2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumNew Name Surfaces In Clinton's Email Scandal
By Steve Morgan - MAR 5, 2016 @ 09:13 AM
A new name has surfaced in connection to Hillary Clintons private email server Ronald S. Posner, Chairman and CEO at eChinaCash.
Michael Scheidell was previously Founder at SECNAP from December 2001 to August 2012. The SECNAP CloudJacket security device was purchased and installed by Hillary Clintons technology consultants in late 2013 coincidentally right after Scheidell left the company he started up and ran for eleven years.
SECNAP named Victor Nappe to its advisory board in 2010. Nappe succeeded Schiedell as CEO and remains in that position today. Sen. Ron Johnson (R., Wis.), chairman of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee wrote a letter to Victor Nappe, requesting documents relating to the companys work on Mrs. Clintons server and the nature of the cyberintrusions detected, according to an October 2015 article in The Wall Street Journal. Johnsons committee was investigating Mrs. Clintons email arrangement.
The Wall Street Journal article stated that a February 2014 email from SECNAP reported that malicious software based in China was found running an attack against Mrs. Clintons server.
~Snip~
Did Posner ask Norton for an introduction to Clinton? Did Clinton know that Posner was on the board at SECNAP and CEO at eChinaCash when she did business with them? What role, if any, did Posner have in connection with Clintons private email server? Did Posner provide anyone in China with access to SECNAPs technology which could have led to the cyber attacks on Clintons server? Did Posner or anyone else in China have access to some or all of Hillary Clintons emails?..
Full article:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevemorgan/2016/03/05/new-name-surfaces-in-clintons-email-scandal/#14ae2d391116
grasswire
(50,130 posts)No wonder she wants Bernie to hurry up and concede.
panader0
(25,816 posts)"The Wall Street Journal article stated that a February 2014 email from SECNAP reported
that malicious software based in China "was found running an attack against" Mrs. Clinton's server."
Think about that for a minute. How much info did China pull off her server?
This crap won't go away, it'll just get worse.
WhiteTara
(29,718 posts)panader0
(25,816 posts)tomm2thumbs
(13,297 posts)just so they would get the point
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)looks like the flight attendant in the Delta safety video
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)by Hillary's protectors. (The hacker was just extradited to the US within the last week or so for questioning.)
The fact is that we do NOT know whether or not anybody other than the Roumanian got in; that is part of what the FBI investigation is about. Part of the reason they wanted to interview Pagliano was to get detailed info on what security was or wasn't on the system and network.
WhiteTara
(29,718 posts)not Clinton's.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)however, there is no proof that her system wasn't hacked.
WhiteTara
(29,718 posts)find the proof, but, it wasn't.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)because, to paraphrase the Times, sophisticated hackers don't leave log entries.
In the meantime, more than one high level official, including Kerry, have said outright that they assume their email is hacked by the Russians, Chinese, and who knows who else.
Response to magical thyme (Reply #23)
BlueIdaho This message was self-deleted by its author.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)You are correct. The FBI investigations may have many tentacles. None should be used to create a political advantage for any political party or candidate. imo
panader0
(25,816 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)It said running attacks. That not proof they got in.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)8 track mind
(1,638 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)The story said "the logs show no one got in".
The intended take-away is "no one got in".
The reality is the first thing any attack does is compromise the logs and logging system in order to leave no trace of the attack. The logs not showing an attack is meaningless. But the story does its job in leaving the desired impression.
It's exactly the same as the longstanding efforts to confuse marking information as classified with information being classified.
6chars
(3,967 posts)Autumn
(45,106 posts)magical thyme
(14,881 posts)Autumn
(45,106 posts)Good to know.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)mean that nobody got in.
The unfortunate fact is it is impossible to prove a negative. But in the case of hacking, quality hackers can get in and not leave much or any trace.
Hopefully we'll never know for sure, because the only positive proof would be if an email turned up where it didn't have any way of turning up...
VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)Cleaning up after yourself after the infiltration. Dependent on what the anti-intrusion measures are, editing the logs can range from pathetically easy, to a little bit challenging-- but it's doable.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)And because Pagliano says he didn't see any sign of it does not in any way, shape or form prove it wasn't hacked.
"The security logs show who accessed the server and when, though they may not capture more sophisticated hacking, the Times said."
