My children are all adults, but I did indeed enjoy that (so did they, or I wouldn't have kept doing it.)
The monster under the bed is a lot scarier when he's invisible.
Posted on 06/22/2016 1:03:23 PM PDT by safetysign
Edited on 06/22/2016 4:29:20 PM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Newly released emails show State Department staffers wrestled in December 2010 over a serious technical problem with then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's home email server. They temporarily disabled security features, which left the server more vulnerable to hackers. Weeks later, hackers attacked the server so seriously it was shut down.
AP update: This version updates with State Department clarifying that security features on the department’s computer system were disabled. An earlier version reported that the security features on Clinton’s home server were disabled.
100% Agreed.
Did we (0dunga) destroy it? No.
Did we (0dunga) retrieve it? No.
Did we (0dunga) LET THEM HAVE IT? Yes.
You forgot “In over their boots” which in IT parlance means incompetent hacks.
Hillary’s email handle is “hrod”...?!?!
Clearly a reference to her abilities with a strap on!
Agree!
They over-road our system and landed it. They had to have had “inside” information to pull that off, IMO.
I've actually seen cases where, once in the knickers, intruders have patched all the exploits, including the one that got them inside in the first place so they could operate without worrying about other hacks.
My reply to that is at #46.
You misunderstood my intent. My question is whether the AP story was mere cluelessness or disinformation. The suggestion is that the server was vulnerable, and as a result was shut down. This suggests they were able to detect intrusion, mitigating the damage. I seriously doubt they were.
1) Breathlessly reporting that this-or-that vulnerability existed on the server is fine, but distracts from the main issue, to wit: why did Grandma Nixon subvert the existing protocol? There is only one reason she would have done so: so that nefarious practices could remain undetected -- or what amounts to the same thing based on what we know about Hillary's standard past practice -- unusable by law enforcement.
2) Take it as a given that the number of people who attacked her server was probably quite large. So what then? The first people who should have known, or suspected these practices were in signal intelligence, particularly the NSA. Why did NSA not patch her server without the knowledge of her IT people? That is certainly within their capability, and based on this article it seems likely her IT crew would never have been any wiser. Is this another example of "interviewed the guy twice, had numerous reports of murderous intent including a heads-up from a gun dealer, but 'somehow' he managed to slip through the cracks to shoot a hundred people?"
NSA had numerous requests from State to supply Her Thighness with "special" equipment because she was so inept. Did they really do nothing while all this was going on?
You like telling scary bedtime stories to your kids at night, don’t you Fred?
Damn, that IS serious.
Do you think these people are stupid and incompetent
They used 123456789 for the new password
My children are all adults, but I did indeed enjoy that (so did they, or I wouldn't have kept doing it.)
The monster under the bed is a lot scarier when he's invisible.
Of course she did - that was the POINT.
Otherwise, what would she have had to sell?
She knew enough to be very, VERY dangerous...SMH.
No, she knew. It was a combo sell/give away plan. Everything. All of it. The entire US confidential network.
She gave it ALL away to our enemies, on purpose.
1. The degree of security is inversely proportional to the degree of convenience, so given that Crooked Hillary was unable to even power on a desktop PC, I’d say security had to be pretty lax even under the best of circumstances, just so that screeching harridan could manage to read her email.
2. If the email server was a Windows box, then just forget about security all together as Windows is almost impossible to fully secure even by very knowledgeable professionals.
[As an aside, I’d LOVE to see a comedy sketch in which an Indian scam artist claiming to be from Microsoft calls Hillary and convinces her that her email server has been detected leaking viruses all over the place and then proceeds to lead her down an obvious path where the scamster uploads all of her email: something to the effect, “Oh I think I see the problem; it’s that .pst file right there; and it looks infected to me so I’ll have to copy it to my own server to properly analyze it, and oh, what was your email password again, because I’ll need that too for proper virus detection.]
The features were not disabled on Clinton’s server, it’s was the State Dept servers that had security disabled!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.