(June 25, 2016 at 11:42 am)Minimalist Wrote: Government email - a primer:  Obviously nor for the nut who can't handle the big words.  Sorry, idiot.  Can't have everything written at Breitbart level for you.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/14/us/pol....html?_r=1

Quote:Members of President Obama’s cabinet have a wide variety of strategies, shortcuts and tricks for handling their email, and until three months ago there was no law setting out precisely what they had to do with it, and when. And while the majority of Obama administration officials use government email to conduct their business, there has never been any legal prohibition against using a personal account.

But it's her e-mail server is the big problem not the e-mail account. Other secretaries of state did not use an e-mail sever. That's the difference between Hilary and others. Not only that, other secretaries of state did not request the State Department disable key cyber security features because their e-mails were being blocked.

She had the State Department turn off key security features because her e-mails, sent via her unauthorized BlackBerry and routed through her unauthorized home-brew e-mail sever were either getting bounced or sent to the spam folder(s). Hilary, instead of getting an official goverment e-mail address (which was the suggested solution to her woes) decided it would be better to turn of parts of the State Department's cyber security.

She exposed the State Department to cyber attacks because she had key State Department cyber security features disabled.

No, she didn't.

A spam filter is not a fucking cyber security protocol. It's a fucking routing filter. All emails still come, they just get routed to junk folders if they are deemed junk. Even still, her layman's request to disable the spam filter was likely accomplished by an IT professional who simply marked her .org as not spam, meaning her emails bypass the filter. This is child's play.

Once again, you are so busy with your steaming hatred that you cannot even see how ridiculous and tin foil hat you sound.

Private email accounts come from other servers just like Clinton's. If you think a fucking Hotmail account is more secure than whatever Hillary had built in her basement by people that clearly know a fuck ton more about cyber security than you, then you are just determined to be a nut job and there's nothing anyone can do to stop you.

By all means, vote for the guy who thinks Mexicans can't do their job because they're Mexican.

1. I have never advocated people vote for Donald Trump. I don't like Donald Trump either. So you can stop with the ad hominem attacks. I am a Green Party voter from Europe.

2. The new information shows that it wasn't just the spam filters that were turned off, but the anti-virus too. I quote:

Quote:The mail filter system—Trend Micro's ScanMail for Exchange 8—was apparently causing some messages from Clinton's private server (Clintonemail.com) to not be delivered. Some were "bounced;" others were accepted by the server but were quarantined and never delivered to the recipient. According to the e-mail thread published yesterday by Judicial Watch, State's IT team turned off both spam and antivirus filters on two "bridgehead" mail relay servers while waiting for a fix from Trend Micro.

The Associated Press also reported on this fact:

Quote:The emails, reviewed by The Associated Press, show that State Department technical staff disabled software on their systems intended to block phishing emails that could deliver dangerous viruses. They were trying urgently to resolve delivery problems with emails sent from Clinton's private server.

3. You clearly didn't read the article I linked to in my original post  if you missed that. That's far worse than simply marking her e-mail as safe as you claimed. And you say I'm blinded. The anti virus and the spam filters were disabled. So it wasn't just the simple fix you suggested. Hilary's e-mail was not marked as "not spam" as you put it because she refused that solution too. This is further elaborated on in the below quote:

Quote:The mail problems prompted Clinton Chief of Staff Huma Abedin to suggest to Clinton, "We should talk about putting you on State e-mail or releasing your e-mail address to the department so you are not going to spam."

Clinton replied, "Let's get [a] separate address or device but I don't want any risk of the personal [e-mail] being accessible."

She did not want anybody in the State Department to know about her e-mail.  So this "IT professional who simply marked her .org as not spam" didn't exist. The anti-virus and spam filters were both turned off.  Bottom line is, Hilary hates freedom of information laws and the FBI is investigating why.

The evidence is out there that Hilary is a criminal and should be in jail. I care about democracy, and all of the millions more people who will be made homeless because of expanded war in the Levant because of a president Hilary. That is why I'm against Hilary. Donald just is equally as bad as Hilary, but the American goverment won't let him do anything. They will let Hilary do lost of nasty things though because if you donate enough to the Clinton Foundation you get put in positions of influence, like the Chicago commodities trader who advised Hilary on tactical nuclear weapons.