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-idUSMTZSAPEC33HF0X9N
Response to magical thyme (Reply #13)
BlueIdaho This message was self-deleted by its author.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Secretary of State's maybe? Since we're in the business of correcting people?
Logic and critical thinking indeed.
Response to cherokeeprogressive (Reply #47)
BlueIdaho This message was self-deleted by its author.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)nor am I trying to prove a negative. I responded to the poster who claimed that it has been proven that Hillary's server was not hacked.
I said no such thing has been proven, that the article they are claiming proved it did NOT prove it. Just because logs don't show suspicious entry does not mean the system was not hacked.
You may want to go read what I posted at 1:07, when I wrote that we'll never know for sure because there is no way to prove a negative. Oh, about 15 minutes before you informed me of what I already wrote.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1444555
Response to magical thyme (Reply #75)
BlueIdaho This message was self-deleted by its author.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)the thread started at 12:40
Response to magical thyme (Reply #90)
BlueIdaho This message was self-deleted by its author.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)In any event, I responded directly the the poster claiming that "it had been proven" that their citation did not prove anything.
I had already, in an earlier reply (#24 at 1:07 my time), posted that we'll likely never know for sure if it was hacked because you can't prove a negative.
Response to magical thyme (Reply #92)
BlueIdaho This message was self-deleted by its author.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)Yes, I agree that is one way to say it correctly.
Response to Kalidurga (Reply #101)
BlueIdaho This message was self-deleted by its author.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)And he is probably a sports fan. But, I am sure you had some point beyond our commonalities.
B2G
(9,766 posts)A good hacker knows how to not leave fingerprints.
Especially when they intend to come back.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Doesn't cover this time frame. Regardless, the logs aren't the end all in hack detection.
shawn703
(2,702 posts)There is no proof the server was not hacked.
Even I could hack into a server and remove logs. And I am just a Computer Programmer that is a 1/2 decent server admin.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Modern state-sponsored hacking is very sophisticated and very hard to detect, even by trained professionals.
China was able to steal the plans for the F-35 from Lockheed Martin without being detected until after China built their own prototype.
HubertHeaver
(2,522 posts)If it did, it wasn't ours.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)HubertHeaver
(2,522 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)That is irrelevant to a discussion of unauthorized electronic intrusion and data theft.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)The F-35 is a massively expensive failure.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)At best you can do an extensive analysis (and how extensive depends on what logs and backups are available) and
conclude that there wasn't any evidence of a hack.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)As the article states, he would not have been able to detect more sophicated hacking. Try again.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Anyone want a great illustration of why screwing up in a way that makes info vulnerable to hacks is a huge deal? Here:
http://map.norsecorp.com/#/
Aerows
(39,961 posts)leaves port 23 exposed?
That's a red carpet greeting.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)AlbertCat
(17,505 posts).... we now know she doesn't do very well with firewalls on servers...
Punkingal
(9,522 posts)Duval
(4,280 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Gamecock Lefty
(700 posts)AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Yeah..... apparently this Hillary's attitude toward classified info too.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)salinsky
(1,065 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)Hopefully this ticking bomb goes off before the primaries end.
6chars
(3,967 posts)But neither is Hillary going away. She's a tough kid.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)...in doing right for We the People as she does in her own self promotion, she would go away. I don't give two shits about her "proving" how "tough" she is while the nation continues circling the bowl while rhe corrupt play power games.
VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)This... Is gonna be big.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)for a techo idiot? what does this mean and what makes it big?
VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)have likely gotten in and out of that server so many times, that it could basically be a digital slice of Swiss cheese, what with the possibility of Cloudjacket's capabilities being leaked to Chinese state-sponsored actors. Which not only would be another massive lie in Clinton's cap, but would run the risk that the Chinese could have gained American state secrets.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)and as many have said, i don't imagine professional hackers leave digital traces behind that say "hey everyone! we were here!"
thanks for the explanation!
VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Clinton baggage...MORE baggage...I'm tired of 30+ years of Clinton baggage.
No More Clintons Ever!
