don’t know where to go yet. I haven’t got any connections.”

But for some the chance of a job and a pay packet – albeit a small one – is cause for some satisfaction.

Eka, a single mother in her 30s with two children, who has spent seven years at Buma, told the Guardian: “I still like my job. It’s not too hard.”

And Yuma, a young unmarried woman, said, “I’m glad that I work at Buma now, because my parents are farmers and it’s a tiring job. Here, at least there is air conditioning.”

The workers spoken to appear to typify the average employee making Ivanka Trump clothes in Indonesia. They are not egregiously abused but are in circumstances so far removed from the first daughter’s “women who work”brand that it was impossible for them to imagine a situation where anyone would wear the dresses they were sewing. Ivanka Trump stepped down from running her brand in January, although all products still bear her name on the label.

Women who are permanent employees at the Buma factory do get certain concessions: three months’ paid maternity leave (usually split between six weeks of pregnancy and six weeks post-birth), mandatory federal health insurance and a monthly bonus of $10.50 if they don’t take a day off for menstruation.

These reports of the Buma factory seem largely typical of the other factories in West Java, said Andriko Otang, of Indonesia’s Trade Union Rights Centre. “Using unrealistic production targets to justify unpaid overtime is very common.”

According to a photo of a timetable one worker showed the Guardian, the production targets, broken down for every half hour between 7am and 4pm, are between 58 and 92 garments per period, while the actual numbers produced are recorded as 27 to 40.

“The management is getting smarter: they tap out our ID cards at 4pm so you can’t prove anything,” said Wildan, a 25-year-old male worker.

Seven workers also said they were subject to verbal abuse, being called things like “animals, moron and monkey”. Otang said this, too, was fairly common.

Beyond this, Buma also has a pattern of firing workers right before Ramadan and rehiring them a month later, to avoid paying a “religious holiday bonus”, according to several workers. Indonesian law dictates all workers are owed a holiday bonus according to their religion, which works out to at least a month’s wages or more depending on seniority. In May 2017, there were about 290 people fired before Ramadan, according to Toto Sunarto, a leader of the SPSI union in Subang.

“The buck stops with her”

Indonesia has the largest gap among Asian countries between high and low wages for unskilled garment workers, according the International Labor Organisation. None of the workers the Guardian spoke with have ever received performance-based raises, only federally mandated ones – even though some of them have worked at the factory continuously for seven years.

“You have to assess minimum wages in the context of the country itself and, in that context, it’s not a living wage,” said David Welsh, Indonesia and Malaysia director at the Solidarity Center. “Given the disparity in wages across Indonesia, we see a trend whereby factories are migrating increasingly to the lowest wage jurisdictions … whose terms are essentially dictated deliberately by western brands.”

None of the not-already unionised workers who spoke to the Guardian expressed a desire to join one, citing fears of being fired and a general sense that their work wasn’t all that bad. Sita, for instance, said she “voluntarily” worked overtime almost every day because they never met their targets.

“It’s not surprising to me that in a factory like this, you have rank and file workers who are unclear on what their rights are, and what the law says in terms of wages and rights,” said Jim Keady, an American labor rights activist who has worked extensively in Indonesia. “But with these poverty wages — and I would call it that — just because something is legal, doesn’t mean it is moral.

“The buck stops with her,” said Keady, of Ivanka. “It’s her name that’s on the dress. Without her there is no brand.”

Carry Somers, founder of the non-profit Fashion Revolution said: “Ivanka Trump claims to be the ultimate destination for Women Who Work, but this clearly doesn’t extend to the women who work for her in factories around the world.”

In March, Indonesia was called out by President Donald Trump for having an unfavourable trade balance with the US. The president took issue with Indonesia’s $13bn surplus last year and vowed to penalise “cheating foreign importers”.

The fortunes of Ivanka’s brand have fluctuated wildly in the past year. During her father’s campaign, net sales for her brand increased by almost $18m in the year ending 31 January 2017, according to G-III data. But in recent months, several department stores have pulled her brand and G-III discreetly relabelled some Ivanka Trump merchandise under a different house brand, Adrienne Vitadini.

Hepi Abdulmanaf, an official with the local manpower ministry, was flattered by the Trump connection. “It’s proof that Indonesian goods are good enough for the world. Hopefully this – quality garments – becomes something Indonesia is known for.”

Meanwhile, the word “minus” was a common refrain among Buma workers, denoting ongoing debt. “We can never think about leaving debt,” said Alia. The cost of infant formula, school books, or a family visit can put these workers over the edge in any given month.

Fadli, a young man who works in the warehouse part of the factory, sees all the brands’ price tags as they are prepared for shipment to the United States.

“Sure I’m proud to make clothes for a well-known brand,” he said. “But because I see the price tags, I have to wonder, can’t they pay us a bit more?”

The Guardian contacted PT Buma for comment on the claims made in this article. A spokeswoman said neither she, nor anyone else at Buma Jakarta, nor anyone else at Buma Subang, wanted to comment.

