Basically, the things Hillbilly has done would make Nixon blush. If anyone at my husband's company did what she did off a secure server with any of their defense files, they would not only be fired, but also charged criminally. And this is just one issue. It simply beggars belief how far the Clintons have been able to go without consequences to their crimes. You may flame me as mad hatter Trump supporter (I'm not), but the sight of either Clinton talking (lying) to the public, brings bile to my throat. I actually may not vote in the coming election because it is all such a farce on the American public that I see no point in participating.
going to ignore the sarcastic/political tone, but i agree with the second part. People seem to be talking about a lot about the content of the emails, etc, when was it classified, etc, which is important, but seems ancillary to my main concern for the case: confidentiality and integrity of the data. Excuse me while i go on a rant for a second:
While i don't know the specs/setup of whatever was put in her house, there's a reason DoS has in-house email and systems, it provides a much more controlled environment, where there are known safeguards and managed systems. Are the perfect? No, but DoS tech staff has their eye on them, and knows what they're doing. When you change an element and relocate the server (conduit for send and receiving of information of varying sensitivities) you are throwing off that known system, adding a bunch more variables that complicates the security equation - seems like a big risk to me.
We have what's known as the Information Security (CIA) Triad - it consists of:
Confidentiality - ensuring data/information is not disclosed outside of the person(s) and system(s) it's intended to be reached by. Any person that sees the information (via interception midway, or seeing it say on a computer they're not supposed to) that is not intended to is considered a breach of confidentiality. Information duplicated, or sent to another system not originally intended to receive the information, is generally considered [for assessment sake] as a loss of confidentiality, as it's difficult to know if a 3rd party saw information as it went to or through an unintended system.
Integrity - ensuring data is in it's original format and was not tampered with between time of sending and time of receipt. If PintoBean wanted to send a file to Eventhorizon, and i managed to either change the file's contents, or corrupt the file, this is a loss of integrity. This also applies to data at-rest (meaning not being sent.) If i managed to get on PintoBean's computer, change the file before she sent it, that would still be a compromise of data integrity.
Availability - ensuring people have access to the data without undue interruptions. If a corporate server went down, and clients couldn't access company data, this is a loss of availability. You'll hear about DDOS attacks a lot, where websites get hammered by requests and go down, causing them to be inaccessible to users - this is a breach of availability.
Now, the way i see it (and i could be very wrong) - this is a breach of integrity for one, as emails went "missing" or were deleted, especially ones that may have been crucial to a case, and confidentiality, if anyone was either 1) shared information when they weren't supposed to (e.g. clinton foundation) or 2) able to access the home server. Both could be likely, but i'm not going to speculate or accuse, as i have no way of knowing or proving either occurred. That being said, if i were an attacker (hacker), i would find it likely much easier to access information on a home server (even if it was set up to be secure) that's outside of the perimeter of an organization like the Department of State. Whether that occurred or not, i don't know, but it's almost certain to be an easier target than a DoS provided email, but again, hard to say without knowing the system in place at her house.
All that to say, without getting into the importance of each material, what was classified, when was it classified, etc, it all seems like a pretty big error in judgement for anyone who is concerned about security. Whether the DoS approved this or not (i've heard they might have?) and if IT Security staff oversaw/inspected the home system, that might be a different story. Still though, seems like a poor route to take just because you don't want to use two email accounts. In my mind, the more separation between the two, the better.
However, i digress. I'm curious to see how this unfolds though, and am surprised the majority of the Democrats seem to be just playing this off as an attack against her campaign rather than a lack of judgement and serious misgivings about future decisions were she POTUS. Again though, i don't have all the facts, so this is just conjecture on my part. I will say personally though, the way she's reacted to all this in interviews and stuff makes me skin crawl. Seems so...wormy?
This is a biased source for the video, but you can find the same video in multiple places. Just made me so annoyed. But that's me.
[video=youtube;T2OJwsit0WY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2OJwsit0WY[/video]
"I have no idea how it works digitally at all..."
well yikes.... i mean i don't expect candidates to be technically versed but at least know the possible ramifications of your major decisions by asking other people. Like i said above though, if it was OK'd then that's a different story.
