Slashdot Mirror


Obama, McCain Campaigns Both Hacked, Files Compromised

dunezone writes "As the election ends, news is coming out from both campaigns on what happened behind closed doors. During the summer, the Obama campaign had their systems hacked, but so did McCain — and not by each other, but by a third party. '... both the FBI and the Secret Service came to the campaign with an ominous warning: "You have a problem way bigger than what you understand," an agent told Obama's team. "You have been compromised, and a serious amount of files have been loaded off your system." The following day, Obama campaign chief David Plouffe heard from White House chief of staff Josh Bolten, to the same effect: "You have a real problem ... and you have to deal with it." The Feds told Obama's aides in late August that the McCain campaign's computer system had been similarly compromised.'" Also from the article: "Officials at the FBI and the White House told the Obama campaign that they believed a foreign entity or organization sought to gather information on the evolution of both camps' policy positions — information that might be useful in negotiations with a future administration."

255 comments

  1. Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fun by jaxtherat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I guess we'll find out soon enough.

    --
    http://www.zombieapocalypse.tv/
  2. Who.... by 18_Rabbit · · Score: 1

    So...was it the Chinese or the Russians?

    1. Re:Who.... by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Informative

      Our adversaries(even though China and Russia are technically our "allies") aren't the only ones who seek to gain from inside knowledge of foreign policy plans.

      Israel is a good example but there are many others. Somebody hurry up and post other examples before some mods with sticky trigger fingers see this and mod me down for being a "racist Jew-hater".

    2. Re:Who.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Israelis.

    3. Re:Who.... by Fluffeh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Pffft, before you go jumping up on all the other countries who would want this info, given the current foreign policy of the US, I wouldn't at all be surprised it they weren't both hacked by inside sources - just to make them THINK it was another country "wanting to invade the proud US of A".

      I mean seriously, all those paranoid big chiefs sitting in powerful seats within government organizations? They have careers to protect. Why not make whoever gets into power fearful of the "outside world and it's dangers" before they even get into office? Sure would help get their policy in line with the policy of aforementioned big chiefs in government seats.

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    4. Re:Who.... by pcolaman · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a good plot for a typical James Bond movie.

    5. Re:Who.... by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You raise a good point. Even TFS says "'... both the FBI and the Secret Service came to the campaign with an ominous warning: 'You have a problem way bigger than what you understand,' an agent told Obama's team."

      The old guard have spent the past 8 years stinking drunk with money and power and now 'Bama(and, apparently, most of the common Americans) wants change. Of course, that tinfoil hat theory implies that 'Bama and the old guard are at odds and Obama would be wise to reverse his stance re: telecom immunity.

    6. Re:Who.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      it was a demented knife-wielding escaped lunatic libertarian zombie mutant

    7. Re:Who.... by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why would Obama or McCain have secret foreign policy plans in their campaign planning computers? The sensitive data here was most likely canvassing, financing, and advertising plans. They'd be very useful to the other campaign, or to a party supporting either campaign and planning to influence the election. Maybe unaffiliated but supportive organizations like those of T Boone Pickens and his democratic equivalent had this done.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    8. Re:Who.... by jcnnghm · · Score: 5, Funny

      Your tinfoil hat is cutting off the circulation to your brain again.

      --
      You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. - Winston Churchill
    9. Re:Who.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it"

      -- Aristotle

    10. Re:Who.... by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Um, China and Russia are not our allies. Not even in a loose interpretation of the word.

      Or relations with them are cordial and we maintain trade links, but we are more likely to fight a war against them, rather than with them.

      And no one should be surprised that Israel spies on us. Israel is a very small country that relies on the consistent good will of the West (particularly the US) and the might of their sword arm to stay alive, even today. Israel will feel its survival will depend on knowing exactly what sort of support they can get from the US. Our interests have not always coincided perfectly.

    11. Re:Who.... by Elektroschock · · Score: 1

      The question is why did they know about it and who was the source of the hack. It could well be simple rumour.

      In short it means that these institutions guard the campaign parties and monitor their internet.

    12. Re:Who.... by omeomi · · Score: 2, Funny

      In short it means that these institutions guard the campaign parties and monitor their internet.

      Or it means that somebody hacked into Obama's account and tried to sell the info to the White House, and somebody else hacked into McCain's account and tried to bribe the White House...

    13. Re:Who.... by sraviik · · Score: 0

      that actually makes sense... if i was Israel i'd want to know if the next American presidential candidate was going to be a complete ass and try to stop supporting Israel

      --
      4c:61:7a:79
    14. Re:Who.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be helpful to know, where the parties are not especially determined to stick to their policy. Than pushing harder in this direction could bring better results @cheaper@

    15. Re:Who.... by commodoresloat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      To be fair, the article says the hackers were gathering "information on the evolution of both camps' policy positions", not secret foreign policy plans. But this still begs the question of your conclusion, since presumably that information is available to anyone with access to newspapers and the internet anyway. As you say, the more private version of this info might be useful to the other campaign but it's not going to be that interesting to foreign adversaries.

    16. Re:Who.... by ReedYoung · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I mean seriously, all those paranoid big chiefs sitting in powerful seats within government organizations? They have careers to protect. Why not make whoever gets into power fearful of the "outside world and it's dangers" before they even get into office? Sure would help get their policy in line with the policy of aforementioned big chiefs in government seats.

      s/government/corporate

      War or no war, we will have government. Halliburton and Blackwater are the prime suspects according to the "follow the money" school of investigation which was employed to discover the Watergate crimes. Beware the military-industrial complex.

      --
      "I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
    17. Re:Who.... by easyTree · · Score: 1

      Who was it who said "Humans are fundamentally insane.. Put more than one of them in a room and they start thinking of ways to kill each other" ?

      Someone needs to put extasy in the water supply and send grass sandals to everyone (preferably more tasteful ones :) - chill the fuck out people..

    18. Re:Who.... by SDF-7 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah -- but there's always that 1/10th of 1% that have the opposite reaction to the Pax....

    19. Re:Who.... by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      But this still begs the question of your conclusion, since presumably that information is available to anyone with access to newspapers and the internet anyway.

      (Apologies to the Weekend Update team, but...)

      Really? Really, commodoresloat? REALLY?

      There's NO chance their servers would contain policy planning that differs from what you'd find on the internet and in the newspapers?

      REALLY?

    20. Re:Who.... by m50d · · Score: 1
      the article says the hackers were gathering "information on the evolution of both camps' policy positions"

      Do you think this is actually just about that slasdot story from a few months back where the commenters pointed out you could still get PDFs of previous campaign positions off Obama's website?

      --
      I am trolling
    21. Re:Who.... by easyTree · · Score: 1

      Ok. I must ask.. 'Pax' ? googling leads to 'Peace'; yes?

    22. Re:Who.... by SDF-7 · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_(film)

      (The Wikipedia entry never says it -- but "The Pax" was the compound introduced by the Alliance to Miranda. Yes -- the nomenclature was doubtlessly deliberate on their part).

    23. Re:Who.... by SDF-7 · · Score: 1
    24. Re:Who.... by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      Well, sure there's always a chance that there's all kinds of stuff on there, but in terms of "the evolution of policy positions," what is there really to keep secret? Someone mentioned blackmail -- that's certainly a possibility but that wouldn't be about the "evolution of policy positions" at all.

    25. Re:Who.... by BobMcD · · Score: 1

      Imagine a discussion about topic 'X'. The plan is to tell the public 'Y' and there is a fair amount of debate as to whether or not that's wise, based on the fact that only 'Z' is feasibly possible. The decision is made that 'Y' is pretty close to 'Z', and 'Y' will almost certainly get more votes. A list of things to 'never say' is made up so one never gets an unrealistic expectation about 'X' that can't be denied later. All of this is logged under that topic so the campaign can remain unified about what it says to the public without having to run each and every statement past the candidate.

      If I were a hacker, and I wanted data of this type, this is the setting in which I'd expect to find it.

    26. Re:Who.... by easyTree · · Score: 1

      The Alliance government on Miranda added a chemical agent known as G-23 Paxilon Hydrochlorate, or simply "Pax" (Latin for "peace"), to the planet's air processors. The Pax was supposed to calm the population and weed out aggression.

      Cool. Now it makes sense. Cheers :)

      The agent worked, but too well: 99.9% of the population became so lethargic that they stopped working, talking, and eventually eating and moving.

      Yep. That's pretty much the reaction I had to whatever shit is in our water supply.. *re-adjusts aluminium-foil helmet*.. Starting to become immune to it now :)

    27. Re:Who.... by Darby · · Score: 1

      if i was Israel i'd want to know if the next American presidential candidate was going to be a complete ass and try to stop supporting Israel

      And by "be a complete ass", you mean put the interests of his own country above those of Israel.

      That would be an extremely good thing for everybody but Israel. Color me utterly unconcerned about that.

    28. Re:Who.... by ginbot462 · · Score: 1

      Isreal is also usually in the top of the list on technology espionage; so, they want some of our engineering for free as well.

      --
      Atlas Shrugged : Thematic Story :: Battlefield Earth : Organized Religion
  3. Uh huh.. by QuantumG · · Score: 1

    and does this "foreign entity or organization" hang out on 4chan?

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:Uh huh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4chan is like Drudge. They glom and over inflate shit.

    2. Re:Uh huh.. by TriezGamer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't get the 4chan bashing -- /b/tards might be scum, but a large chunk of 4chan's userbase is quite civil, and many don't bother going to /b/.

    3. Re:Uh huh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't get the 4chan bashing -- /b/tards might be scum, but a large chunk of 4chan's userbase is quite civil, and many don't bother going to /b/.

      Many 4channer users are fine and upstanding--definitely not scum--people just like you. These people avoid /b/ and /b/-tards. They have boards to suit their [definitely not scummy] interests. Wholesome boards like /d/, /h/, /f/, /r/, /rs/, /s/, /t/, /hc/, ...

      butt srsly folks, [citation needed] for "large chunk" for this to be "Informative"

    4. Re:Uh huh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's true, many of us are civil and generally follow the rules.

      Also, GNAA.