G-III Apparel, which became the exclusive supplier of Ivanka Trump’s brand in 2012 told the Guardian in a statement: “G-III Apparel Group, Ltd. is committed to legal compliance and ethical business practices in all of our operations worldwide; we expect and require the same of our business partners throughout the world. We audit and inspect our vendor’s production facilities and when issues arise we work with our partners to correct them promptly.”

The Guardian also approached the White House for comment. None was forthcoming at time of publication. The Ivanka Trump brand’s public relations company declined to offer any comment.

'Shameful': Senate Votes to Further Arm Saudi Arabia as Yemen Suffers

Bipartisan opposition to the bill nonetheless sent a "strong message" to the Saudis—and to President Trump

Go to Original
By Jake Johnson

The Senate voted on Tuesday to approve a widely criticized $500 million sale of precision-guided munitions to Saudi Arabia, narrowly beating back a bipartisan effort to block the deal.

"Voting for the weapons sale, these Senators showed that they value the war profiteers more than lives of Yemenis and more than US national security." 
—Jodie Evans, CODEPINK

The final tally was 53-47 in favor of the sale, which is just part of a massive $100 billion arms package.

Among the sponsors of the resolution put forth to block the sale was Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who argued that despite the opposition's defeat, the effort nonetheless sent a "strong message" to Saudi Arabia.

Chris Murphy‏Verified account @ChrisMurphyCT

My resolution halting $500m of Saudi arms sale failed 47-53. But 20 more votes than similar resolution last fall. Strong message to Saudis.

"A bipartisan coalition of Senators just sent a major message to the Saudis," Murphy said in a statement. "Today's vote total would’ve been unthinkable not long ago, but Congress is finally taking notice that Saudi Arabia is using U.S. munitions to deliberately hit civilian targets inside Yemen."

Human rights groups echoed this sentiment while arguing that to continue to arm a persistent violator of human rights and funder of extremism is to be complicit in both.

In a statement released following the vote, Alexandra Schmitt of Human Rights Watch wrote, "Dozens of US Senators just sent a powerful message to Saudi Arabia: they—unlike President Donald Trump—want to stop selling arms to Saudi Arabia, a country that has repeatedly used US weapons in attacks that likely constitute war crimes. Forty-seven senators voted to block a US$510 million weapons deal, meaning it was only three votes short of passing."

Jodie Evans, co-founder of the anti-war group CODEPINK, had a sharp message for those who voted for the deal.

"Voting for the weapons sale," Evans said, "these Senators showed that they value the war profiteers more than lives of Yemenis and more than US national security."

If lawmakers really cared about national security, she asked, "would they vote to arm the regime most responsible for the spread of the Wahhabist ideology that forms the underpinnings of terrorist groups from Al Qaeda to ISIS? Would they vote to arm the regime that has funded and supported these terrorist groups?"

Yemenis, the victims of U.S.-backed Saudi aggression, feel "abandoned and betrayed" by the continued arms flow, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Ali Mohammed Murshed, a 32-year-old delivery man from Sana'a, spoke to the Times and exemplified how repeated arms deals in the face of Yemeni suffering only fuels anti-American sentiment in the country.

"There is nothing in this world that I hate more than Americans," Murshed said.

"With all the arms they have given to Saudi Arabia, the Saudis have achieved nothing after more than two years but killing civilians and destroying infrastructure," he concluded.

Trump gives U.S. military authority to set Afghan troop levels: U.S. official

Go to Original
By Phil Stewart and Idrees Ali

U.S. President Donald Trump has given Defense Secretary Jim Mattis the authority to set troop levels in Afghanistan, a U.S. official told Reuters on Tuesday, opening the door for future troop increases requested by the U.S. commander.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said no immediate decision had been made about the troop levels, which are now set at about 8,400.

The Pentagon declined to comment.

The decision is similar to one announced in April that applied to U.S. troop levels in Iraq and Syria, and came as Mattis warned Congress the U.S.-backed Afghan forces were not beating the Taliban despite more than 15 years of war.

"We are not winning in Afghanistan right now," Mattis said in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee earlier on Tuesday. "And we will correct this as soon as possible."

Mattis said the Taliban were "surging" at the moment, something he said he intended to address.

A former U.S. official said such a decision might allow the White House to argue that it was not micromanaging as much as the administration of former President Barack Obama was sometimes accused of doing.

Critics say delegating too much authority to the military does not shield Trump from political responsibility during battlefield setbacks and could reduce the chances for diplomats to warn of potential blowback from military decisions.

It has been four months since Army General John Nicholson, who leads U.S. and international forces in Afghanistan, said he needed "a few thousand" additional forces, some potentially drawn from U.S. allies.

Current and former U.S. officials say discussions revolve around adding 3,000 to 5,000 troops. Those forces are expected to be largely comprised of trainers to support Afghan forces, as well as air crews.

Deliberations include giving more authority to forces on the ground and taking more aggressive action against Taliban fighters.

Some U.S. officials have questioned the benefit of sending more troops to Afghanistan because any politically palatable number would not be enough to turn the tide, much less create stability and security. To date, more than 2,300 Americans have been killed and more than 17,000 wounded since the war began in 2001.

