Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Did the Clinton Email Server Have an Internet-Based Printer?

krebsonsecurity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 259 posts

Re: Did the Clinton Email Server Have an Internet-Based Printer?

#221

Post by sandworm101 »

untog wrote: post #65

Among the more disappointing things in all of this is that there is a rational, important conversation to be had about everyday awareness of security and government inflexibility. But there won't be, because she is Hillary Clinton and it is 2016. Supposedly she got the server set up because the NSA refused to give a politician who travels frequently a secure smartphone. She (I personally believe) was likely ignorant…

It's not A or B. They are not mutually exclusive. She can be evil and the subject of a plot. In fact, given that she is a politician, A is a most certainly true. And given that she is a candidate for president, so is B.

Re: Did the Clinton Email Server Have an Internet-Based Printer?

#222

Post by JonFish85 »

eli wrote: post #214
ctdonath wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supposedly she got the server set up because the NSA refused to give a politician who travels frequently a secure smartphone. Baloney. She was the second most powerful person in the US government. If she couldn't get them to provide modern secure communications, she had the ear of the one who could. If it was as you say, and truly that systemic a problem, then indeed heads should politically roll - starting from the…

Ever work in a really large oraganization and try to demand something from some far-flung other division? Not so easy. She shouldn't have set up her own server. And the NSA should have been more sensitive to how important mobile email is to a modern diplomat.

"Ever work in a really large oraganization and try to demand something from some far-flung other division? Not so easy."

As someone reporting directly to the CEO, I bet it's not so hard... And "but it was really hard" isn't exactly a solid excuse for... anything?

Re: Did the Clinton Email Server Have an Internet-Based Printer?

#223

Post by themartorana »

rdiddly wrote: post #101
themartorana wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the rationale for not giving everyone secure smartphones? And I mean high-ranking officials, SoS certainly ranks considering how much she/he is in foreign countries with foreign leaders. Can someone in the know explain why the NSA would deny such requests?

I liked where I _thought_ you were going with that. Why not give ALL OF US secure smartphones. Indeed. Indeed.

The NSA is already in my smartphone. If they gave me a secure smartphone, I'd still feel pretty much like I do now.

Re: Did the Clinton Email Server Have an Internet-Based Printer?

#224

Post by GVIrish »

patrickg_zill wrote: post #148

I have spent some time talking to different people I meet/know who have security clearances. EVERY one of tells me that if they had done what it appears Hillary did, they would fully expect to be in jail for years. In researching this, I find that about 4.5 million Americans currently have, and maybe 1.5 million more did have in the past, security clearances. I find it hard to believe that in Washington DC, surrounde…

That's because in the federal government the average employee simply doesn't have the same amount of power nor leeway that a cabinet level executive would. For one, several cabinet level appointees have original classifying authority. No regular employee has that power.

A rank and file employee obviously could not direct anyone to set up a private email server for their correspondence or request that the NSA provide them with a secure blackberry.

> I find it hard to believe that in Washington DC, surrounded by people with security clearances, this was unintentional and just an accident. It's like Hillary had to look far afield to find people without security clearances so that they would set this up for her.

Clinton certainly was wrong here and people certainly told her not to do this. But I don't think it requires malicious intent, just someone not taking the rules/guidelines seriously and/or thinking they have more power than they do.

NARA compliance is something that many people either don't know about or are confused about at State department so I could see how some might not take it as seriously as they should.

I'm sure she and her inner circle rationalized away the security risk because classified materials are not supposed to be sent to public email addresses, there's a separate network for that.

Re: Did the Clinton Email Server Have an Internet-Based Printer?

#225

Post by engi_nerd »

karmacondon wrote: post #164
engi_nerd wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And those slipups should open her to prosecution under the Espionage Act. A number of security professionals (I mean security in the government, Information Assurance sense) have told me that if they or I were to do anything like what Secretary Clinton did, we would be liable to be prosecuted.

This is very true. But you aren't the Secretary of State. I'm sure there are people at a high enough level at wherever you work now that the normal rules don't apply to them. That's the nature of any organization. C-level executives, military generals and high level politicians can all decide not to follow certain rules if they choose, especially when it comes to IT policy. I'm not saying that what Clinton did was ri…

Power has privileges. I'm not surprised by her ability to get away with this.

It happens. I don't like it, and I don't respect people who think the rules do not apply to them.

Re: Did the Clinton Email Server Have an Internet-Based Printer?

#226

Post by merpnderp »

GVIrish wrote: post #218
merpnderp wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've almost entirely given up on conversations in HN threads, but the recent State Dept Inspector General's report concludes that after the server was found to be compromised, the staffers who found the issue were told to never speak of it again. This wasn't just poor IT security, this was willful ignorance of the consequences of state secrets being in the open. It is incredibly likely she was targeted by foreign int…

> This wasn't just poor IT security, this was willful ignorance of the consequences of state secrets being in the open. To be clear, this was unclassified email. Classified email is on a separate network. Certainly having access to the Secretary of State's unclassified emails could yield valuable intelligence insights but these are not emails that are going to contain "secrets" per se.