    5. Re:Uh huh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 4chan reference is related to the hacking of Sarah Palin's private e-mail address. The guy who did it was a /b/tard, and he posted his proof that he hacked her e-mail (which in turn led to his arrest...)

    6. Re:Uh huh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any bashing of 4chan is assumed to be targeted at /b/ unless otherwise specified.

    7. Re:Uh huh.. by martinw89 · · Score: 1

      I would say people who don't visit 4chan often consider /b/ to be 4chan, and bash that. I myself don't regularly go to 4chan and can't speak for the rest of the site, but the few times I looked through /b/ I can see where they get this reputation.

    8. Re:Uh huh.. by Khemisty · · Score: 1

      When it comes down to using time on /b/ and Sexy Beautiful Women, who can blame them?

      Although I have to admit, seeing Obama wielding nunchucks while skateboarding off an exploding helicopter is kinda cool too.

    9. Re:Uh huh.. by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      Wholesome boards like /d/

      That may be the single strangest definition of 'wholesome' I've ever seen. Certainly /d/ is a lot more civil than /b/, you won't find them posting abuse and hate content for the lulz, but surely nothing with that many cartoon hermaphrodites can possibly qualify as 'wholesome'.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    10. Re:Uh huh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wholesome boards like /d/

      That may be the single strangest definition of 'wholesome' I've ever seen. Certainly /d/ is a lot more civil than /b/, you won't find them posting abuse and hate content for the lulz, but surely nothing with that many cartoon hermaphrodites can possibly qualify as 'wholesome'.

      Whoosh.

    11. Re:Uh huh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /b/ hasn't been funny for a year now

    12. Re:Uh huh.. by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 1

      /b/ hasn't been funny for over 9000 years.

  4. Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

    Officials at the FBI and the White House told the Obama campaign that they believed a foreign entity or organization sought to gather information on the evolution of both camps' policy positions

    Is that all they're after? Pff. The Internet Archive already lets me do that. And if that's too much work, the candidates have already done the graphical diffs for us!

    /tongue in cheek

    1. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was probably foreign hackers wanting to remove credit and "gift" card info for those $200 (untraceable) donations... What is George Soros's IP block anyway?

    2. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, not the fake ones they publish. The secret ones they don't publish. The plans for world domination. The ones containing the election script written two years ago by the Illuminati's dictator for life: Ron Paul.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    3. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up...that's fucking hilarious!

    4. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by illumin8 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Did anyone read the rest of the article? I find it hilarious that Caribou Barbie went on an even bigger shopping spree than previously reported:

      NEWSWEEK has also learned that Palin's shopping spree at high-end department stores was more extensive than previously reported. While publicly supporting Palin, McCain's top advisers privately fumed at what they regarded as her outrageous profligacy. One senior aide said that Nicolle Wallace had told Palin to buy three suits for the convention and hire a stylist. But instead, the vice presidential nominee began buying for herself and her family--clothes and accessories from top stores such as Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus.

      Wait, it gets better:

      According to two knowledgeable sources, a vast majority of the clothes were bought by a wealthy donor, who was shocked when he got the bill. Palin also used low-level staffers to buy some of the clothes on their credit cards. The McCain campaign found out last week when the aides sought reimbursement. One aide estimated that she spent "tens of thousands" more than the reported $150,000, and that $20,000 to $40,000 went to buy clothes for her husband. Some articles of clothing have apparently been lost. An angry aide characterized the shopping spree as "Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast," and said the truth will eventually come out when the Republican Party audits its books.

      I am so glad we won't be hearing from her at least until 2012 or so... Corruption in Alaska? You betcha!

      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    5. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by dpilot · · Score: 4, Interesting

      > Corruption in Alaska? You betcha!

      According to my brother, even with such corruptions as she's shown, Sarah Palin is a breath of fresh air compared to politics as usual in Alaska.

      And he is by no means a Sarah Palin fan, quite the opposite.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    6. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice...
      Ashkenazi, Zionism and the Globalist movement

    7. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by jamienk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >>I am so glad we won't be hearing from her at least until 2012 or so...

      Ted Stevens gets re-elected; then he resigns (or is kicked out of the Senate by 2/3rds); then there will be a special election in Alaska for Senate and Palin will most likely win. She plans this already. When she found out about Stevens she said (paraphrase) "He should leave the Senate. Even if he is re-elected, he should then resign." So we will most likely see her in the Senate for the next 4 years or so. The question is: will she be like Liddy Dole who people thought was an up-and-comer but who turned out to be a drag, or like Hillary who was a massively divisive figure but who used the Senate to grow to become liked by a broad spectrum of people.

    8. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by brianjlowry · · Score: 1

      Too bad corruption in Alaska doesn't hurt hurt her chances for re-election. Just look at Mr. Tubes.

    9. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by TheLink · · Score: 1

      So if she moved to DC, she'd have lowered the average of both places? :)

      Maybe DC is just more discreet.

      I'm not a US citizen, but the thought of Palin just a heart attack away from having the nuclear football was a bit worrying.

      The fact that Bush managed to get reelected didn't help.

      Paris Hilton for president would probably be much better than Sarah Palin. ;).

      --
    10. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      Ted Stevens gets re-elected

      I know they're still counting absentees, but it looks like this is coming to pass. I've never been to alaska so I admit I don't understand, but how the hell did he convince voters of anything at this point? "The Internet is a series of tubes, and I've been convicted of a series of felonies... vote for me, while I'm still alive!"

    11. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by ndogg · · Score: 1

      I definitely don't like Palin, and yes, I voted for Obama, but I hope for her sake, and her families' sake that those charges aren't true.

      I don't feel like being a sore winner, and beating up on them just for the sake of doing so.

      --
      // file: mice.h
      #include "frickin_lasers.h"
    12. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by Britz · · Score: 1

      I am not a fan of Palin, but give her a break. Do you know what Laura Bush wore and how much that cost? Or McCains wife. Those families have the money to spend 500.000 on a dress for one evening. If you were surrounded by those types and didn't have that kind of money what would you? Maybe she felt under pressure? We don't know.

    13. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by catman · · Score: 1

      They say that Carl Hiaasen has it easy when he refers to Florida politics in his books - he doesn't have to make up anything :-)

    14. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they know that Stevens will end up either resigning or being otherwise removed from office, and then they can elect a Republican. And they would rather go that route than elect a Democrat to represent Alaska. Alaska is a red state.

    15. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to compare the cost of her clothes to the cost of Hilary's.

      As is, there are many conservatives out there with deep suspicions that if we hadn't been reading this story, we would have been reading a story about how poorly Palin dresses.

      I guess the question is this: do we want to make it a requirement that a candidate be able to afford high end clothing out of their own finances before they can run for President? Because if a candidate needs high end clothes, and its not acceptable for the campaign to buy them, then that's the requirement that we just added to the list of Presidential qualifications.

    16. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by illumin8 · · Score: 1

      I guess the question is this: do we want to make it a requirement that a candidate be able to afford high end clothing out of their own finances before they can run for President? Because if a candidate needs high end clothes, and its not acceptable for the campaign to buy them, then that's the requirement that we just added to the list of Presidential qualifications.

      No, I think she should have worn nice jeans and a nice shirt to her rallies. That's all that's needed to win Joe Sixpack over. Especially when you pass yourself off as a hockey mom. Why not dress the part? I think the American people would appreciate a little honesty from their politicians every once in a while.

      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    17. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by illumin8 · · Score: 1

      Ted Stevens gets re-elected; then he resigns (or is kicked out of the Senate by 2/3rds); then there will be a special election in Alaska for Senate and Palin will most likely win. She plans this already. When she found out about Stevens she said (paraphrase) "He should leave the Senate. Even if he is re-elected, he should then resign." So we will most likely see her in the Senate for the next 4 years or so. The question is: will she be like Liddy Dole who people thought was an up-and-comer but who turned out to be a drag, or like Hillary who was a massively divisive figure but who used the Senate to grow to become liked by a broad spectrum of people.

      I don't think so. What normally happens if a Senator gets kicked out is that the governor of that state gets to nominate a new Senator. As far as I know, you can't nominate yourself. I would suspect she'll find an equally corrupt Republican senator to nominate for Ted Stevens place.

      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    18. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no , just obama won, that is all

    19. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by Beyond_GoodandEvil · · Score: 2, Informative

      As far as I know, you can't nominate yourself.
      Well the previous governor Murkowski who followed Gravel(yeah that Gravel) into the Senate, ran for Gov. of Alaska, won and appointed his daughter to full out the remainder of his term, which pissed so many people off they may have stripped that power from the governor otherwise, I see no reason Ms. Palin couldn't make herself or her husband the next Senator from AK.

      --
      I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
    20. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by dpilot · · Score: 1

      There are other qualifications for the Presidency, which of course the Vice President should also meet, besides "being much less corrupt than the run-of-the-mill Alaskan politician."

      Worrying, certainly.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    21. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I definitely don't like Palin, and yes, I voted for Obama, but I hope for her sake, and her families' sake that those charges aren't true.

      I don't feel like being a sore winner, and beating up on them just for the sake of doing so.

      Well, you're on the wrong site then. Character assassination is a lifetime duty here.

    22. Re:Is that all? The IntarTubes have a solution! by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      I guess the question is this: do we want to make it a requirement that a candidate be able to afford high end clothing out of their own finances before they can run for President? Because if a candidate needs high end clothes, and its not acceptable for the campaign to buy them, then that's the requirement that we just added to the list of Presidential qualifications.

      No, I think she should have worn nice jeans and a nice shirt to her rallies. That's all that's needed to win Joe Sixpack over. Especially when you pass yourself off as a hockey mom. Why not dress the part? I think the American people would appreciate a little honesty from their politicians every once in a while.

      I don't think her wanting to dress appropriately as a VP candidate is exactly "dishonest". So, she's a hockey mom in her personal life and on her private time. That doesn't mean she should dress casual 24/7 as a matter of "integrity", especially when attending an affair with the gravity of a presidential race or rally.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  5. It's the chinese I tell ya! It's dem damn commies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would not surprise me one bit...