Even the Clinton News Network reported on this:
Clinton donor received top spot on State Department intel board
This man has no experience that qualifies him to be giving advice on tactical nuclear weapons. Enemy nations must be licking their lips right now. All a foreign spy has to do to gain access to sensitive information is donate enough money to Hilary.

4. Spam filters do help to stop cyber attacks (but we know the anti-virus was turned at the State Department off too). It helps guard against phishing and other malicious e-mails . If I asked to turn off the spam filter where I work I'd be told I was crazy. And if I somehow managed to get it turned off then I'd be fired. Not promoted, like Hilary wants to be.

5. I don't think a Hotmail account is more secure than Hilary's sever but I'm not storing top secret government information on Hotmail servers, am I? People aren't determined to hack into my e-mail because I'm not a top government official. Hilary clearly knew nothing about cyber security.

We know Hilary got hacked because:

Quote:The latest batch of documents obtained by Judicial Watch also includes an e-mail from Justin Cooper, the former aide to President Bill Clinton who set up the private mail server for Clinton and her staff at State, to Abedin, explaining that the server had been shut down briefly because "we were attacked again." He explained further in a follow-up e-mail, "I had to shut down the server…Someone was trying to hack us and while they did not get in I didn't want to let them have the chance. I will restart it in the morning."

So her e-mail, full of state secrets, was hacked. Are the various intelligence agencies going to let her get away with this? Russia, China and other countries will have hacked into her server. Only an idiot would think they didn't want to hack into a server full of top secret and Special Access Program information.

Hilary told us her e-mail server was never hacked. Dear Leader Hilary would never lie to us of course. Come on, you're just not getting it. This e-mail thing will sink Hilary's campaign.

Quoting the Associated Press article again:

Quote:The AP reported last year that in the early morning hours of Aug. 3, 2011, Clinton received infected emails, disguised as speeding tickets from New York. The emails instructed recipients to print the attached tickets. Opening an attachment would have allowed hackers to take over control of a victim's computer.

Also:

Quote:In a blistering audit released last month, the State Department's inspector general concluded that Clinton and her team ignored clear internal guidance that her email setup broke federal standards and could leave sensitive material vulnerable to hackers. Her aides twice brushed aside concerns, in one case telling technical staff "the matter was not to be discussed further," the report said.

Why do you think the FBI has been investigating Hilary all this time? Are the FBI investigating Hilary for her health? Hilary is costing the American government so much money because of her idiocy.


But I'm just a Hilary Hater. Keep committing the fallacy of the poison well at your peril. Hilary is far more corrupt that Donald. Well done for playing your small part in giving the less electable nominee the most pledged delegates.

Sink her campaign?:  Really....

It's old folks that rock our votes, so to speak...and you think that an old lady being bad at email is going to make other old ladies not vote for her?

Yes, more leaked e-mails will come and they will show how rotten the Clinton Foundation and Hilary herself are. The Governor of Virginia is currently being investigated by the FBI for corruption related to the Clinton Foundation. And I'm also wondering how many more Democratic Party Superdelegates will be investigated for corruption between now and November.

Chukka Fattah was found guilty of corruption. As was Sheldon Silver. Both Hilary Superdelegates. The Governor of Virginia will follow soon.

USA Today:

Quote:Longtime Rep. Chaka Fattah, D-Pa., was convicted in a federal court Tuesday of taking bribes and stealing charitable funds and federal money.

NY Times:

Quote:Sheldon Silver, who held a seemingly intractable grip on power for decades as one of the most feared politicians in New York State, was found guilty on Monday of federal corruption charges, ending a trial that was the capstone of the government’s efforts to expose the seamy culture of influence-peddling in Albany.

Hilary is at a real risk of losing the election to Donald because there will be many more revelations between now and November. I wouldn't vote for either of them. Hilary's empire is slowly falling apart.

Hilary is risky candidate for the Democratic Party. Too risky. If they don't want any risk of Donald entering the Oval Office then the suoerdegates should do what they were implemented to and give the Democratic Party the more electable candidate and ditch Hilary at the convention. Bernie is far from perfect, but he's also far better than Hilary and Donald.

Much better, guilt by association; that does tickle the geriatric impulse to pull or not  pull.