SamKnause
(13,107 posts)The destruction these 2 families have caused America and the world
is incalculable.
jalan48
(13,870 posts)Years of Republican investigation and probable impeachment hearings. Is this what we want to drag the country through? There will be little time to focus on the real issues facing the country while Hillary and her foes battle it out in Clinton II. Blaming the Republicans doesn't deal with the bigger problem of why Democrats would elect someone with so much obvious baggage to represent them. I guess the whole villain/victim thing is just too much to pass up for many.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)that is a given. And without a substantial majority in the Senate, she will be convicted. Then they'll go after the the VP so they can install Ryan, or whoever winds up as the GOP Speaker.
jalan48
(13,870 posts)And while the country is distracted like a viewer at a carnival act the folks on Wall Street will continue with business as usual.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)Whether justified or not, the hatred is white hot, visceral, and on-going.
glinda
(14,807 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)She just wants to be president.
jalan48
(13,870 posts)It will be a huge spectacle of distraction but then maybe that is the real point of it all.
zentrum
(9,865 posts)was supposed to make her super-competent.
And spot on, too!
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)This is Hillary. She gets, yet another, pass.
zentrum
(9,865 posts).."look into" being more competent. She'll get back to us on it.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Last edited Tue Mar 8, 2016, 03:43 PM - Edit history (2)
The original server was first "wiped clean" by a company in New Jersey at the time that maintenance of Hillary's email was taken over by an IT firm, Platte River Networks, in June, 2013 after the hacker "Guccifer" released part of her email exchanges with Sidney Blumenthal, according to the timeline below. Clinton apparently continued to use the original server as host for Cintonemail.com for four months after she left the State Department.
Platte River was a small "mom & pop" company operated from a loft in Colorado. The email hosting company was not certified to maintain classified communications systems. Nevertheless, Hillary continued to use that email server, or possibly a different server unit, on which a virus was detected in late 2013. It is not clear when the virus was first introduced, but it seems unlikely that it survived the server's clean and reinstall. However, as a backup copy of the data was made at the time, it seems that the FBI might be able to determine the date the server was penetrated by the Chinese-made program.
In addition to the SECNAP CloudJacket security device identified in the story above, Platte River also installed a second device to speed up the pace of data backups, overwriting existing data. As CNN has reported: http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/07/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-platte-river-networks/
(A) "Clinton family company," Clinton Executive Service Corp., paid for the back-up services, operated through a device called the Datto SIRIS S2000, and that the purchase was made by Platte River Networks when the server was moved from her private residence to a New Jersey-based data center in 2013.
(E)mails sent by and to employees at Platte River Networks, which indicate there was discussion about how the duration of data backups could be reduced, apparently at the direction of the Clinton Executive Service Corp.
Here's a timeline 2008 through August 2015:
http://www.unbiasedamerica.com/hillary-clinton-email-controversy-timeline/
2008: Hillary Clinton acquires an email server for her 2008 presidential run and has in installed in her house in Chappaqua, New York.
January 13, 2009: On the day of Hillarys Senate confirmation hearing for Secretary of State, someone named Eric Hoteham registered three email domains for Clinton at her Chappaqua address. These become the sole emails used by Clinton during her time at the State Department.
January 21, 2009: Clinton is confirmed as Secretary of State.
Oct. 2, 2009: The U.S. Code of federal regulations on handling electronic records is updated: Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system.
June 29, 2011: A State Department cable is issued under Clintons signature that orders all employees to Avoid conducting official Department business from your personal e-mail accounts because its been discovered that hackers are targeting the personal emails of government employees.
August, 2012: The State Department criticizes U.S. Ambassador to Kenya Scott Gration in part because he used a private e-mail account to handle sensitive but unclassified material. Gration is forced to resign.
Feb. 1, 2013: Clinton tenure as secretary of state ends.
March 15, 2013: Clintons private e-mail account is first exposed after a hacker named Guccifer accessed the account of former aide Sidney Blumenthal, and published a screenshot of the Clinton and Blumenthal discussing sensitive foreign policy issues via hdr22@clintonemail.com during her time as Secretary of State.
June, 2013: Shortly after the hacking incident, Clinton hired the Colorado-based Platte River Networks to maintain her email. The original Chappaqua server was disconnected and shipped from its location at the Chappaqua residence to a data center in New Jersey to be professionally wiped clean of all data.
Summer, 2014: State Department lawyers working to respond to a request from the House committee investigating Benghazi noticed that there were no emails to or from a government account for Mrs. Clinton.
August 11, 2014: Following a congressional subpoena and more than a year of delays, the State Department hands over a small number of Clintons private emails, 10 in all, to a House committee investigating Benghazi. The committee asks for more.