  6. Should have used linux! by malevolentjelly · · Score: 0, Troll

    Wait, Obama's campaign did use linux. Guess they should've used Solaris, then.

    1. Re:Should have used linux! by cstdenis · · Score: 1

      Or BSD.

      --
      1984 was not supposed to be an instruction manual.
    2. Re:Should have used linux! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think they wanted to serve their intruders a cup of java.
      "During these hostile and trying times and what-not
      OpenBSD may be your family's only line of defense"

  7. Error in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    they believed a foreign entity or organization sought to gather information on the evolution of both camps' policy positions--information that might be useful in negotiations with a future administration."

    "they believed a foreign entity or organization sought to gather information on the evolution of both camps' policy positions--information that would be entirely useless once the winner back pedals on all campaign promises made."

    Fixed that for them.

    1. Re:Error in summary by Duradin · · Score: 1

      Why would they have anything sitting on or connected to a public network that they didn't want someone to find?

    2. Re:Error in summary by myz24 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because eventually people have to get work done

    3. Re:Error in summary by Ocker3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because they were promised by the vendor that the security was flawless and they believed them?

    4. Re:Error in summary by pcolaman · · Score: 1

      Or both machines could've been honey pots that just had a bunch of files named [x]InvasionPlan.doc where x = [Russian, Chinese, Korean, Iranian, French, Canadian] Just to scare the shit out of anyone who thinks that either candidate is going to start getting chummy with foreign powers.

    5. Re:Error in summary by khallow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nonsense. The information is valuable for other reasons. It gives a third party information on who the candidate keeps around them and hints about how the candidate and his advisors think. Among other things, that'll help in future negotiations with the administration. And it'll provide avenues for social engineering. They may have obtained vetting information. And further will have some idea who to target for various espionage operations, say if someone wishes to blackmail or bribe.

    6. Re:Error in summary by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they will know who was being appeased by the false promises, and thereby know what the real policies will be.

    7. Re:Error in summary by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      WTF kind of honeypot is that?? Lets strain foreign relations needlessly so that maybe they'll bomb the shit out of us. Then we can be like HAHA! gotcha.

    8. Re:Error in summary by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Is that you, Mordac?

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  8. Actually Patrick Layton Pauson's campain? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given that he actually got more votes than some of the other candidates in the primaries, and given his platform, you never know.

  9. Future Blackmail Protection by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 2, Funny

    Remember kids, always have some photos of you and Chuthulu parktaking in ancient, evil rites so the perpetrator knows exactly what their "reward" will be.

    --
    If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
  10. Obama Apologists by introspekt.i · · Score: 0, Troll

    In 5...4...3...2....

    1. Re:Obama Apologists by erroneus · · Score: 1

      "Obamagists"?

    2. Re:Obama Apologists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Fuck it. We got him elected, he's going to have to answer for himself from now on. And I hope more people are with me on this -- especially those in the media.

      The good news is, I believe that he will.

    3. Re:Obama Apologists by pcolaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, he did promise to make what the White House does more transparent to the American voters. So maybe it was a pilot script for the new reality TV series, "Obama's House"

    4. Re:Obama Apologists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're sorry you are bitter that Obama was elected.

    5. Re:Obama Apologists by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      So, you're saying he is going to be one of those people I keep hearing about who live in glass houses? I hope he doesn't throw stones...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    6. Re:Obama Apologists by pcolaman · · Score: 1

      Well, it's the White House. Who needs to throw stones when you can throw interns and grenades. Should make for a sexy, explosive new comedy.

    7. Re:Obama Apologists by initialE · · Score: 1

      I was thinking "The Black House" starring Will Smith

      --
      Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
    8. Re:Obama Apologists by pcolaman · · Score: 1

      Only one problem. Who'd take Will Smith as a president seriously? I think even Barack would wince at that one.

    9. Re:Obama Apologists by Sfing_ter · · Score: 1

      Just for that, RMS is up for a cabinet post. How 'bout dem apples? Aaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahaha!

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
  11. While I am not suprised, by Jimmyisikura · · Score: 1

    I am a little curious that someone would make all of that information so readily available.
    Like many /.ers say, If it is on the net, it is vulnerable. Or something like that.

    1. Re:While I am not suprised, by orclevegam · · Score: 1

      I am a little curious that someone would make all of that information so readily available. Like many /.ers say, If it is on the net, it is vulnerable. Or something like that.

      Almost but not quite.

      The only truly secure system is one that is powered off, cast in a block of concrete and sealed in a lead-lined room with armed guards - and even then I have my doubts.

      There's also a variation with the lead-lined room/armed guards part replaced with buried at the bottom of the marianas trench.

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    2. Re:While I am not suprised, by Maguscrowley · · Score: 1

      Hacker fish.

  12. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Funny

    My bet is someone trying to get a leg up in their Fantasy U.S. Elections league.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  13. They hacked the Obama by Jazz-Masta · · Score: 1

    Next step: the gibson.

  14. Both campaigns were hacked? by xactuary · · Score: 5, Funny

    Proof that Fox News REALLY IS fair and balanced!

    --
    Say hello to my little sig.
  15. Impact on elections??? by DriedClexler · · Score: 1

    What effect will this had on the election, if someone will invented time travel? (Note my use of the appropriate grammatical tense for speaking of time travel.)

    --
    Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
    1. Re:Impact on elections??? by pcolaman · · Score: 1

      No need to invent it. Just ask Hiro Nakamura what the effects are.

  16. Hopefully this inspired Obama by m93 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What I really hope is that the President-Elect was made fully aware of the situation by his staff and the authorities. Hopefully, this knowledge would inspire him to seriously consider the potential danger to our country in the area of network security. Of course we never hear stories of what we do to foreign countries, but I have definitely heard too many stories of what other countries do to us to be of a sound mind in regards to the integrity of our nations information infrastructure.

    1. Re:Hopefully this inspired Obama by Duradin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't think that having legislation enacted that cites the latest Die Hard movie as a source and has Ted "Tubes" Stevens as an adviser is a good thing.

      We'll wake up one morning and hear that the cyber-terrorism meter is at paisley.

    2. Re:Hopefully this inspired Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't hack them, we just invade them and take their computers away.

  17. Third party by hansamurai · · Score: 4, Funny

    During the summer the Obama campaign had their systems hacked, but so did McCain - and not by each other but a third party.

    Bob Barr or Cynthia McKinney?

    1. Re:Third party by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ron Paul, of course!

    2. Re:Third party by pcolaman · · Score: 1

      Hillary Clinton! Digging up dirt for her 2012 run.

    3. Re:Third party by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      The Ron Paul Freedom Brigades.

    4. Re:Third party by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I couldn't have been the only one who read that as Bob Barr on Cynthia McKinney.

    5. Re:Third party by lothos · · Score: 1

      It wasn't Barr, it was Root.

    6. Re:Third party by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      It wasn't Barr, it was Root.

      You're exactly right! How did you know? We looked through our syslogs and found that EVERYTHING was done by some very suspicious-sounding user named root!

      Mr Iothos, we will need to detain you for questioning, I'm afraid.

    7. Re:Third party by root-a-begger · · Score: 1

      That must be a hoot to get a call from Josh Bolten..."uh, yeah, we think its the Chinese, or maybe Bob Barr" ;)

    8. Re:Third party by Darby · · Score: 1

      Hillary Clinton! Digging up dirt for her 2012 run.

      There's pretty much no chance Hillary will run in 2012. 2016, maybe, but barring some major disaster for Obama, typically a party tends to nominate a sitting first term President as their candidate when they have one ;-)

    9. Re:Third party by pcolaman · · Score: 1

      You forget the possibility that she pulls a Lieberman. Not saying it won't happen, but if anyone could pull votes as an independent it would be Hillary. And that's coming from someone who hates her.

    10. Re:Third party by pcolaman · · Score: 1

      Or rather "Not saying it will happen." Hooray for typos!

  18. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  19. The Gorilla greater than the Chimp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Starting in January, this question will begin to be answered.

  20. Wait, both?! But I thought... by mattytee · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...Carly Fiorina worked on McCain's campaign.

    1. Re:Wait, both?! But I thought... by DocHoncho · · Score: 1

      Duh, McCain was only hacked to make it look like it wasn't him!

      Sheesh.

      --
      Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
  21. Insight into Pragmatism by DigitalisAkujin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I particularly love this insight:
    The debates unnerved both candidates. When he was preparing for them during the Democratic primaries, Obama was recorded saying, "I don't consider this to be a good format for me, which makes me more cautious. I often find myself trapped by the questions and thinking to myself, 'You know, this is a stupid question, but let me ⦠answer it.' So when Brian Williams is asking me about what's a personal thing that you've done [that's green], and I say, you know, 'Well, I planted a bunch of trees.' And he says, 'I'm talking about personal.' What I'm thinking in my head is, 'Well, the truth is, Brian, we can't solve global warming because I f---ing changed light bulbs in my house. It's because of something collective'."

    Could you have imagined Obama saying that during the election? heh

    1. Re:Insight into Pragmatism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      > Could you have imagined Obama saying that during the election?

      No... but he just went up in my estimation having read that.

    2. Re:Insight into Pragmatism by slimjim8094 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I wouldn't mind a pragmatic president. Perhaps that's because I'm a pragmatic guy...

      I have a lot of respect for somebody like Joe Biden that says whatever he thinks, because we get a much better insight into he really is.

      And that quote is fucking amazing. He said essentially that a couple times, but slightly cleaned up, for what it's worth.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    3. Re:Insight into Pragmatism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell, if I'd have heard him talk straight like that in one of the debates, he'd have got my vote. That would have been awesome. I kept hoping he'd start a response to McCain with "cracker please" too. All of Obama's intellectual niceties ended up being just as annoying to me as McCain's condescending and ignoring of things people said.

    4. Re:Insight into Pragmatism by Artuir · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To be frank, I wish he would have said that during the election. The man is smart.

      The thing that irritates me the most about this election is we've got so many political parrots out there that just repeat misquotes like idiots. It's amazing how ignorant the country is and how little research is actually done for people to make a decision this important. What a dangerous position to be in.