That's absolutely not clear at all. Content from SIPRNet and JWICS both ended up in 1,340 of the emails on Hillary's server. The CIA has reviewed the emails and said that several of them contain partial content from their highly sensitive intelligence on human intelligence.

We won't know for sure until the FBI investigation is complete, but it is looking like this wasn't an accident but a cavalier attitude towards handling sensitive intelligence.

But given how no one seems to care how she handled Syria, Iraq, and N. Africa, it's obvious it doesn't much matter how she handled secret information.

Re: Did the Clinton Email Server Have an Internet-Based Printer?

#227

Post by stillusingvb6 »

snsr wrote: post #196
stillusingvb6 wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jan 29th. Seems like the information released in the last few days points to her knowingly violating security protocol. I doubt she will be prosecuted but this has sunk her campaign. It's over.

> It's over. Far from it

How many times did you say that Trump was finished in the last 6 months?

We have to face reality. Trump destroyed the Republican establishment. Hillary will not be an issue for him.

Re: Did the Clinton Email Server Have an Internet-Based Printer?

#228

Post by stillusingvb6 »

unlinker wrote: post #191
stillusingvb6 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She asked and they gave her options she didn't like and then worked around it. Big difference

That's implying she understood the implications.

She cheered imprisonment of whistleblowers, citing sanctity of classified info. Source: "Hillary Clinton on the Sanctity of Protecting Classified Information"

Best quote: “I think that in an age where so much information is flying through cyberspace, we all have to be aware of the fact that some information which is sensitive, which does affect the security of individuals and relationships, deserves to be protected and we will continue to take necessary steps to do so,” Clinton said

She knew what she was doing. This is outrageous.

Re: Did the Clinton Email Server Have an Internet-Based Printer?

#229

Post by GVIrish »

merpnderp wrote: post #226
GVIrish wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This wasn't just poor IT security, this was willful ignorance of the consequences of state secrets being in the open. To be clear, this was unclassified email. Classified email is on a separate network. Certainly having access to the Secretary of State's unclassified emails could yield valuable intelligence insights but these are not emails that are going to contain "secrets" per se.

That's absolutely not clear at all. Content from SIPRNet and JWICS both ended up in 1,340 of the emails on Hillary's server. The CIA has reviewed the emails and said that several of them contain partial content from their highly sensitive intelligence on human intelligence. We won't know for sure until the FBI investigation is complete, but it is looking like this wasn't an accident but a cavalier attitude towards ha…

Right, but State Department has Classnet for classified materials, this is not a case of Clinton plugging into Classnet with a private server.

The fact that other people sent information to her Opennet email address that contained information derived from classified documents is not necessarily damning for Clinton. If someone from DoD or any of the intelligence agencies pulled information from a classified document and sent it to a public email address, that spillage would be on the sender.

If Clinton realized that classified info came into her inbox then she would be responsible for getting that information off an unclassified machine. But if someone pasted an excerpt from a classified source into an unclassified email, the recipient of that email may not know that it was in fact classified information. Certain types of information should ring alarm bells for the recipient, but the classification of other types of information are not always going to be apparent if the information is not marked (secret, top secret, sbu, etc).

To date there doesn't seem to be anyone claiming there was intentional spillage on Clinton's part, or that she personally took classified information and put it on an unclassified system. There may yet be more revealed but right now it doesn't look like she did anything meriting prosecution.

Re: Did the Clinton Email Server Have an Internet-Based Printer?

#230

Post by Torgo »

untog wrote: post #65

Among the more disappointing things in all of this is that there is a rational, important conversation to be had about everyday awareness of security and government inflexibility. But there won't be, because she is Hillary Clinton and it is 2016. Supposedly she got the server set up because the NSA refused to give a politician who travels frequently a secure smartphone. She (I personally believe) was likely ignorant…

>Supposedly she got the server set up because the NSA refused to give a politician who travels frequently a secure smartphone.

She didn't want the one they offered her, which was an older-style Windows Mobile phone. As the emails frequently note, she is not a "computer person", she knew how to work one kind of device for accessing email and refused to use anything different. They offered her a secure computer with a dedicated outside line even inside State, but her handlers thought she wouldn't even be able to deal with the concept of accessing her email on a PC rather than a Blackberry. I am not bashing Clinton here, I am just reading back the stuff from the emails that was on JudicialWatch.

What's "depressing" to me is that I have had to handle classified material in the past and there's zero doubt what would happen to me if I handled this shit like her and her staff did, but there's going to be zero material consequences for her. I kind of feel like there's two sets of law books, ones for peons like me, and ones for special people like her.

Post reply on HN