October, 2014: The State Department asks Clinton to turn over any emails from her time in office.
December 5, 2014: 50,000 pages of printed emails from Mrs. Clintons personal account are delivered to the State Department. They contain 30,490 emails that Clinton deems to be work-related. But she later says that she deleted another 31,830 emails that were personal and private.
February 13, 2015: The State Department sends the Benghazi committee another 850 pages of Clintons emails, including some from two different accounts on the private clintonemail.com server.
February 27, 2015: State Department staffers tell Benghazi committee aides that Clinton had used her private addresses exclusively during her tenure, and that they dont have any of her emails other than those she provided voluntarily.
March 2, 2015: A New York Times article reveals that Clinton used a private email server.
March 4, 2015: The Associated Press reports that it has traced Clintons private email address back to a private server at her Chappaqua, New York home, and that the server was registered under a fake name.
March 10, 2015: Clinton makes her first comment on the issue in a contentious press conference. She insists that I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email; there is no classified material. She says she had used a private email for convenience, because she didnt want to carry two devices. However, it later emerged that she in fact used four devices: an iPad, a mini iPad, an iPhone, and a BlackBerry.
March 11, 2015: The Associated Press sues the State Department to force the release of Clintons emails and other documents that the agency has failed to turn over following a Freedom Of Information Act request.
March 17, 2015: It comes to light that Hillary Clinton should have turned over all official documents, including emails, upon leaving the State Department, or face possible felony charges, fines, and imprisonment. She did not, and in fact kept official government records for two years after departing. Also, State Department spokeswoman claims they cannot find Clintons form OF-109 swearing that she turned over all official records before leaving, and that perhaps she never signed it, despite rules requiring all departing employees to.
April 12, 2015: Hillary Clinton launches her presidential campaign.
April 23, 2015: As part of a plea agreement, a federal judge sentenced former CIA director and general David Petraeus to two years prohibition and a $100,000 fine for giving his lover, Paula Broadwell, who was writing a biography about him, notebooks classified information about official meetings, war strategy and intelligence capabilities. The F.B.I. had been seeking jail time.
May 19, 2015: A court orders the State Department to release Clintons 30,000 emails to the public in small batches. The State Department says it will do so by January, 2016.
May 22, 2015: The first 300 of Clintons emails are made public by the State Department, revealing a close relationship with Blumenthal in the weeks following the Benghazi terror attack; one of them has been retroactively classified by the FBI as secret
May 27, 2015: A federal judge orders the State Department to begin releasing all of Clintons emails in installments every 30 days, setting monthly targets for the agency so the work is completed by January 29, 2016 Some related to Benghazi, but most were mundane. Several were heavily redacted.
June 22, 2015: The Select Committee on Benghazi reveals it uncovered emails between Hillary Clinton and Sidney Blumenthal related to Libyan policy that should have been provided by Clinton to the Committee but werent. Three days later the State Department announced Clinton didnt provide them with the Blumenthal emails either, and that they are no longer certain she complied with their order to turn over all work emails.
July 7, 2015: During an interview on CNN, Hillary commented on the email controversy: Everything I did was permitted. There was no law. There was no regulation. There was nothing that did not give me the full authority to decide how I was going to communicate. Previous secretaries of state have said they did the same thing . Everything I did was permitted by law and regulation. I had one device. When I mailed anybody in the government, it would go into the government system. Two days later, the Washington Post gave her statement 3 out of 4 pinnocchios, saying her actions subverted the intent of the rules, and she had outright ignored the requirement to turn over her business-related e-mails before she left government service.
July 23, 2015: The New York Times reveals that the inspector general for the intelligence community, I. Charles McCullough III, told the F.B.I., Justice Department, and members of Congress that Mrs. Clinton had top secret information the highest classification of government intelligence in two emails among the 40 from the private account that the State Department had allowed him to review. Additionally, two other emails contained secret level information. The State Department refused to give McCullough access to the entire trove of roughly 30,000 emails that Mrs. Clinton handed over to the department last year. But State Dept. official Patrick F. Kennedy, admitted that it was likely that the entire body of emails contained hundreds of instances of classified information.
July 24, 2015: Responding to news that several top secret documents were found among Clintons emails, her campaign says that any government secrets found on the server had been classified after the fact. But the inspectors general of the State Department and the nations intelligence agencies said the information they found WAS classified when it was sent and remains so now.
