Slashdot Mirror
Clinton Campaign Breached By Hackers
An anonymous reader writes: Hillary Clinton's campaign network was breached by hackers targeting several large Democratic organizations, Reuters reports. Clinton's campaign spokesperson Nick Merrill confirmed the hack in a statement. 'An analytics data program maintained by the DNC, and used by our campaign and a number of other entities, was accessed as part of the DNC hack. Our campaign computer system has been under review by outside security experts. To date, they have found no evidence that our internal systems have been compromised,' he said.
The hack follows on the heels of breaches at the Democratic National Committee and at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee earlier this year. More than 19,000 emails from DNC officials were published on WikiLeaks just prior to the Democratic National Convention, casting a shadow over the proceedings. Some security experts and U.S. officials have attributed the breaches to Russian operatives, although the origin of the email leak is less certain.
The hack follows on the heels of breaches at the Democratic National Committee and at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee earlier this year. More than 19,000 emails from DNC officials were published on WikiLeaks just prior to the Democratic National Convention, casting a shadow over the proceedings. Some security experts and U.S. officials have attributed the breaches to Russian operatives, although the origin of the email leak is less certain.
Stop watching movies and thinking they are real.
Someone had to do it.
So saying things some people don't like (while lacking any immediate calls for violence)... is now considered a hate crime?
Truly the SJW's have won the cultural war... if you are right... which thankfully you are not.
America is a liberal country - Love it or leave it.
Point 1: America is 38% conservative and 24% Liberal. (source).
Point 2: "Love it or leave it" is effectively "shut up and sit down". It calls for a suppression of free speech typical of tyrannical, abusive dictatorship. Turkey can say "love it or leave it" with some justification. America cannot.
That criminal witch is untouchable [...]
Insults are the domain of the Democrats, have some couth. Republicans don't generally use insult as a substitute for rational thinking, that's a Democratic play.
We could easily build stories about Hillary being Marie Antoinette ("let them eat cake"), or Lucrecia Borgia (for all Clinton's opponents who have died under mysterious circumstances), or even Lilith ("Mother of demons"). Some of them would even have a rational basis. It would be a counterpoint to Trump being Hilter, Stalin, or Cthulhu.
But we don't, because we believe the head rules the heart. We have smart people here at Slashdot, we don't have to descend to common name calling.
"Heart rules the head", IOW emotional thinking, is what Democrats do.
We don't *need* to spout lies or insults.
Don't descend to their level.
(And if you're a Democrat reading this and are angered: take the challenge. Post a reason why Hillary would be better than Trump as president, without outright lying, insulting, or wishful fantasy. In other words, cite their stated positions instead of "he'll do *this*" or "she'll do *that*. I don't think anyone can, but if anyone can, they'd be here on Slashdot.)
So Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith.Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty weren't killed there in large part due to Hillary?
Nope, they were killed there. But not "in large part due to Hillary" except on your fantasy island.
Someone had to do it.
Remember everyone, the DNC can be hacked and the Clinton campaign can be hacked, but there's NO WAY IN THE WORLD that Hillary's homebrew email server was hacked. Nope. Not possible. Pure as the driven snow.
Hateful speech is not a crime. This is not the EU. You can be a NeoNazi and drape your house in swastikas if you want. It's only a hate crime once you start gassing people or telling other people to do so.
I want to know how much money Trump really owes to the Russian oligarchs? Would he pay them back in political favors if he become president?
16 US embassies and/or consulates were attacked during GW Bush's presidency. 60 people were killed. There were NO congressional hearings. Double standard, much?
Who cares if her server was hacked? It never stored any classified information, and if hacked, all they would get is her yoga routines & wedding plans for her daughter.
We have the assurances of the Clinton herself to validate that truth with.
Why? Because we don't jail people for thought crimes and believe everyone deserves a voice even if they're stupid? Since when is not liking people a crime?
NeoNazis are ridiculed quite mercilessly here in the US. You have the freedom to say whatever you want. And people have the freedom to call you an irrational douchebag and wish that someone would kick your ass.
It's called LIBERTY. We still have a little bit of that left in spite of the best efforts of "progressives" and SJW retards. If liberty scares you and you enjoy a nanny state that punishes people for being meanieheads, then enjoy the EU. A nanny state for your "protection" goes against the principles on which this country was founded. And nanny states are happy to turn on their own citizens eventually.
You mean besides the part where the Benghazi embassy requested extra security and she along with her underlings said there wasn't any money for it? But they could come up with the money for electric car chargers for the embassies in Europe?
Om, nomnomnom...
Yeah, who cares if one of the most powerful people in the world violated federal law and put national security at risk. Stop obsessing about it.
Let's ignore the emails about rigging the election and instead focus on how these hackers are trying to rig the election.
Repeating my reply to another similar post : I'm definitely not a Trump supporter, but I have to take issue with that statement. He didn't call for hacking, he said that they should "find" the missing emails. Since the server is already off-line, it's not there to be hacked.
Presumably, he is suggesting that the server had probably already been hacked (maybe by any number of individuals or countries) and he thinks they could be found.
https://pjmedia.com/homeland-s...