    5. Re:Insight into Pragmatism by AxemRed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I didn't vote for either McCain or Obama. However, if Obama would have said that, I would have voted for him.

    6. Re:Insight into Pragmatism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have a source for this quote?

    7. Re:Insight into Pragmatism by Sfing_ter · · Score: 1

      Amen, mother-fucking AMEN.

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
    8. Re:Insight into Pragmatism by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > > Could you have imagined Obama saying that during the election?
      > No... but he just went up in my estimation having read that.

      As he did in mine. On the other hand, I hope he does realize that, although him changing light bulbs does not _solve_ the problem, it does _help_. And it's things that help that will eventually solve the problem. There's no magic bullet that is going to completely solve everything all at once. We solve the problem by doing the little things that bring us closer to the solution, until, one day, we find the problem is gone.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    9. Re:Insight into Pragmatism by isorox · · Score: 1

      > > Could you have imagined Obama saying that during the election?
      > No... but he just went up in my estimation having read that.

      As he did in mine. On the other hand, I hope he does realize that, although him changing light bulbs does not _solve_ the problem, it does _help_.

      Reducing world population from mercury poisoning?

    10. Re:Insight into Pragmatism by ion.simon.c · · Score: 1

      A-MER-I-CUH!

  22. Nothing to see here by Locke2005 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I volunteered to work on a Senate campaign. I was shocked to learn their headquarters was using an open wireless access point, but handing out WEP keys to hundreds of volunteers bringing their own laptops would have been unmanagable. Plus, you wouldn't even need to hack the network from the outside -- literally anyone can volunteer and gain access to their servers. Most of the data is just donor and supporter lists anyway; it's not like it does a candidate any good to keep their platform a secret! Since thousands of unvetted volunteers had access to the candidate's networks, I certainly hope they used a rule that no data should be placed on the campaign servers that you wouldn't want to see leaked to the newspapers the next day anyway. And everybody already knows if you're going to do something that is possibly unethical or unlawful, you NEVER mention it in email! I very much doubt you could find any information on McCain's or Obama's campaign computers that would be useful to anyone after the election.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Nothing to see here by DigitalisAkujin · · Score: 1

      I live in Philadelphia and there is an Obama office literally 2 doors down from me. I found them running a 802.11G open wifi for about a week before they closed it. Was a decent T1 connection. It's still up, SID: "Campaign for Change", WPA encrypted.

      Now as far as security within their campaign I don't think it's too much of an issue because they literally built a social network for the campaign which has many hundreds of thousands of machines that somehow access the campaign infrastructure in some way or another. I can certainly see the security analysts making a big fuss over it but the campaign can't afford to spend time dealing with security at the expense of actually running a campaign. I'm actually in utter awe of the ability of the Obama campaign to really build such a great system that scales in such a short period of time and constantly keep to deadlines.

      The key is to make sure there's no one that got to the core brain trust of the Obama inner circle and their discussions with advisers. Unfortunatly the article didn't really mention if this is the case.

    2. Re:Nothing to see here by worthawholebean · · Score: 5, Informative

      Having worked on the Obama campaign, mostly with the data end, I have to say they did a really good job. There are a few things that could have been improved, sure, but overall the system scaled very well until the last few days when the load became just ridiculous. Even then, it only displayed minor misbehavior - it worked just as quickly as before. The vast majority of volunteers have read/limited write access to volunteer and voter lists. I don't believe I had access to any donor information. The fact is, below the upper echelons, a data leak is really, really insignificant, because the data is essentially publicly available anyway. We got all the starting information for our database from the DNC, which got it from voter rolls. I'm assuming here they don't store credit card numbers from donations, etc.

    3. Re:Nothing to see here by Locke2005 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Credit card numbers were handled very carefully; a paid staffer processed the donation first, then very carefully obscured the numbers with a black marker before handing off the form to data entry. We did have access to name, address, and amount donated information for all supporters, but like you said, that is a matter of public record -- we had the same information for the competitor's donors (and yes, several people donated to both candidates). There is a huge amount of data there (e.g. the voter registration data of everyone in the state), but other than getting a press release a few hours before it's made public, I really don't think any of the information is particularly valuable to anyone else.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    4. Re:Nothing to see here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was hoping that somebody hacked things, because of the 'PLEASE DONATE' button on the final email to volunteers at 11pm ... the HTML email that started off with my name personalized and went on "I'm about to head to Grant Park to talk to everyone gathered there, but I wanted to write to you first."

      But sadly, the beg letter for additional money donations (sent to the mailing list of volunteers and previous donors) actually redirected to the official secure website of the campaign.

  23. Bigger vs. Imaginative by ZarathustraDK · · Score: 1

    "You (Obama) have a big problem, and you (McCain) have a real problem"

    --
    If you quote this signature there'll be 72 copies of Windows ME waiting for you in Heaven.
    1. Re:Bigger vs. Imaginative by Sfing_ter · · Score: 1

      Yup, Grampa had a hacker driving a truck through his tubes!!!

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
  24. infosec says: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Disclosure: I work for a malware / network security type firm.

    The only surprise about this is that they picked it up. It's happening every day. Slashdot's reported enough dots over the last five years to join up and see a definite pattern.

    1. Re:infosec says: by denzacar · · Score: 1

      Slashdot's reported enough dots over the last five years to join up and see a definite pattern.

      Umm... Invasion?
      No... wait... that's communications disruption.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  25. BSD is for losers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It must have been the McCain campaign that was running the world's only BSD installation..

  26. Too little, to late... by Erikderzweite · · Score: 1

    Why do these campaigns matter anymore?

  27. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by jaxtherat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I doubt it was anonymous. Basically a bunch of script kiddies.

    There are plenty of script kiddies that just call themselves anonymous, so the line is very blurry these days.

    --
    http://www.zombieapocalypse.tv/
  28. Farfetched ideas ftw by one-eye-johnson · · Score: 1

    Suppose somebody edited the files without campaign workers catching on, leading to subtle changes in the behavior of the campaign.

  29. Hillary Clinton website cracking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  30. Possible Answers by lymond01 · · Score: 4, Funny

    When posed the question of how one might respond to cyberattacks on their own websites, the following responses were gathered:

    McCain: My friends, I've been around the block a few times. I know what it's like to be hacked. I know what it's like to be crippled, to be seized by foreign powers and pried for information. My friends, I've been there, not 30 years ago I was......Internet? What's that now? Oh, like the tubes...

    Obama: There is no classified data on those servers. There never was. I will not hide information from the people of America. I will not hide my concerns from foreign powers. We are a nation built on freedom and that includes freedom of information. If they want to know our bathroom schedules, we will let them know. Yes we can. If they want to know where I park my car in the afternoon, I will tell them. Yes we can. If they want to know the route my daughter takes to school...

    Palin: Dog gone it, how am I going to know when my next hair appointment is? Oh, it's still there? But you said they stole it. Could we go back to the part just after, "You're my vice presidential choice"? I've been a little confused since then.

    Stevens: You ask me if they'll get away with this? I'll tell you. "NO!!"

    Bush: Thank Christ the Lord I am done with this job. Next question...

    1. Re:Possible Answers by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Nader: It's the military-industrial complex! The corporate domination of America!

      Barr: *twiddles thumbs* Huh? What?!

  31. Illuminati by mrsalty · · Score: 1

    keeping their All Seeing Eye on things.

    --
    -- Hail Eris
  32. Just a Jewish dude... by copponex · · Score: 0, Troll
  33. Wonder how the Feds found out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how the Feds found out that the parties had been hacked? Maybe secret service detected one then started looking at the other? I guess neither was running an IDS.

    Which platforms were they using? Was Obama using Linux and McCain Windows? Makes you wonder.....

    1. Re:Wonder how the Feds found out by shentino · · Score: 1

      It could be that presidential candidates or not, they're still citizens just as entitled to police protection as anyone else, and that they just reported the attack just like joe sixpack might.

    2. Re:Wonder how the Feds found out by cryptoluddite · · Score: 4, Funny

      Feds: Hey you've been hacked... trust us, we know
      Campaign: Um, so how do you know that?
      Feds: They removed our backdoors
      Campaign: Oh... right... so what are you going to do about it?
      Feds: We only investigate if you reported it, but WE reported it to YOU, so YOU have to investigate it. See how that works?
      Campaign: *grumble*

      Sounds about right.

  34. So? by geekoid · · Score: 2, Funny

    Seriously, what information do they have?
    National secrets? Launch codes? Pictures of Britney's crotch?

    Yeah, advise them to lock down their system, but for crying out loud, stop acting like every computer breach and tress[pass is the end of the civilized world.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, what information do they have?

      It's what information they don't have that concerns the me most.

    2. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you would be surprised what is of value to someone who is organized and methodical at collecting information especially when it is part of a larger information campaign. It is not just the individual pieces but how they combine to make the larger picture. For example is Obama serious about this or that aspect of an agreement with another country that might affect China's interest. While few wars have been won by an inferior opponent due to intelligence efforts alone many valuable bluffs have been called. How interested would Obama be in continuing support of Israel if they started another war or might we finally have a president who can say no to Israel?

  35. How did the Feds know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless the villains modified a public campaign website, how did the Feds know about this? Does the FBI have access to the campaign machines?

  36. er.. by savuporo · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why would a guy who is just learning to get online, himself, care ?

    --
    http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashdot.org Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
    1. Re:er.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You try getting online with hands crippled from years of torture.

  37. culprit by Atreide · · Score: 1

    wasn't he Jonathan Lee Riches whose brain was fried by Blizzard's WoW (http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/11/05/1658215) ?

    --
    The world belongs to those who get up early. - I'm far from being the king of Earth then :-(
  38. how dangerous! by jollyreaper · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's a good thing McCain doesn't know how to use a computer!

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  39. Is there actual proof? by SIR_Taco · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I am not much for the whole conspiracy theory BS, but if I really wanted to, underhandedly, get more funding for my department/organization it would make sense to approach the likely candidates and tell them they have a problem. Then when either candidate comes into power it would be much easier to say: "we need more funding for 'cyber-defence' to protect the country from attacks. Attacks like you fell victim to not to long ago, remember?"

