Former intel chiefs fear future election hacks

As investigations continue into Russian interference into the 2016 presidential elections, former top intelligence officials said they worry it's only the beginning of a long, insidious fight.

"We've entered a new era of conflict and influence where states and non-state actors are figuring out new strategies and means to asymmetrically influence the United States," said Juan Zarate, former deputy national security advisor for combating terrorism, during an Aspen Institute panel on intelligence community and White House relations.

"They're realizing just like the terrorists did, that they can have strategic impact with fairly minimal barriers to entry. One of the ways to do that is to undermine faith and confidence in our democracy and elements of it," he said. Information warfare, pervasive cyber manipulation and cyber tools are the weapons in the new era, according to Zarate.

Russian "hybrid warfare," that contains all of those elements, should be a focus of national security, he said.

The 2016 incursions, according to Zarate, are not isolated episodes or anecdotes. They are part of a longer stream of threats. "I'm incredibly worried about what happened in 2016. I'm also worried about what's going to come and what is likely happening now, because these actors learn from each other and these tools are available on the dark web. That is a real threat to the country," he warned.

"I would say to the president that we have midterm elections coming up in two years," said John McLaughlin, former acting and deputy director, at the CIA who spoke on the same panel. "The clock's running."

The ongoing investigations into the interference would help define how to prevent it, McLaughlin said. "The premium right now ought to be on finding out how to prevent the kind of interference we saw in 2016."

Michael Hayden, former CIA and National Security Agency director, took a slightly different tack, laying some of the blame for the Russian interference on the toxic political environment in the U.S.

"I would offer the view that covert influence cannot create fractures within a society," he said. "Covert influence takes advantage of, and leverage, fractures in a society. The Russian knew us at least as well as we knew ourselves. If you really want to do something to make this less likely to succeed ... quit demonizing and de-legitimizing political opposition within the United States."