I've seen a lot of talk about cyber security in this thread, and a lot of misinformation about it, so I thought I'd at least chime in. Full disclosure, I'm against both Hillary and Trump, but I'll restrict my comments to purely the cyber security issues.

(June 25, 2016 at 11:17 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: I'm well aware of how a spam filter works. A spam filter is not a national security issue.

A spam filter in itself isn't a national security issue, but a spam filter on the state department's email system that is turned off most definitely is one. Most spam filters block malicious content. If a malicious file got through and was executed by a user who had access to confidential files, that's a national security issue.

(June 25, 2016 at 11:20 am)Minimalist Wrote: Idiot.

Some IT guy in State decided this was the best way to solve a problem.

Then that IT guy is the idiot. You do not solve a problem of emails not getting through by disabling a spam filter. Instead, you configure the spam filter to whitelist those email addresses.

(June 26, 2016 at 6:47 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: A spam filter is not a fucking cyber security protocol. It's a fucking routing filter. All emails still come, they just get routed to junk folders if they are deemed junk. Even still, her layman's request to disable the spam filter was likely accomplished by an IT professional who simply marked her .org as not spam, meaning her emails bypass the filter. This is child's play.

Yes, a spam filter is a cyber security protocol. At the end of the day, it prevents malicious emails, adding to cyber security. The spam filter that the State Department used isn't just a filter in the email application people were using, so it doesn't just route stuff to junk folders, they were using Trend Micro's ScanMail, which is installed on the email servers themselves, and performs rigorous checks to prevent spam, viruses, phishing attacks, etc.

From the Trend Micro website, it also does this:

"Drops up to 85 percent of all incoming email using email sender reputation to free network resources"

This is presumably what was happening to Clinton's emails. They were getting dropped by the system because the address was untrusted. They weren't getting through to people's spam folders at all.

Also, the IT professional didn't simply mark her .org as not spam; he disabled the filter entirely. If you read the email from the OP, it makes this clear. Quote from the email:

Quote:...
our next steps will be:

A: Disable content filtering and restart SMTP services
...
C: Disable AV filtering and restart SMTP services
...

To explain that in laymans terms to people. The content filtering is your basic spam filtering, but the fact he had to "restart SMTP services" means that yes, this was installed on the email servers rather than just a configuration option in people's email applications. The AV filtering is the eye opening one. If he disabled AV (anti-virus) filtering, then emails containing malicious executable files may have made it through to people working in the State Department, and if clicked on, could have infected State Department computers.

That most definitely is a security issue, and therefore a national security issue.

Quote:Private email accounts come from other servers just like Clinton's. If you think a fucking Hotmail account is more secure than whatever Hillary had built in her basement by people that clearly know a fuck ton more about cyber security than you, then you are just determined to be a nut job and there's nothing anyone can do to stop you.

The problem with this statement is, ironically, that Hotmail is probably more secure than the server Hillary had in her basement, for multiple reasons.

The people Hillary had set up the server did not know much about cyber security at all. They were run of the mill IT guys, and I can tell you from professional experience, that most IT people do not know much about security. In contrast, Microsoft actually have people who know about cyber security, and they will had performed numerous security tests against Hotmail infrastructure.

The insecurities of Clinton's server are already well known from scans of the Internet that were performed a few years ago. We know it was running a vulnerable version of RDP (which didn't need to be running), and didn't have a certificate installed for months.

In short, perhaps a spam filter itself isn't a big issue, but turning the spam filter for the entire State Department off most certainly is, especially considering all the crap that's emerged about Clinton's server in the first place.

--

On a separate note, I see a lot of insinuation that people complaining about Clinton's emails will be voting Trump, or want Trump to win. I don't really see the logic in this. Can we not complain about the shitty nature of both candidates?

(June 26, 2016 at 10:45 am)Tiberius Wrote: On a separate note, I see a lot of insinuation that people complaining about Clinton's emails will be voting Trump, or want Trump to win. I don't really see the logic in this. Can we not complain about the shitty nature of both candidates?

Of course, just so long as we agree to vote for the safer, saner option.

The Democrats could have chosen a principled, anti-war, pro-reform candidate with few scandals around him who would beat Trump by 20 points. Instead they went with Hillary.....

It is a mystery to me.

Is it?  They owe her. Not only is she a career politician with deep ties to the establishment, she was the runner up before the current two term dem. Do you have an alternative in mind?