    On a side note, I hate the word cyber in this context.

    --
    I say don't drink and drive, you might spill your drink. Before you get behind the wheel just stop and think.
    1. Re:Is there actual proof? by plantman-the-womb-st · · Score: 1

      Seeing the words cyber and attack in the same sentence always causes this to read itself aloud to me in my head.

      --
      Say bad words about my book, in cold oatmeal, or I shall sue!
  40. Gee, which "foreign entity" could they mean? by stevegee58 · · Score: 4, Funny

    95% of the unauthorized http accesses and port scans to my PC at home are from China. Go figure.

    1. Re:Gee, which "foreign entity" could they mean? by DrugCheese · · Score: 1

      Been the same for me for at least 3-4 years now. Maybe more like 99%

      --
      *DrugCheese rants*
    2. Re:Gee, which "foreign entity" could they mean? by WhiteHorse-The+Origi · · Score: 1

      Yeah and the other 5% come from Langley, Virginia.

    3. Re:Gee, which "foreign entity" could they mean? by caluml · · Score: 2, Interesting

      95% of the unauthorized http accesses

      Do you have a system for requesting authorisation for http accesses to your system? tcp/80 open to the world? Sounds authorised to me.

    4. Re:Gee, which "foreign entity" could they mean? by stevegee58 · · Score: 1

      My PC at home has no web server and there's no legit reason for random computers to be probing for one.

    5. Re:Gee, which "foreign entity" could they mean? by m50d · · Score: 1
      Do you have a system for requesting authorisation for http accesses to your system?

      Some basic authentication mechanisms are a standard part of HTTP.

      --
      I am trolling
    6. Re:Gee, which "foreign entity" could they mean? by caluml · · Score: 1

      How can people know you're not running one without trying to connect?

  41. This wouldn't be a problem if. . . by mosb1000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This wouldn't be a problem if our political system did not practically require politicians to keep secrets and lie through their teeth.

    1. Re:This wouldn't be a problem if. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why so cynical? Doesn't this election show that politics isn't always won by show plays the dirtiest?

      It's time to stop the cynicism and start contributing to the solutions.

      http://it.slashdot.org/it/08/11/05/221222.shtml#

    2. Re:This wouldn't be a problem if. . . by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      "Doesn't this election show that politics isn't always won by show plays the dirtiest?"

      No, this election was more of the same.

      "It's time to stop the cynicism and start contributing to the solutions."

      There can be no political solution to this problem, because politics itself is the problem. No matter how far you travel to the east or the west, you will never take a single step north.

  42. Re:Who spys on the US the most- you got it; by BubbaDave · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The US is most heavily spied upon by Israel, there's a long history of it. Unlike many who spy on the US, they don't do so to bring our system down, but to a) gain leverage to affect US policy b) learn about where we're heading c) technology (not saying its OK that their reasons are a bit less malevolent, their goals are just different) They're in the somewhat unusual situation of having the existence of their country somewhat tied to what the US does (loath they'd be to admit it, though) both directly in our policies regarding them, and our policies w.r.t. other actors in the region. Dave

  43. Troll? by copponex · · Score: 1

    They guy (a professor) explains that you can have a democracy or a Jewish state, but not both. Seemed pretty self-explanatory. Oh well.

    1. Re:Troll? by LingNoi · · Score: 1

      It's troll, but it should be off topic.

  44. Obama's plans weren't that secret by mi · · Score: 1

    While "The One" was blasting NAFTA to gain support, he sought to secretly reassure Canadian government, that he has no plans to change the agreement.

    His campaign position's on coal kept changing faster, than any hacker could download...

    The lowest income, on which the taxes will be increased.

    Fortunately, Joe Biden's foreign policy statements like:

    When we kicked -- along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, "Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't know -- if you don't, Hezbollah will control it."

    ...will confuse any adversary for good...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  45. By 3rd parties ? i dont buy it. by unity100 · · Score: 0, Troll

    The Feds told Obama's aides in late August that the McCain campaign's computer system had been similarly compromised.'

    so fbi, which was turned into a joke by the neocon gop administration by implanting their own people in, went and told obama camp that mccain campaign also got hacked.

    no sir i dont buy it. i dont think it was a third party. 'policy position' is also bullshit, the policy positions of each party is clear, and you dont need to hack any website or get any files to know about it.

    but, if you hack their websites, you can get a lot of information about the donors.

    sounds like neocon filth to me. cataloguing info about donors.

    1. Re:By 3rd parties ? i dont buy it. by nomadic · · Score: 1

      so fbi, which was turned into a joke by the neocon gop administration by implanting their own people in, went and told obama camp that mccain campaign also got hacked.

      Actually, while the neocons ruined every other branch of government, I think the FBI ruined themselves. They've just gotten a little too arrogant over the years, and a little too eager to see themselves on camera, so they overreach and underperform.

    2. Re:By 3rd parties ? i dont buy it. by Bourbonium · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Uh, you don't have to hack any websites to get information about political donors. It'a all public knowledge. The candidates are required by law to report that kind of stuff. This was required even before McCain-Feingold fucked up our political system even further with their Campaign Finance Reform Bill. If they don't file these reports, or file them late, they have to pay significant fines.

      Go to the Federal Election Commission's website and review all the campaign finance reports they've filed regularly since they declared their candidacy. For an easier view of the data, you can also go to http://www.campaignmoney.com/ and search on your own zip code to see how much money all your neighbors contributed to the last campaign.

      No hacking required.

    3. Re:By 3rd parties ? i dont buy it. by warsql · · Score: 1

      If that were the case, then why inform the Obama campaign at all?

      --
      878659 - yep its prime.
    4. Re:By 3rd parties ? i dont buy it. by ptudor · · Score: 1

      No hacking required.

      And you didn't even mention FundRace! Let's go haxor teh public interwebs.

  46. I guess reading the paper was too complicated by gatkinso · · Score: 1

    ...for those wiley Chinese.

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  47. The method used to address the security breach: by blind+monkey+3 · · Score: 1

    Tools
    Options
    Sharing
    Uncheck the shared folders
    Apply

    --
    BM3
  48. It's worse than I'd feared... by Overzeetop · · Score: 5, Funny

    Obama seems to have somehow slipped through the vetting process. It's common knowledge that politicians should not have an independently functioning brain with an ability to grasp the overall picture. Did no one interview this guy to make sure he could be swayed by a $600/hr lobbiest in an expensive suit, or by advisers with hidden agendas? This, my fellow Americans, can lead to no good outcomes. Applying common sense and logic in this fashion will surely grind Washington D.C. to a halt.

    Mark my words...this fool will be making decisions which will utterly confound both major parties. The only thing I can't determine is whether they'll strip his flesh like a school of piranhas or end up following him off the cliff of common sense. :-)

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:It's worse than I'd feared... by XLR8DST8 · · Score: 0

      L-O-B-B-Y-I-S-T*

    2. Re:It's worse than I'd feared... by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      Ok people. This is the Great Cliff of Common Sense. Now jump !

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    3. Re:It's worse than I'd feared... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You made a spelling error.

      Anyway, your average politician doesn't need a full lobbiest. A lobbier should be good enough.

    4. Re:It's worse than I'd feared... by skeeto · · Score: 1

      Mark my words...this fool will be making decisions which will utterly confound both major parties. The only thing I can't determine is whether they'll strip his flesh like a school of piranhas or end up following him off the cliff of common sense. :-)

      Are you saying we should start calling Obama by the name Jefferson Smith? I guess someone should warn him about Jim Taylor and the Willard Creek Dam.

    5. Re:It's worse than I'd feared... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only thing I can't determine is whether they'll strip his flesh like a school of piranhas or end up following him off the cliff of common sense. :-)

      Neither. They'll just give the whole Treasury Department one day off, and let everyone know what day that will be.

      Congress Critters aren't going to do work that someone else would do for them.

      m!

  49. Fnord! There are no secret plans! by jbeach · · Score: 1

    This message below is empty, unless you have clearance - to nothing, because there are no plans, as previously discussed! Two lines, no talking!

    --
    The Invisible Hand of the Free Market is what punches workers in the nuts.
  50. The aliens will be here by 2012 anyway by jbeach · · Score: 1

    So we should skate out of Palin then too, by being sold into intergalactic bondage. Score!

    --
    The Invisible Hand of the Free Market is what punches workers in the nuts.
  51. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    One word. It is the Chinese. This is what happens when U.S. companies move their production and design to China. For gods sake don't move any more production overseas or out source.

  52. Sigh! Incorrect by jbeach · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Now that Obama's elected, I really do want to move on. But I am still compelled to correct misinformation about his positions.

    So, I'll refrained from criticizing any conservative or GOP positions, and simply deal with what's incorrect.

    1. NAFTA - that story you link to is incorrect. A couple of days after the article you cite, both the Obama campaign and - more importantly - the Canadian embassy itself declared that no such assurances were made. So either they're all lying, or the first article that you cite got it wrong.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/03/politics/main3898313.shtml

    2. Obama's position on coal is: We will probably need some coal as a transition away from foreign oil. But coal also comes with environmental risks, so clean coal is better than dirty coal.

    That's not shifting, that's reasonable. Sometimes reality is nuanced. That's addressing different circumstances in a complex world.

    3. There was and is absolutely no change in Obama's tax plans, or anywhere near it. That link you cite is not even from Obama speaking. That's Biden making a gaffe-tastic misstatement in a speech. The Obama campaign restated it's policy after Biden's misstatement - it says that in the very same article you cite.

    4. As for Biden's transcribed dialogue - it seems quite clear to me. It's just transcribed from live human speech. Biden's saying "When the US and France kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, Barack and I wanted NATO forces moved in to fill the vacuum. Otherwise Hezbollah would walk back in."

    So, in conclusion, I'd like to propose that, from this point forward, we criticize what people's actual articulated positions are, and see how their actions match up to those positions. Because, as an Obama supporter, I *want* to see Obama's positions and policies criticized from every possible angle. Both in formulation and in practice.

    But let's stick with what Obama and others are actually intentionally saying (and will now be doing) - and not hearsay or misstatements. Let's concentrate on whether or not it will work, and why.