Any increase of several thousand troops would leave American forces in Afghanistan well below their 2011 peak of more than 100,000 troops.

The Afghan government was assessed by the U.S. military to control or influence just 59.7 percent of Afghanistan's 407 districts as of Feb. 20, a nearly 11 percentage-point decrease from the same time in 2016, according to data released by the U.S. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction.

A truck bomb explosion in Kabul last month killed more than 150 people, making it the deadliest attack in the Afghan capital since the Taliban were ousted in 2001 by a NATO-led coalition after ruling the country for five years.

On Saturday, three U.S. soldiers were killed when an Afghan soldier opened fire on them in eastern Afghanistan.

The broader regional U.S. strategy for Afghanistan remains unclear. Mattis promised on Tuesday to brief lawmakers on a new war strategy by mid-July that is widely expected to call for thousands more U.S. troops.

Senator John McCain, the chairman of the Armed Forces Committee, pressed Mattis on the deteriorating situation during the Tuesday hearing, saying the United States had an urgent need for "a change in strategy, and an increase in resources if we are to turn the situation around."

"We recognize the need for urgency," Mattis said.

Trump's Wall Street game plan needs players

Go to Original
By Pete Schroeder and Lisa Lambert

Wall Street banks on Tuesday cheered U.S. President Donald Trump's plans to loosen the leash put on them in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis but they do not expect significant change any time soon.

    The Trump administration has said the bulk of its plan for overhauling bank regulation can be done via executive order and through regulators, rather than requiring legislation from Congress. But Trump is months away from installing top officials at key regulatory posts to carry out his agenda.

"We won't see policy changes before the end of the year," said Rich Foster, senior counsel for regulatory and legal affairs at the Financial Services Roundtable, a trade group.

Trump has gradually been nominating heads of financial agencies, but only Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman Jay Clayton have been approved by Congress. Other agencies are either awaiting presidential picks or are operating under "acting" chiefs. Others have leaders appointed by Trump's Democratic predecessor, President Barack Obama.

The Federal Reserve has already signaled it will make its stress testing of banks more transparent and is considering other steps to simplify the process, in line with Treasury's recommendations.

But the Treasury called for even more significant changes, including having the Fed overhaul its testing models and assumptions. Such changes may have to wait until the administration has appointed a vice chair in charge of banking oversight at the Fed.

Randal Quarles, a veteran of the George W. Bush administration, is expected to be Trump's pick for the Fed's top bank regulator, people familiar with the matter have told Reuters. He has not been named publicly while he is being vetted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Office of Government Ethics.

    Once he is named, he will have to be confirmed by the Senate -- a process that could easily slide into the fall with Congress facing a busy calendar and an upcoming five-week congressional recess from the end of July to the beginning of September.

Analysis by the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington think tank, has found that since 1989, it has taken an average of 149 days for a financial regulatory nominee to receive Senate confirmation after being announced.

    Quarles has declined to comment on speculation about the possible nomination.

Meanwhile, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is being managed by an interim Trump pick, Keith Noreika, while the Senate considers Joseph Otting for the top role.

Otting was nominated earlier this month, but could face a contentious confirmation. Senator Sherrod Brown, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee that will consider the pick, has already announced his opposition, citing his time as an executive at OneWest Bank and that firm's foreclosure practices.

In addition to Clayton at the SEC, Christopher Giancarlo, the acting chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, is already in position, awaiting full confirmation to take on the role full-time.

But at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Obama appointee Martin Gruenberg intends to serve his full term, which expires in November. Treasury's plans to ease some of the restrictions around banks' trading, living wills and their adherence to international banking accords could face resistance from him, given his role in drafting many existing rules.

An FDIC spokesperson declined to comment.

    The Treasury report also focuses significant attention on overhauling mortgage rules. But that would require cooperation from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which wrote many of them.

That agency's Obama-appointed director, Richard Cordray, has a term that does not expire until summer 2018.

The CFPB, created in the wake of the financial crisis, receives its funding through the Federal Reserve and Trump can only fire Cordray "for cause," an almost impossible standard to meet. That leaves few levers the administration can pull to get the agency to reorganize its internal operations or make the suggested changes on mortgages.

    Cordray will probably do nothing more than subject Trump's proposals to "long-term analysis," said Quyen Truong, a partner at law firm Stroock & Stroock & Lavan, which in Washington means he will shelve it. Truong was the assistant director and deputy general counsel for the CFPB until early 2016.

    "The changes proposed by the study go to fundamental aspects of the CFPB's philosophy and operations," she said. "The CFPB likely will not confront directly those proposals."

A CFPB spokesperson said the agency was reviewing the report, but had no further comment at this time.

A Treasury spokesperson maintained the administration would be working quickly on its recommendations even as some key posts await Trump picks.

"We have strong working relationships with the regulators and considerable dialogue is already underway," said a Treasury spokesperson. "We plan on working with them to begin swiftly advancing these recommendations."