Clinton Home Servers Had Ports Open (ap.org)
Jim Efaw writes: Hillary Clinton's home servers had more than just the e-mail ports open directly to the Internet. The Associated Press discovered, by using scanning results from 2012 "widely available online", that the clintonemail.com server also had the RDP port open; another machine on her network had the VNC port open, and another one had a web server open even though it didn't appear to be configured for a real site. Clinton previously said that her server featured "numerous safeguards," but hasn't explained what that means. Apparently, requiring a VPN wasn't one of them.
now claims the server was secured.
either of these claims disproves the other. You cannot have secured what does not exist.
Interesting how the debate has shifted away from the lies and denials in public of this, but into the content and construction.
It's like any of us being caught with a machine gun illegally in our possession but turning the debate away from the law we broke having it into whether or not it was loaded and what type of ammo, as if that made any difference.
I hope she was using Windows, we all know how hardened that is.
Not only was she running Windows Server (according to the AP article), but she was using Network Solutions for her registrar, even after the U.S. Postal Service and several other large institutions had their NetSol domains slammed to a registrar in the British Virgin Islands against their will; and for some reason the clintonemail.com IP address was changed to that same company in 2011. (This, of course, years and years after anyone with tech experience had dropped Network Solutions.)
First, are you sure that it actually was extra-legal, or are you only repeating what others have said?
All that I know is that it has been reported that she had an e-mail server of her own. I could not tell you when it operated and I do not know what laws or regulations existed at what point during its operation.
At this point, so many contradictory, technically incorrect, and outright silly things have been said by talking heads about this that I'm simply inclined to not bother to judge based on it. This is like when the supposed expert from one of the news channels reported on the hacker 4chan and the images of celebrities he stole and put up on the Internet, it was so full of derp that there was no point in even bothering to pay attention other than as a drinking game of factual inaccuracies. This episode should be interpreted the same way when nontechnical people are doing the talking, be they Mrs. Clinton, or the congress critters, or the reporters.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
I'm not an American, so I'm not really that interested, but I would watch a debate between the top campaign donors for each candidate...
Don't worry. The Democratic party is still working hard to set up the Clinton coronation.
As long as the boat isn't rocked too much, Clinton is our winner in this election.
That could change if they managed to indict Clinton somehow, or Biden joined the race. I don't think Bernie, on his own, will be able to unseat Clinton.
That said, I am not sure that Jeb would beat Bernie. On the other hand, Bernie would get exactly nothing done unless they seriously changed the make-up of Congress.
The Republicans are in a bad state, but they'd re-unite to deal with a President Sanders. An actual socialist is probably something they hate even more than each other.
> I'm saying she did something stupid, not malicious.
Leaving out that setting up a server to bypass public records laws is inherently malicious as far as the public interest goes, even if setting it up wasn't malicious, repeatedly lying to us about it most certainly is malicious. The fact that they can convince a non-trivial faction of America of non-factual things is a serious problem. It will continue to be a problem whether it's being abused by Ds or Rs and it was just as bad when the Rs were doing it and I was complaining about them.
If we want a responsible government, we can't let them off the hook when they deliberately and knowingly subvert the accountability rules, no matter which faction they belong to. If nobody can be held accountable, then the government controls us when it's supposed to be the other way around in a democracy.