    Sound good?

    --
    The Invisible Hand of the Free Market is what punches workers in the nuts.
    1. Re:Sigh! Incorrect by mi · · Score: 1

      So either they're all lying [...]

      Why, yes, they probably are. Obama — to "spin-down" the consequences of the leak, Canadians, having received their assurances — not to rock the boat.

      Obama's position on coal is ... That's not shifting, that's reasonable.

      I didn't say "Obama's" — I said, Obama's campaign's. Biden is on record talking against coal, and Obama himself talked in January (when he needed to appeal to the Left, rather than the whole country), how he'll bankrupt the coal industry. You can call it "nuanced", but if it were McCain or Bush, you would've called it "ever changing" or worse.

      There was and is absolutely no change in Obama's tax plans, or anywhere near it.

      His running mate said "$150K" and Obama himself never made it clear — and I did watch all three debates trying to figure it out — whether the magical "$250" is per person, per couple, or per "working family". And what exactly qualifies as a "working" one...

      That link you cite is not even from Obama speaking.

      I was referring to Obama's campaign... TFA talks about the campaign computers being broken into, you know...

      The Obama campaign restated it's policy after Biden's misstatement - it says that in the very same article you cite.

      It rang hollow. I think, it was not a "gaffe", but a slip — much like the earlier one, when he said, Hillary would've been a better VP (damn right, she would've!)

      Biden's saying "When the US and France kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, Barack and I wanted NATO forces moved in to fill the vacuum. Otherwise Hezbollah would walk back in."

      Are you serious? I mean, in good health and clear mind? Because the statement you entered above, trying to defend your vice-President by claiming, the official transcripts of the debate is somehow wrong, is not better than what Biden actually said. It is wrong on many levels and sub-levels and there is no way in the world to rephrase it to make less idiotic:

      1. First and foremost, nobody has ever kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon. Not yet, anyway.
      2. The only country, that even triedunsuccessfully — was Israel. Not France and not US.
      3. Neither Lebanon, nor Israel, are NATO-members, so what justification could there possibly be for NATO forces there?
      4. Last time France was in Lebanon, was in between First and Second World wars — they are the ones, who left the country with its arcane Constitution.
      5. Last time the US was in Lebanon, was when Reagan sent marines there, who — far from kicking anybody out — ended up blown up by a truck bomb themselves. That was before Hezbollah was formed, and before Barack Obama, who, supposedly, joined Biden's in calling (on who?) to send NATO troops there, even got to the Law School.

      Now, I don't blame you for not knowing any the above facts — and Sara Palin has not demolished him over it either, but for a senior US Senator, a supposed "foreign policy wonk" to be so wrong is flabbergasting. Senility comes to mind, pardon the pun.

      Had McCain or Palin said anything even remotely idiotic like this — and there were plenty of other "gaffes" during the debate, all of them by Biden — they would've been written off as "geezer and gidget", by the same newspapers, who continued to smooth things over for Biden, presenting h

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    2. Re:Sigh! Incorrect by brkello · · Score: 1

      Your team lost. They lost running the most negative, false campaign in history. Your teams supporters sent billions of e-mails saying that this guy was a muslim, a terrorist, an arab, not an american citizen, etc. And you have the nerve to talk about facts?

      You are a ridiculous person. Your small-minded, Limbaughesque garbage didn't work this time but you continue to stick with it. You are a polarized/polarizing person that is a waste of bandwidth because you refuse to fact check. Your campaign ran on fear, hatred, racism, and bigotry and still lost. Why? Because McCain flipped his view on almost everything and failed to present a compelling reason to vote for him.

      But to the people who like you...who can't let go and still want to spread false garbage. Obama has put his hand out to you and has said he wants to be your president too. Even after you called him a terrorist, a liar, "The One", and everything else in the book, he still wants to work with you for the better of the nation.

      So please, grow up. Get your news from sources other than Fox News and Republican pundits. Actually seek out truth. Not just parrot the people who say things you want to be true.

      --
      Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
    3. Re:Sigh! Incorrect by ReedYoung · · Score: 1
      Citation required:

      Biden is on record talking against coal, and Obama himself talked in January (when he needed to appeal to the Left, rather than the whole country), how he'll bankrupt the coal industry.

      FYI, the absence of any source for the above opinion about Obama's position on coal is even more conspicuous due to the liberal use of hyperlinks for your other claims.

      --
      "I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
    4. Re:Sigh! Incorrect by mi · · Score: 1

      Get your news from sources other than Fox News

      Please, point me to a news-source, according to which Biden's statement about USA and France kicking out Hezbollah from Lebanon makes sense. Thank you.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    5. Re:Sigh! Incorrect by brkello · · Score: 1

      Keep plugging your ears and focusing on distractions. It is why you lost the election.

      --
      Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
    6. Re:Sigh! Incorrect by mi · · Score: 1

      Oh, please... Here is Biden saying:

      "No coal plants here in America," he said. "Build them, if they're going to build them, over there. Make them clean." [...] "We're not supporting clean coal"

      And here is the discussion of Obama's interview, where he says, among other things:

      So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted.

      Yeah, the first link on the subject, that came up is openly partisan. But you aren't accusing them of inventing Obama's quote, are you? And it is not "torn out of context" either, because, uhm, there is a lot of context there.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    7. Re:Sigh! Incorrect by mi · · Score: 1

      Keep plugging your ears and focusing on distractions. It is why you lost the election.

      Brkello, I'm going to ask you one more time, not to belabor the point: Please, point me to a news-source, according to which Biden's statement about USA and France kicking out Hezbollah from Lebanon makes sense. Thank you.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    8. Re:Sigh! Incorrect by Cornflake917 · · Score: 1

      Your request is poorly worded. I wouldn't blame the GP for not answering it for that reason alone, although there are many others. Are you asking for a news source which is claiming that Biden's statements make sense? Or are you asking which news source makes sense when they are talking about Biden's statements? Your word usage sucks ass. Are you honestly already attacking Obama's foreign policy when they have yet to take a single action? At least wait until the guy gets into the office before you start criticizing them. You might get an ounce of credibility then.

    9. Re:Sigh! Incorrect by mi · · Score: 1

      Your word usage sucks ass.

      I borrowed the phrase from a certain famous TV person, who became rather famous for grilling Sarah Palin with just such a phrase...

      Are you honestly already attacking Obama's foreign policy when they have yet to take a single action?

      Perhaps, you need to read the entire thread... I claimed, jokingly, that whatever an adversary may find on Obama campaign's computers, they'll be thoroughly confused by Joe Biden's statements, such as the one I quoted.

      Brkello seems to think, there is nothing wrong with Biden's statements, and if anyone thinks otherwise, it can only be due to their watching Fox News.

      So, I asked Brkello to suggest a news-source, which could've helped me (or anybody!) to make sense of the Biden's statement. Brkello responded with a change of subject, and I asked him again. He wouldn't respond — maybe, you can help out?

      Which news-source could possibly help make sense of the statement: "When the US and France kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, Barack and I wanted NATO forces moved in to fill the vacuum. Otherwise Hezbollah would walk back in."

      Note, the sentence above has already been edited by another Obama-supporter so that it does not, at least, contradict itself — unlike Biden's original words found in the transcripts. It only contradicts (on many levels and sub-levels) the facts from very recent history, which a "foreign policy wonk" — as Biden was presented to the nation — should know rather well...

      So, do you think, you can help me find a news-source, that would help reconcile Biden's words with reality? Or will you take the "poorly worded" excuse and skip? Come on, what are afraid of — your team won, you can admit now, that the chosen vice-President is a senile doofus...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    10. Re:Sigh! Incorrect by brkello · · Score: 1

      Fine, I'll address your stupidity. What he said doesn't make sense. It was a gaffe. What did he mean when he said this? I don't know, you would have to ask him. McCain said he wouldn't talk to the leader of Spain. Why? During the interview he forgot who that was. Do I have a doubt that McCain would actually not talk to the leader of Spain? Of course not, it was a simple gaffe.

      We all know Biden has plenty of foreign policy experience. Experts in foreign affairs say he does. We also know he is also prone to some gaffes. But your over-focus on these dumb little issues reveal where you get your information. I mean seriously, contrast that gaffe with the whole damn debate. Palin would not answer questions and talked about whatever the hell she wanted to since she knows essentially nothing about foreign policy, the constitution, the first amendment, or anything relevant to being the VP in our country. Yet you are complaining because one thing Biden said didn't make sense? Insane.

      --
      Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
  53. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by penguin_dance · · Score: 0, Troll

    But did they find out if either campaign used their email for personal reasons?

    --
    If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!
  54. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wasn't us. If one of us had done it the information would be public by now. It's not as funny if they get to hide their fuck up.

  55. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 4, Informative

    Anonymous is just the 4chan equivalent of Anonymous Coward. It's not supposed to be a group or an identity. Some of them just decided "We Are Anonymous" sounded cool, but they were using the word in a completely literal sense.

  56. Conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Just for fun, let me go a little wing-nut here. The FBI informs the campaigns that their systems have been compromised. Implying of course that the campaigns themselves don't already know this. So ... how does the FBI know? That's weird all by itself.

    Let's get even weirder. Do they know? Maybe they are just making shit up, so that they can offer to 'help' the campaigns tighten up their security. Thereby obtaining access to information that they wanted. What information, why, and for who? Dunno. I'm just opening the door for the next conspiracy theory.

    1. Re:Conspiracy theory by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      So ... how does the FBI know? That's weird all by itself.

      The Secret Service and the FBI together have the job of protecting the major party candidates...after all, one of them was going to be president.

  57. I see the McCain apologist got here first. by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 1

    Both campaigns were hacked.

  58. Ralph, is that you? by TheStonepedo · · Score: 1

    If you can't beat 'em, hack 'em.

    --
    I'll be your candy shop of infinite deliciousity if you'll be my discotheque of endless rump-shaking.
  59. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    We are Anonymous Coward, and we do not RTFA!