Hillary Obstructed Boko Haram's Terror Designation as Her Donors Cashed In
In January 2015, I was one of the first to report on a massive massacre by Nigerian terror group Boko Haram in Borno State in northwest Nigeria, with reportedly thousands killed. Witnesses on the ground reported that bodies littered the landscape for miles as towns and villages had been burned to the ground, their populations murdered or fled.
And yet, as Boko Haram began to ramp up its terror campaign in 2011 and 2012, Hillary Clinton obstructed the official terror designation of the group over the objections of Congress, the FBI, the CIA and the Justice Department.
Nice deflection onto Bush. I gotta ask how is he running for office again and what the hell makes you think it absolves her sins.
Remember everyone, the DNC can be hacked and the Clinton campaign can be hacked, but there's NO WAY IN THE WORLD that Hillary's homebrew email server was hacked. Nope. Not possible. Pure as the driven snow.
You mean that sarcastically, but it's basically true. Hacking a server is one thing. Hacking a server without leaving any tracks whatsoever is insanely difficult. Hillary Clinton's server was examined by top FBI forensic analysts, and no breach was detected. This is unlike the system she supposedly "should" have been using, OpenNet (the state.gov email system), which has been hacked so many times, they judge them by how bad they are Sources: State Dept. hack the 'worst ever'. Every other hack has been detected and analyzed - it strains credulity that of all these emails servers, only clintonemail.com would have been hacked so perfectly that there was no trace left, even in the many backups.
This doesn't mean that the Russians don't have her emails, since anything sent to a state.gov email address was copied by them. But that's not Secretary Clinton's fault, and the sheer incompetence of State's IT department (their "solution" to her emails going to people's spam bucket wasn't to whitelist clintonemail.com, but to turn off all spam filtering), lends credence to the idea that she was just trying to work around some very incompetent people in the bureaucracy to get her job done.
What is absolutely proven at this point, is that if she'd done things the "right way", then all her emails would be now in the possession of foreign intelligence agencies. Having clintonemail.com didn't hurt, and may in certain ways, helped.
Turn in your Nerd Card, it has been revoked!
Once a machine is compromised, absolutely nothing on it can be trusted. With full access to a machine, log files can be erased or modified to cover all traces of intrusion. Couple this with the fact the machine was wiped, like with a cloth, and it is plainly obvious that any forensic analysis will be a waste of time. The fact is, the server in question was actively running insecure services on Internet facing ports, insecure as in there were known exploits at the time.
It was once reported that a fresh install of Windows (an ancient version) would be compromised within minutes (10-15?) of being connected to the Internet due to the number of random scans. Clinton's server was running a wide-open vulnerable service for MONTHS. Let that sink in.
WTF do electric car chargers have to do with security? Do you imagine that embassies must have "perfect" security and only then are the employees allowed to have chairs?
Well let's look at it from an IT pov shall we? You'r UID is low enough you should get it. Imagine you've got two satellite offices, one is in a relatively stable, secure area where you can get away with simple keypad lockouts and the occasional guard. The other location is in a shit hole, there's roving bands of thugs and not only do you have heavy security you also have all the existing security.
Now your nice safe office in order to look trendy in their new hip area wants 143 cappuccino and espresso machines, because that'll make them look good. And your other office wants more on the ground bodies and further hardening of the existing security measure to make sure your hardware is secure. So you decide that trendy and hip is the way to go, your other office gets trashed, people get killed and you just say "well there wasn't any money to help with that..." while you just finished spending several hundred thousand dollars for cappuccino and espresso machines.
So the money was there, it could have been reallocated by dispensation to the security fund. But instead of doing that you're now responsible for the deaths of a couple of people, destruction of your hardware and other issues. And your response is: "what difference does it make?"
Om, nomnomnom...
I'm not obsessed about it, actually. I don't particularly care about US federal law or national security anyway. What I find somewhat more troubling is attempts almost on the eve of elections at conveniently removing one of two major candidates for the leadership of a global superpower in a world I happen to live in, even if I happen to live in a different part of it.
Ezekiel 23:20
Oh, laws were violated. They just were excused. Comey is on record saying that anyone else Hillary caught doing what Hillary did with the same evidence, would be prosecuted. How does that sit with you? I guess it sits pretty good as long as some ass official says it's ok for one but not for anyone else. Try getting past your cognitive dissonance. You're failed logic is the pillar of corruption.
Who decides what is hate speech? You? Hillary? Obama?
I tell you what, I think it's hurtful and mean to say that I have white privilege. I believe that I am being singled out purely based on the color of my skin and it being assumed that because of that skin color I am somehow a hazard to society. I think it's further hateful and harmful that I am assumed to be misogynistic because I have a penis. Based purely on my gender I am assumed to be a destructive element to society. I believe that the terms "white privilege" and "male-dominated" are micro-aggressions, that they are racist and sexist generalizations, and by every comparative definition to anyone that chants them while quite literally RIOTING in the streets, they are undeniably guilty of hate speech.
Where is your outrage for harms done me?
Where is your campaign slogan to protect me from the wildfire of anger and hate directed at me?
Or will you admit that by your definitions that free speech is for you to stir anger toward me, but that you personally mean to deny me any rights to turn that speech back on you.
"But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi