2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumQuestions about Hillary's Emails
I work in IT and I work for a State Government. I am familiar with how Government uses their email systems.
So as I keep reading the issues with Hillary, a couple of questions come to mind.
1) If Hillary was sending confidential information to someone else, that email is also on the other email server as well. It's not a one way street. And at either end, there are numerous IT people who can look at the MS Exchange server (or whatever product they were using for an email server.) This is true for all of the people who are clamoring about this now as well. Any emails they send do go to another server other than theirs. The exception would be if they send to someone within their domain, but even then, most are going to go to another building, with possibly another server.
2) What is with this "secured" government server. Are they now saying that the government does a much better job of security than private companies? The truth is that I can access my email from the web as well as from Outlook. I log onto my email web portal just like I do my sbcglobal mail and att mail. There are no extra security settings on the browser end. The log on process is the same.
So to me, this is nothing but a witch hunt being done by non technical people who believe that the they can create a crisis when none exists. Besides, didn't Condoliza Rice also use a private server? Why aren't we investigating her as well? Do we only investigate something if they are running for office?
/end vent
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)posted an OP saying some senate committee is going to the tech company to get the data. However, in there article State is quoted as saying she didn't send the emails. So I don't know if now they are just chasing down the rabbit hole of spillage or what?
Romulox
(25,960 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,716 posts)Presumably if there was material in HRC's private e-mail that shouldn't be there , there was material on those gentlemen's private e-mail accounts as well that shouldn't have been there.
Sancho
(9,070 posts)Updated: The Facts About Hillary Clintons Emails
Weve put all of the information about Hillary Clintons State Department emails here. Just the facts, all in one place.
Yes, an estimated 90% of Hillary's email was exchanged with .gov addresses that automatically captured everything.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)That's exactly what it is. Sadly, a lot of liberals who aren't tech savvy (or just plain hate HRC) that post on this board have jumped onto the bandwagon.
frylock
(34,825 posts)What are your credentials?
padfun
(1,789 posts)then you know that, if it is connected, then nothing is truly safe.
I was at a Microsoft Demonstration the other day and I mentioned my concerns about cloud security. He said how even the IRS uses their Microsoft Cloud services. Right then someone else mentioned how the IRS recently got hacked with 21 million users information and asked if it was hacked from the MS cloud. The instructor really had no answers.
I can get into any computer on my network (I am assigned rights), and can get into their registry as well. In fact, to fix certain problems, I usually just get into their registry and change the proper keys. And the one thing I have found, if I spend enough time on any network, I can usually find holes. This goes for private servers as well as government servers.
How do you think WikiLeaks gets into all those servers?
frylock
(34,825 posts)What's the point of have standards and procedures if they're not going to be adhered to?
padfun
(1,789 posts)One of the problems I see is that they really aren't hiring qualified people. Nepotism seems to be big in State Government so we get some people who actually are pretty high up. High enough where they make decisions that they really shouldn't be making.
In Government and Business, the ones who climb the ladder aren't your best and brightest. They are the best talkers and con artists. I guess we are stuck with the "peter principle" and have people who just went up the ladder one rung too many.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)and believe the RW BS fall under my caveat in that post (those that just hate HRC).
I never did any IT professionally, and have not made such claims. I have, however, run a secure email server out of my house.
frylock
(34,825 posts)it was for her to use a private server.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)It has been discussed to DEATH about how the servers at State were both unreliable, and unsecure. But hey, keep fucking that chicken. Trey Gowdy thanks you.
frylock
(34,825 posts)And were there TS emails found on those servers? What other actions have republicans done that we can use to excuse poor judgment from Democrats?
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Guess who did? Hillary. Who has been providing every bit of information, everytime it was requested? Hillary. Who proactively handed over her servers to the FBI? Hillary.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Clinton had maintained that all work-related emails were included in the 55,000 pages of documents she provided to the State Department, and that only emails of a personal nature on her private server were destroyed. The State Department informed the Select Benghazi Committee on June 25, 2015, however, that they are no longer certain that is the case. Assistant Secretary of State Julia Frifield confirmed that 10 emails and parts of five others from Sidney Blumenthal, which the Committee had made public on June 22, could not be located in the Department's records, but that the 46 other, previously unreleased Libya-related Blumenthal emails published by the Committee, were in the Department's records.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)keep fucking that chicken.
frylock
(34,825 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)The most outraged people are the ones who know the least about computer security.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)If we're going to be stuck with her as our nominee then she better put this to rest. The media hates her...we already know that. Full compliance with no stalling and an easily understandable explanation is what is needed. If that is not possible then this will only continue to bloom into a bigger problem for her. I have my own problems with Hillary that have nothing to do with this but she has a pattern of stalling on this kind of stuff and thinks that everyone is going to agree with and understand the technically legal reasoning behind her behavior. It may be legal but it's politically tone deaf.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)We get it, you want some kind of huge scandal to take down Clinton, because that's the only way Bernie gets the nomination. The GOP wants the same thing, because Bernie is their best change to take the White House.
But the email thing is not it. Sorry.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,716 posts)He would also inherit her donors, her endorsements, her organization, and her overwhelming affection from non-white voters, especially African Americans and Latinos who make up nearly forty five percent of Democratic voters.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)I DO think the enthusiasm gap would be worse for him though.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,716 posts)Her fundraising base , her endorsements, her organization, and her overwhelming support from non-white Democrats, who make up nearly forty five percent of Democratic voters would more than make up for it. And that's not even including Barack Obama's endorsement, who is a rock star among Democrats , feckless demurrals notwithstanding.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)I don't like her as a candidate. At all. I've made no bones about it. But I'm not the one controlling the narrative on the email issue. And it's not up to me to explain it to people. Hillary people are always complaining about how the media is out to get her...we'll it's true. It's a consequence of her guardedness that seems to render her incapable of expressing her unvarnished opinions on anything. No I don't want her as th nominee. But, as you all are so fond of pointing out, she IS going to be our nominee then she better fix this. The media is not going to let it go and neither are the Republicans. Do you think you're going to convince anyone other than your own chorus that there's nothing there?
padfun
(1,789 posts)Hillary has her work cut out for here and she does need to address it.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)I would imagine that federal email systems are more secure than state systems. Tell us why if I'm wrong.
padfun
(1,789 posts)We have contracts and many of our users have duo emails. One federal and one state.
And the Federal servers aren't much different than the State servers. They too, can access their email through a web portal.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Only the latter moves through commercial hubs and switches. Tell me if I'm wrong. See, related, http://www.pcworld.com/article/2896952/state-dept-to-shut-down-email-system-to-clean-out-malware.html
If Hillary was receiving classified information, she would have been accessing the classified system on a private system. That would put the classified system at some jeopardy. So, one assumes.
BooScout
(10,406 posts)The government can be hacked just like everyone else.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)NSA whistleblower Tom Drake, for instance, faced years in prison, and ultimately had his career destroyed, based on the Obama DOJs claims that he mishandled classified information (it included information that was not formally classified at the time but was retroactively decreed to be such). Less than two weeks ago, a Naval reservist was convicted and sentenced for mishandling classified military materials despite no evidence he intended to distribute them. Last year, a Naval officer was convicted of mishandling classified information also in the absence of any intent to distribute it.
In the light of these new Clinton revelations, the very same people who spent years justifying this obsessive assault are now scampering for reasons why a huge exception should be made for the Democratic Party front-runner. Fascinatingly, one of the most vocal defenders of this Obama DOJ record of persecution has been Hillary Clinton herself.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)With regards to this? If so that's what you stick with. If it's not then you're going to have a continuing problem.