  60. Budget. by obscured_dude · · Score: 1

    Gee's. They spend millions and millions of dollars on their election campaigns. And they spend NOTHING on their I.T. services.... What sort of a trained I.T. monkey do they have??? A Chimp? Gorilla? Orangutan?

  61. cancer by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    sage

    1. Re:cancer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sage

      newfag

  62. "Caribou Barbie"? That's insulting. by commodoresloat · · Score: 3, Funny

    Her proper nickname is "Bible Spice".

  63. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, it was just Anon again.

  64. What makes anyone think it is......... by Anachragnome · · Score: 1

    What makes anyone think it is an overseas job?

    Maybe it is just the current administration putting all our well-spent dollars to work in the pursuit of information about what Obama/McCain might do in regards to Bush and Sons Liquidators, LLC.

    I'm sure Kennedy/s experienced the same sort of probing.

    Or maybe it isn't all that sinister. Maybe the two campaigns simply paid 3rd parties to hack each other. That sits much better with me.

  65. Who Watches The Watchmen? by mbradmoody · · Score: 1

    I will sleep better tonight knowing that both the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the White House are watching the Obama campaign's computer networks carefully enough to detect third party intrusions. I'm sure neither of them would actually look inside the network to find out what the campaign is thinking.

  66. VA Obama campaign a bit more secure... by jnelson4765 · · Score: 1

    In Virginia, the voter data was stored on a server (provided by the Democratic party of VA) in a datacenter, with a web front end. Worked okay for the most part, but cratered at the end from a massive load.

    The wireless was WPA on Cisco APs, and there were no local servers in any of the VA offices. Used a fair number of Ubuntu boxen with X terminals attached - generally 6 or 8 Xterms on a private LAN attached to a mid-range desktop machine.

    A fair number of machines loaned to the campaign, as well - Macs, Windows boxen, and some machines with no OS that were running live Linux CDs.

    The data entry systems worked equally well in IE, Firefox, and Safari, Linux, OSX, and Windows. It probably performs just fine in most of the elections in VA, but this election has been historic in many ways.

    --
    Why can't I mod "-1 Idiot"?
  67. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, they treat it as a group and identity. They organize attacks against stupid websites and people under that term.

  68. Re:Who spys on the US the most- you got it; by cowwoc2001 · · Score: 0

    I'd love to know where you're pulling this out of, aside from your usual conspiracy theory sites. It's quite clear that Russia is both highly capable and highly inclined to spy on the USA... *much* more so than Israel.

    Israel has had very few (you can count them on one hand) instances over its entire history (~60 years) where it was caught spying on the US. They put a firm stop to it the last time it happened (a few decades ago). China and Russia on the other hand...

    Again, Russia has a very strong motive and capability to do this. Much more so than anyone else. And unlike our spying allies, they don't have our best interest at heart.

  69. Cabinet choices? by freedom_india · · Score: 1

    Probably after the dream cabinet choices.
    My choices for cabinet would be:
    1) Chuck Hagel: Defense
    2) Ron Paul(R): Treasury (!!!)
    3) Clinton: Spl. Envoy to Pakistan
    4) Ralph nader: OSHA chief
    5) Spitzer(yes): SEC chief
    6) Schwarzenegger: State

    That's all i can remember...

    --
    "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
    1. Re:Cabinet choices? by ginbot462 · · Score: 1

      Is that your dream, or theirs? (Clinton might want ambassador to Sweden or Jamaica or something)

      --
      Atlas Shrugged : Thematic Story :: Battlefield Earth : Organized Religion
  70. Re:Is that all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Inside info - I post this here quite late in the thread so only a few will read it...

    The article mentions an attack midsummer suggesting 2008, but we investigated attacks starting midsummer 2007. There were brief compromises, but quite limited in scope as far as we could determine when examined the traces; we assumed that it was done by bored hackers without particular political motivation. The leadership sought out our expertise to protect the data as a result.

    There was a more serious breach in January 2008, it exploited human error/trust more than system insecurity; only outdated files were compromised. It was shortly after that we set up a proper 'honeypot' in the hope of catching the 'weak link'. It did not appear to work; the 'weak link' either stopped being active or s/he left the campaign altogether. However, in April the fake data was accessed. It was indeed a very skilled attack exploiting vulnerabilities and we could only trace the attackers(!) to public terminals and one overseas location. We monitored the patterns throughout the summer, interestingly the activity stopped sometime around the beginning of October, maybe the financial crisis had something to do with this.

    There was no need to have the highly sensitive data to be on anything connected to the internet. And fortunately we could convince the leadership as well. Our contract is up and we are replaced by the feds handling the transition.

  71. Sorry, but you're living a fantasy by celtic_hackr · · Score: 1

    If things turn out the way they look. Stevens will get re-elected. Then the Senate will eject him, causing a special election, and Palin will be elected to the Senate. So, hold on to your Moose horns, because she's gonna be back a lot sooner than 2012.

  72. What's in an ally anyway? by Logi · · Score: 1

    Also, the US has routinely spied on their allies for decades. Nobody should be surprised if some of those allies spy back.

    The list of examples is massive and includes both spying on friendly governments and industrial espionage on behalf of American companies.

    --
    Logi - I can do anything, but not everything.
  73. The InWestorZ did it.. by ImNotAtWork · · Score: 1

    Sorry, CNBC commercial humor.

    Get the jump on some unposted policies and you have can put together a 2 market positions before the election is complete and enact the gameplan to fit who won the election.

    With the stockmarket volatility some cash can be made if you can confirm a policy decision ahead of the pack.

    --
    open source sub sim. I might start coding again for this. http://dangerdeep.sourceforge.net/contribute/
  74. Re:In Completely Unrelated News ... by Ornedan · · Score: 1

    You do realize that the only reason Mutually Assured Destruction worked for keeping a nuclear war from happening was the Mutually part? So building that missile shield is essentially declaring that you (the USA) want the ability to use nuclear weapons without retaliation.
    So, as a denizen of the Baltic region, it would really have been nice if you'd picked a president that doesn't do military aggression four years back already. At least the next one hopefully won't be doing everything he can to make things worse like Bush has.

  75. OMG! Stop the press! by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    We need to hold another vote!

    ( :P )

  76. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by thegnu · · Score: 0

    not true. some people actually do things, like the whole harrassing scientologists thing. And when has AC ever organized a group harrassment of Scientologists?
    Never.

    --
    Please stop stalking me, bro.
  77. Bad Summary by crmarvin42 · · Score: 1

    I'm not trying to start a flame war, but does it strike anyone else as odd that the summary appears more than a little biased in it's form? Both campaings get hacked, but somehow it's all about Obama's campaign with the mention of the McCain campaign thrown in to imply that it wasn't them doing the hacking? It's as if the expectation was that the hacking came from the other camp and they've gotten away with something by being hacked themselves.

    I recognize that Obama has won, so it's obviously more important to know what the winners secret files said than the losers, but the summary sounds unnecessarily partisan to me.

    maybe i'm just being over sensitive since I didn't vote for Obama, and am just being a Troll

    --
    Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
  78. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rules 1 & 2

  79. I question your conclusion by jwietelmann · · Score: 1

    As you say, the more private version of this info might be useful to the other campaign but it's not going to be that interesting to foreign adversaries.

    Why would potential blackmail material not be that interesting to foreign adversaries?

  80. Joe Biden = Pragmatic??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Joe "Drug Czar" Biden is pragmatic? The drug war is a poster child for anti-pragmatic government.

  81. Re:Is that all? by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

    Some inside info is more interesting than others. When I run for office, my computers are going to be full of misinformation. Plans to attack Washington State, Possible treaty negotiations with Germany for increased import of good beer. And other things that are closer to actual policy positions.

      Maybe I would make a terrible politician, because I can't figure out what information they had as candidates would be of use to anyone. Even campaign strategies seem to be pointless to me. The only strategy that makes any sense is to win receiving more votes than your opponent. Anything else is voodoo politics. The people who practice it thinks it works, despite an overwhelming body of evidence that it does not. I think the loser of any campaign is the one who practices more voodoo.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  82. stupid people in 08 still by kingsteve612 · · Score: 0

    well, the internet has been available to public use since the early 80's i believe, and people still dont understand crap about it. how difficult is it to not put a system with extremely valuable information like campaign stuff on the internet?? what, are they looking at youtube and downloading porn while editing their hella important information? sending out email attachments with secret government info? people hack networks you shit heads!!!

  83. Re:Who spys on the US the most- you got it; by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Israel doesn't need to spy on us, all the information they need is handed to them.

  84. Re:Who spys on the US the most- you got it; by BubbaDave · · Score: 1

    Not from any conspiracy websites. Yes, they haven't been caught since '05 (didn't need export licenses for one thing, they claimed, another was a renegade op, they claimed) and they repeatedly say they don't spy on us, yet they also say that they "engage in no operations that are harmful to US interests." Dave

  85. Re:Who spys on the US the most- you got it; by cowwoc2001 · · Score: 1

    '05 yeah right. More like the 1980s.

  86. Re:Who spys on the US the most- you got it; by BubbaDave · · Score: 1

    I believe the applicable folksy internet term is "FTW". You do know how to access Congressional Research Service reports, I assume. From Order Code RL33476 Israel: Background and Relations with the United States Updated September 8, 2008 Carol Migdalovitz Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division "On June 13, 2005, U.S. Department of Defense analyst Lawrence Franklin was indicted for the unauthorized disclosure of classified information (about Iran) to a foreign diplomat. Press reports named Naâ(TM)or Gilâ(TM)on, a political counselor at the Israeli Embassy in Washington, as the diplomat. Gilâ(TM)on was not accused of wrongdoing and returned to Israel. Then Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom strongly denied that Israel was involved in any activity that could harm the United States, and Israelâ(TM)s Ambassador to the United States declared that âoeIsrael does not spy on the United States.â Franklin had been charged earlier on related counts of conspiracy to communicate and disclose national defense information to âoepersonsâ not entitled to receive it. The information was about Al Qaeda, U.S. policy toward Iran, and the bombing of the Khobar Towers, a U.S. housing site in Saudi Arabia, in 1996. On August 4, 2005, two former officials of the American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC), Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman, whom AIPAC fired in April 2005, were identified as the âoepersonsâ and indicted for their parts in the conspiracy. Both denied wrongdoing. Their attorneys asked the court to summon Israeli diplomats to Washington for testimony. On January 20, 2006, Franklin was sentenced to 12 years, 7 months in prison." Some of this was back in the late 80's (Pollard, for one), some in the 90's, some more recent. Your cites are...? Dave

  87. Re:Who spys on the US the most- you got it; by cowwoc2001 · · Score: 1

    What a laughable example...

