Slashdot Mirror
McCain Campaign Sells Info-Loaded Blackberry PDAs
An anonymous reader writes "A news station in Washington D.C. has reported that the McCain Campaign has allegedly sold to reporters Blackberry handhelds with campaign-related information such as e-mail messages and phone numbers: 'We traced the Blackberry back to a staffer who worked for "Citizens for McCain" ... The emails contain an insider's look at how grassroots operations work, full of scheduling questions and rallying cries for support ... But most of the numbers were private cell phones for campaign leaders, politicians, lobbyists and journalists. "Somebody made a mistake," one owner told us. "People's numbers and addresses were supposed to be erased."'"
The cure is to destroy devices, which are trivially cheap, instead of selling them.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
This happens all the time and most of the time we never hear about it.
You would not believe how many times government computers containing critical information have been sold without having their drives wiped or have been lost or stolen.
The private sector is no better.
The vast majority of organizations do not encrypt their data or their communications. In fact data which is supposed to be encrypted such as credit card information or social security numbers is often mishandled internally ( i.e. emailed half-way around the world unencrypted or stored in the clear ).
I'm a huge obama supporter, but let's be fair to the guy. He's so out of the tech loop he's not personally responsible for this stuff. His tech people are responsible. Of course, they were all let go Nov 5, so I'm not surprised these last duties were neglected.
Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
The cure is to destroy devices, which are trivially cheap, instead of selling them.
Or, since this is a blackberry, use the built-in, server-controlled guaranteed wipe function before selling them.
Or, use your blackberry server to encrypt the device content with AES, and force the user to have a strong password.
See how easy things are with blackberries? But you do have to click a few options.
Idiots.
Yes this is another fine example of why septuagenarians should not be allowed anywhere near tech.
First of all, why would someone who is 70+ not be able to handle technology? I will always remember great uncle who was writing geodesic software on the ZX Spectrum, at the time when most people have not even heard about home computers. Oh, and he was 70+ then.
The second thing that puzzles me is, why would McCain's alleged computer illiteracy be a factor in this incident? So if he is not familiar with computer technology, then his staff will sell blackberries without deleting sensitive information? I think you're making a huge leap in your logic, there.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Ha, more like...
Me: Is your toilet running?
Joe: Why, yes!
Me: Better hire an actual plumber to fix it.
Yes, I know this was a joke. However...
There are many things you could say about the whole Joe Plumber deal, but there's one subtle message that was not lost on me. If you stick your neck out and actually question the candidates, you will become an overnight celebrity whether you want to or not. Look at the background checks that have been performed against Samuel J. Wurzelbacher and the fact that whether or not he is actually licensed as a plumber (apparently he is not, at least not in Ohio) became a very public issue. Of course none of this has anything to do with his question to Obama about taxes, and so it constitutes an ad-hominem attack. For putting a question to Obama, he was rewarded with reporters trying to dig up dirt on him. Whether they were successful or not has nothing to do with the message, which is "if you're not with the media, then sit down and shut up or we will find skeletons in your closet." That message could not have been more clear.
I know that he has written a book and therefore could profit from this experience, but whether he has something to show for it does not negate anything I am saying. I realize that much of this was because of McCain trying to use "Joe Plumber" as something of a campaign symbol, which probably made him more of a target, but really, the reason why this is the case or how it got to be that way is trivia. It might be interesting to some of you but it won't address the chilling effect that this may have on others who would otherwise stand up and ask similar questions of other candidates.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
For putting a dishonest, loaded question to Obama
fixed that for you.
captcha: divert
sounds about right
I agree with you to a point. I think the moment he started seeking the lime light by going on the talk shows, and showing up at rallies, he invited it upon himself.
Mid-Eastern Pennsylvania Gaming Convention
It also didn't help that as they dug, they started to find connections to McCain and his campaign, almost as if he'd been planted there just to create an issue where McCain could routinely criticize Obama over what amounted to nothing.
Sorry, but when you become a campaign slogan and start doing interviews because you asked a presidential candidate a question that doesn't actually make sense (saying that you're looking at buying a business and suddenly having an annual salary WAY above average for people in that line of work, and then trying to argue you'd only be doing moderately well is, to say the least, stretching the bounds of believability), you forfeit your right to be just another anonymous face in the crowd. that's just how it works.
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
You know,
If Joe actually WAS a plumber, as he said he was, he wouldn't have taken so much heat.
If Joe actually WAS in a position to take over his boss's business, he wouldn't have taken so much heat.
If Joe's boss's company actually MADE as much profit as he said id did each year, he wouldn't have taken so much heat.
All in all, he made up a bunch of stuff to pretend to be in the tiny portion of the population that Obama's plan might not be good for.
I think the one not so subtle message is: don't lie your ass off trying to 'nail' someone with a question when you have a ton of cameras pointed at you.
Simply for engaging the candidate in a discussion, he was investigated by the media. That they found some weirdnesses does not make it OK.
I could be wrong, but wasn't it the fact that John McCain brought him up over and over again in the debate, and attempted to use him as a model of the "average American" that caused him to be investigated so heavily? It was less that he asked the candidate a difficult question, and more that McCain's camp was so eager to use him for their own ends. --Jimmy