July 25, 2015: During a campaign appearance in Iowa, Clinton tells reporters that I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time it was sent and received, a shift from previous statements that denied having any classified material at all.
July 31, 2015 The second State Department release of Clintons emails, more than 1,300 in all, includes 41 that were retroactively marked classified.
August 4, 2015: Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill says in a statement that the Clinton did not send nor receive any emails that were marked classified at the time.
August 10, 2015: Responding to a judges order, the State Department instructs Mrs. Clinton and aides Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills to save all federal documents, electronic or otherwise, in her possession or control, and to assure the government that none of them will be deleted.
August 11, 2015: After months of refusing to hand her server over, Hillary Clinton finally agrees to allow the Justice Department to investigate it, as well as the thumb drives housing her work emails. Additionally, it comes to light that the top secret emails discovered by inspectors general contained highly sensitive information from signal intercepts and keyhole satellite data.
August 12, 2015: The FBI picks up the server that Clinton used during her time as Secretary of State. The server, which was in a New Jersey data center, had been wiped clean. A lawyer for Platte River Networks, the company that managed the server, said To my knowledge the data on the old server is not available now on any servers or devices in Platte River Networks control. Investigators also took the thumb drives containing copies of Clintons e-mails.
August 13, 2015: Lawmakers contacted Platte River Networks, the company that has hosted Mrs. Clintons email and data since 2013. Sen. Ron Johnson asked the company to certify if that data was secure, who had access to that material and whether all official documents were appropriately preserved and also whether the company was authorized to maintain or access classified information. Platt River has two weeks to respond.
August 15, 2015: Former CIA operative and CNN national security analyst Bob Baer, who is not known for being a political partisan, said that the sensitivity of the information found on Clintons private server was likely more secret than what Edward Snowden pilfered. He also said this was a deal breaker for Clintons presidential candidacy.
August 16, 2015: The State Department announced that the number of emails containing classified material has grown to 60. Officials are slowly sorting through the emails in order to release them in compliance with a Freedom of Information ruling.
August 17, 2015: Platte River Networks, the IT firm hired by Hillary Clinton to oversee her private server, now says it is highly likely a backup copy of the server was made, meaning any emails Clinton deleted before she handed the server over to investigators may still be accessible. The company is cooperating with the F.B.I.
SOURCES:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/03/10/first-take-hillary-clinton-emails/24705871/
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/us/hillary-clinton-emails-take-long-path-to-controversy.html
http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2015/07/07/cnn-exclusive-hillary-clintons-first-national-interview-of-2016-race/
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/06/us/politics/hillary-clinton-asks-state-dept-to-review-emails-for-public-release.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2015/03/10/hillary-clintons-emails-a-timeline-of-actions-and-regulations/
http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/17/state-dept-spox-fairly-certain-hillary-clinton-did-not-sign-separation-statement-video/
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/89251.pdf
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/hrc-e-mails?page=3
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clintons-e-mail-server-turned-over-to-fbi/2015/08/12/aba5feea-4160-11e5-8ab4-c73967a143d3_story.html
http://thefederalist.com/2015/03/11/6-huge-problems-with-hillarys-there-is-no-classified-material-dodge/
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/25/us/politics/hillary-clinton-email-classified-information-inspector-general-intelligence-community.html
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/13/judge-orders-hillary-clinton-preserve-all-records/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3197093/Tech-company-maintained-Hillary-s-secret-server-sued-illegally-accessing-databases-creating-chaos-stealing-White-House-phone-numbers.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/12/us/politics/hillary-clinton-directs-aides-to-give-email-server-and-thumb-drive-to-the-justice-department.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/criminal-probe-sought-into-clinton-private-e-mails-for-suspected-sensitive-content/2015/07/24/b90bf598-31f8-11e5-97ae-30a30cca95d7_story.html
http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/15/cnn-national-security-analyst-unloads-on-hillary-over-email-scandal-i-wonder-whether-she-is-capable-of-being-president-video/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/16/number-of-hillary-clintons-emails-flagged-for-clas/
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/david-petraeus-to-be-sentenced-in-leak-investigation.html
controversyemailHillary ClintonState Department
think
(11,641 posts)in the beginning but it sure seems to have mushroomed.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)It should be an OP. It is excellent work.