    Let's put things in perspective shall we?

    1) The FBI dangles fake intelligence in front of Lawrence Franklin that indicates an immediate threat to the lives of Israeli agents working with Iraqi Kurds and also indicates that the US is withholding this information from Israel. Key point: The FBI used entrapment, which is illegal.

    2) Franklin decides to pass this information on to AIPAC members purely out of personal conviction to save lives.

    3) There is a debate as to what happened at this point. One report said that AIPAC members pushed back on Franklin, telling him they're unwilling to accept classified information. Another report said the AIPAC member tried to pass that information on to the Israeli government and was rejected at that level. Either way, none of these individuals had a professional relationship with the Israeli government or intelligence agency. They acted out of personal conviction to save lives.

    4) FBI busts Franklin.

    What do you think would happen if the FBI dared using Entrapment on African Americans or Muslim Americans? You wouldn't here the end of it. What the heck is the FBI doing plotting ways to make the Jewish community look bad? If this was a genuine espionage case I'd be all over this, but it is not. If anything, the FBI should apologize for their actions.

    On the other hand, do you know how often American agents are caught spying on the Israeli government and deported without a charge?

  88. Re:Who spys on the US the most- you got it; by BubbaDave · · Score: 1

    In the counterintelligence game, dropping a line to get the spies to expose themselves is how its done. As to american agents in israel, we're not talking about that. Arguing, "well, that doesn't matter compared to what THEY do" is a weak-assed puerile argument if the person saying it actually means it as an argument (not to mention its one of the classic fallacies), and indicates weakness when used as an argument to distract. You are unworthy of more of my time, post what you like. Dave

  89. Re:Who spys on the US the most- you got it; by cowwoc2001 · · Score: 1

    1) Your first statement acknowledges the fact that Entrapment was used.
    2) You argue that the FBI was fishing for Israeli agents, yet it turns out they caught an unsuspecting American *civilian* instead. He was no Israeli agent, or Israeli at all.

    So in conclusion: the FBI used Entrapment to convict an American civilian of passing information to Israeli NGOs.

    Congratulations, they must be proud. They broke the law and acted maliciously against their strongest ally.

  90. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Brothers! It is time to rise up against the Scientologist bourgeoisie for the good of all cowardkind!

  91. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They *are* a group, as their organised demonstrations against scientology show. But I wouldn't call them the elite of hackers. They've been "pwned" by the real hackers enough to show that.

    BTW I'm posting as AC, but I don't have anything to do with TGKAA (the group known as anonymoous)

  92. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by dogdick · · Score: 0

    I doubt any of you know what you are talking about... ah crap i didnt log out.

  93. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 1

    That was Project Chanology. It grew to include a lot of people who had nothing to do with the original "Anonymous" raids.

  94. Public campaign financing by ReedYoung · · Score: 1

    You were taxed for the Palin family's shopping spree, but not for Michelle Obama's funny-looking black-with-red dress, because McCain-Palin accepted public financing and Obama-Biden did not. Even though they'll certainly bill it to the RNC, McCain's campaign had more of the RNC's money to waste on wardrobes due to public financing. So in effect we were taxed for half of all their expenses, from bathroom tissue to needless markups. Which is why McCain's whining about Obama's private, donor-funded campaign and "floodgates" didn't work. If he had been serious about "campaign finance reform" McCain would have insisted that only individual citizens may give to candidates and political parties. If businesspersons want to donate, they must have the courage to put their name on their activities, to donate as individuals like everybody else.

    --
    "I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
    1. Re:Public campaign financing by ReedYoung · · Score: 1
      Clarification of my own post:

      Even though they'll certainly bill it to the RNC...

      Those specific purchases, on paper, will have been made with donations from the RNC [except those on staffers' credit cards!], but in the real world the public funds help the private, RNC and individual donors' money, go farther. So, we as taxpayers paid for almost half of Sarah's hillbilly spending spree, and the RNC paid for most of the other half. Of course, the real victims are the staff members who had to work with Palin and float her excursion to the real American cities with their hard-earned personal funds.

      --
      "I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
  95. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ni!

  96. The meaning of "gaffe" (Re:Sigh! Incorrect) by mi · · Score: 1

    What he said doesn't make sense. It was a gaffe.

    You know, the word "gaffe" has already been made more famous by Obama/Biden in 2 months, than the word "snafu" — by Clintons in 8 years. But this was not a gaffe, a term defined (thank you, WordNet) as: a socially awkward or tactless act. A gaffe — such as Biden's statement, that Hillary would've been a better choice than him — is still factually correct, it is just "awkward or tactless".

    What Biden said — and what I quoted was only one of the pearls — was not a gaffe, and no amount of spin can help that...

    We all know Biden has plenty of foreign policy experience. Experts in foreign affairs say he does.

    Oh, well, you should've started with that! Of course, if you say, that the experts say, it is true, then it must be true. It is just that somewhere higher in this thread a plea was made to concentrate on "people's actual articulated positions", rather than "hearsay"...

    I only listened to Biden once — he never came to my state, which Democrats take for granted. I was quite astounded, that his "actual articulated positions" were so factually wrong. And a few days later, Ann Coulter has summarized it rather well — and added one, that I didn't notice myself. You can discount her for a partisan hack she is, but she didn't invent any of his words...

    We also know he is also prone to some gaffes.

    I'm sorry, but, as already stated, this was not a "gaffe". Bush had gaffes: "Don't misunderstimate," — that's a gaffe or, perhaps, a misstatement, for the intended meaning is clear and obvious. Biden — as quoted — was either lying trying to burnish his and Obama's credentials, or simply having a senior moment on national TV.

    Much was made of the Bush's funky "nukular", even though, it was still perfectly clear, what he meant. But when Biden is going to be needed as a foreign policy expert, who can possibly rely on his advice?

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:The meaning of "gaffe" (Re:Sigh! Incorrect) by brkello · · Score: 1

      And there are plenty on the other side? What's your point? Mine is that you ignoring that major issues and focusing on distractions. And your concept that your side only makes mistakes and my side always is factually wrong is silly. You can spin your side any way you want. I actually hang out with intelligent, informed people that range from Democrat to Republican. They all voted Obama because they didn't buy in to the bull shit that you spew out. You don't care about truth. You care about spinning it to whatever you want the world to look like. You are wrong, you will just never be introspective enough to admit and know when you are wrong.

      --
      Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
    2. Re:The meaning of "gaffe" (Re:Sigh! Incorrect) by mi · · Score: 1

      And there are plenty on the other side?

      No, actually, the Republican side had nothing nearly as monumentally wrong as Biden. If they had, you would've seen it on every TV — from news coverage, to "talk shows", to Comedy Central. MSNBC would've run a "Lebanon History Special" with Middle East experts explaining, just how wrong the hapless Republican was...

      What's your point?

      If you look at the beginning of this thread, my point is quite obvious — that whoever broke into Obama campaign's computers, would've been throughly confused by Biden's senility.

      They all voted Obama because they didn't buy in to the bull shit that you spew out.

      Hey, I don't "spew" anything out — I just watched a debate. And what Joe Biden spewed out was terrifying, but, I guess, one needed to be paying attention.

      You don't care about truth. You care about spinning it to whatever you want the world to look like.

      [Wipes off opponent's saliva. Throws out the napkin. Regains composure.] Brkello, you've already admitted, that your choice of vice President doesn't know Lebanon from a hole in his butt. So, why are you attacking my person? The person, who pointed the truth out to you, for a change... A change you can, actually, believe in... [Shrugs and walks away in disgust.]

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  97. Re:"Caribou Barbie"? That's insulting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Moose Fucker, the Bridge to Nowhere".

    Seriously you fucking nerds she's moderately attractive and no more. Or maybe growing up in San Diego just instilled me with high standards.

  98. whats troll about parent ffs by unity100 · · Score: 1

    neocon bitch admitted to screening DOJ applicants FORTY times in front of the senate comittee, under LIVE broadcast by news channels. FORTY. FORTY different people were rejected from DOJ because their political viewpoints were not neocon enough.

    if there are still brainwashed zealots trying to defend gop among us by downmodding stuff they dont like, may heavens rot them in hell.

  99. Johnfranks999 by johnfranks999 · · Score: 1

    In the realm of risk, unmanaged possibilities become probabilities: These data breaches and thefts are due to a lagging business culture. As CIO, I'm always looking for ways to help my team, business teams, and ad hoc measures of various vendors, contractors and internal team members. A book that is required reading is "I.T. WARS: Managing the Business-Technology Weave in the New Millennium." We keep a few copies kicking around - it would be a bit much to expect outside agencies to purchase it on our say-so. But, particularly when entertaining bids for projects and in the face of challenging change, we ask potential solutions partners to review relevant parts of the book, and it ensures that these agencies understand our values and practices. The author, David Scott, has an interview here that is a great exposure: http://businessforum.com/DScott_02.html The book came to us as a tip from one of our interns who attended a course at University of Wisconsin, where the book is in use. It has helped us to understand that, while various systems of security are important, no system can overcome laxity, ignorance, or deliberate intent to harm. The real crux of the matter is education and training to the organization as a whole â" and a recurring schedule of training â" in building a sustained culture and awareness; an efficient prism through which every activity is viewed from a security perspective prior to action. I like to pass along things that work, in the hope that good ideas continue to make their way to me.

  100. Re:Or it coult just be /b/tards having a bit of fu by penguin_dance · · Score: 1

    Troll? Damn you're a bunch of touchy bastards. That was a JOKE! It seems though you don't mind when Palin's account was broken into because you thought they found dirt. Different when the shoe is on the other foot, eh?

    So FUCK OFF!

    --
    If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!