This stuck out at me:
March 17, 2015: It comes to light that Hillary Clinton should have turned over all official documents, including emails, upon leaving the State Department, or face possible felony charges, fines, and imprisonment. She did not, and in fact kept official government records for two years after departing. Also, State Department spokeswoman claims they cannot find Clintons form OF-109 swearing that she turned over all official records before leaving, and that perhaps she never signed it, despite rules requiring all departing employees to.
April 12, 2015: Hillary Clinton launches her presidential campaign.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)I notice a small mistake in the section above. There would be no felony attached to simple failure to turn in the records and to fail to sign the Form OF-109. It would be a potential felony to attest on that form that all records were turned in but to knowingly not do so.
That explains why they can't find her signed OF-109. Certainly indicates mens rea (Bad intent) an element that might come into play under some (but not all) potential felony charges stemming from her mishandling of classified materials.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)G O N E
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Many of the BushCo minions and the Clintonites have black ops and disinformation skills that they put to work. No wonder that between the two of them they've been running this country for so long.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)..and included your link to that timeline. That was VERY useful to me. Thanks.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Why would anyone hold onto a 2008 server, I wonder, unless it was under the advise of counsel? Or is this a second (or third) server? What happened to all of them?
Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)That is fantastic work and should be it's own OP.
PeoViejo
(2,178 posts)No Vested Interest
(5,167 posts)I realize that "scandal" was used in the Forbes title, by Steve Morgan, author, but I would not have used it on a Democratic site.
Joe the Revelator
(14,915 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Scandal does not do it justice.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)philosslayer
(3,076 posts)Reading through the responses, I thought I had stumbled onto Free Republic accidentally. I was almost ready to take a shower!
Jarqui
(10,126 posts)... and for the previous five years what did they do ?
From the person who wrote this:
In casually disregarding basic security, Secretary Clinton harmed our country and helped our adversaries
comes this:
NY Times Report Debunks Severity of Emailgate With Classic Clintonian Wordsmithing
He basically lays out why the logs provide little assurance Hillary's server wasn't compromised and helps to better explain some things I have been saying:
There is wordsmithing of a classic Clintonian kind going on here that requires a bit of unpacking. In the first place, the use of the term hacking obscures as much as it explains. Its not a word normally used by intelligence services, since it conjures images of unwashed teenagers in basements. Spy agencies which practice advanced signals intelligence or SIGINT instead use terms like active SIGINT to describe their sophisticated, multilayered efforts to break into protected or encrypted information systems.
At the National Security Agencywhere I used to work as a senior intelligence analyst, including as the technical director of NSAs largest operational divisionwhat outsiders call hacking is handled by a shadowy group called Tailored Access Operations that gets at the hard targets requiring actual cyber-break-ins. TAO are probably the best hackers on earth, but Russia and China are no slouches either, as demonstrated by their repeated infiltrations into protected U.S. Government computer networks in recent years.
However, unencrypted IT systems dont need hackingnormal SIGINT interception will suffice. Ms. Clintons private email, which was wholly unencrypted for a time, was incredibly vulnerable to interception, since it was traveling unprotected on normal commercial networks, which is where SIGINT operators lurk, searching for nuggets of gold.
They hunt for data with search terms called selectorsa specific phone number, a chatroom handle, an email address: here Ms. Clintons use of the clintonmail.com server was the SIGINT equivalent of waving a huge Im right here flag at hostile intelligence services. Since the number of spy agencies worldwide capable of advanced SIGINT operations numbers in the many dozens, with Russia and China in the top five, that Ms. Clintons emails wound up in the wrong hands is a very safe bet, as any experienced spy will attest.
There's more in the article.
Part of what disturbed me were the 18 emails between Hillary and President Obama because these spies could snag one and camp out on the White House data pipeline doing the very thing the author describes above. The header of Hillary's emails would give them a data road map of where to go all around the world.
Fairgo
(1,571 posts)Fired all guns at Sanders in Michigan to no avail, server negligence narrative starts to slide towards a breach of trust, everybody asking for transcripts of skyped speeches? Yep. Getting pretty grumpy I swan.
eridani
(51,907 posts)"No one cares bout your damned emails"
Now looking like he and I might be wrong.
think
(11,641 posts)Kind of watching to see where everything leads.
Faux pas
(14,681 posts)noamnety
(20,234 posts)I remember seeing that name under the operating expenses of her campaign funding report.