Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Jarqui

(10,131 posts)
28. If I'm in Uretsky's or the Sanders campaign's boots and I'm concerned with
Thu Dec 24, 2015, 09:15 PM
Dec 2015

Clinton stealing my data from the October breaches and/or before. There's a pretty interesting way of dealing with it. You put in some fake data that only you know and your lawyer about - including for example, fake email addresses. Put in a few in each state that would have voter data that would appeal to the Clinton campaign (voter has money to donate, likes Hillary, you know ...). If the Clinton campaign starts sending emails to those bogus email addresses that only the Sanders campaign created and knows about, how do the Clinton campaign explain that?

Sanders campaign manager Weaver is "very confident" a campaign got a hold of their data. He wants an audit. If that audit doesn't turn up the trojan horse data, well, he can cry foul on the audit, can't he.

This thing isn't over because the Sanders campaign took Clinton's data last week. The logs and the software vendor have already established that didn't happen. They knew from those logs very quickly it didn't happen. I strongly suspect they did it to smear the Sanders campaign - to make them look bad - worse than they really were at the very least.

This thing isn't over because the Sanders campaign is pretty convinced somebody took their data ... and from the sounds of Weaver, they must have some pretty compelling evidence to keep the court case going and stand in front of the national media maintaining they're "very confident" somebody took their data.

If they're in possession of Trojan horse emails (as one example) or evidence that the Clinton campaign took their data last October or whenever and that comes out, oh, say a week or a few days before Iowa goes to the polls, the primary polls could get pretty interesting, doncha think? Bernie would be getting a little media attention then I'll bet.

You're damn right this isn't over. This thing smells bad. I have no evidence the Clinton campaign is guilty. But the stench to me isn't coming from the Sanders campaign. The way their heading with this, it could be a real problem for another campaign - they're not letting go. If they're truly convinced someone took their data, why should they?

Interesting article Gothmog Dec 2015 #1
How could this "harm" the Clinton campaign? artislife Dec 2015 #12
That seems to be the author's conclusion... drokhole Dec 2015 #15
He mentioned they could not even get that detail without being able to download the data newthinking Dec 2015 #17
Agreed drokhole Dec 2015 #20
Nonsense. The strategy and thinking of the Clinton GOTV efforts is probably pretty obvious JDPriestly Dec 2015 #36
Sanders spins the facts when he says campaign did not 'go out and take' Clinton data Gothmog Dec 2015 #55
So it is the Clinton campaign has exploited the software, now could this Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #2
is that the new talking point? grasswire Dec 2015 #5
According to the OP, thought it was strange myself. Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #37
I think it is exactly like he said. He wanted to be able to prove that the breach had occurred. LiberalArkie Dec 2015 #6
++++ Voice for Peace Dec 2015 #9
I agree. We are talking about computer nerds here. They will mess with data just to see JDPriestly Dec 2015 #32
Maybe he can use this for his defense. Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #38
Clinton camp circling the wagons ... Fantastic Anarchist Dec 2015 #14
Nope, not circling the wagons, just waiting for the audit results. Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #39
The author, formerly and admin of the software, said that neither campaign could get far without newthinking Dec 2015 #18
We've discussed this before. JDPriestly Dec 2015 #34
I was commenting on the OP, perhaps responding to the OP where Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #40
If you are talking about the Kroll audit, don't count on it. JDPriestly Dec 2015 #42
All of this does not excuse the fact the breach occurred. Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #43
The breach is the fault of NGP Van. They admit there was a bug in a release on the website. JDPriestly Dec 2015 #49
The NGP Van was nkt fired by Sanders. Who forced Sanders staff members to look at Clinton's Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #50
The staff did not breach the data. They were given permission to search and view the data JDPriestly Dec 2015 #51
Wow. Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #53
Did Sanders fire one of his staff members and suspend two more? Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #52
Very interesting, thanks. SusanCalvin Dec 2015 #3
The document has been pulled from the Internet!! grasswire Dec 2015 #4
I am still getting it LiberalArkie Dec 2015 #7
not me grasswire Dec 2015 #8
It's still there for me. nt SusanCalvin Dec 2015 #10
ditto. n/t JonLeibowitz Dec 2015 #11
Yep, still there. n/t bvf Dec 2015 #45
I just read the article and shared it on Twitter and Facebook underthematrix Dec 2015 #13
This basically shows the analysis by myself and another IT admin was correct. This is POLITICAL not newthinking Dec 2015 #16
Great OP! drokhole Dec 2015 #21
Going off the summary of the log they provided Jarqui Dec 2015 #23
I tend to believe Uretsky's statement about his intent to document the extent of the breach JDPriestly Dec 2015 #29
I can't vouch for every single word Uretsky said. Only a good audit can Jarqui Dec 2015 #35
"It's political not substantive." I agree with the political part. That was the point. pnwmom Dec 2015 #27
Maybe he discovered something so fascinating that he threw caution to the wind. JDPriestly Dec 2015 #30
It really wasn't that big of a deal passiveporcupine Dec 2015 #19
Or rather a BERNghazi! drokhole Dec 2015 #22
I prefer Wassergate! Fuddnik Dec 2015 #25
Ach ja! drokhole Dec 2015 #33
Bad metaphor. Benghazi was where Libyan weapons were stored and from where weapons JDPriestly Dec 2015 #26
Hmmm...not so sure passiveporcupine Dec 2015 #31
Jacobin tries to determine based on the searches what the intent of Bernie's Sanders JDPriestly Dec 2015 #24
If I'm in Uretsky's or the Sanders campaign's boots and I'm concerned with Jarqui Dec 2015 #28
There is something odd about the response to this article. Kalidurga Dec 2015 #41
No. Please just tell me. nt SusanCalvin Dec 2015 #46
The lack of Hillary supporters jumping all over the article Kalidurga Dec 2015 #47
Gotcha. Thanks. nt SusanCalvin Dec 2015 #48
I have the opposite feeling; whenever good points are raised by those qualified to say so, they run. JonLeibowitz Dec 2015 #54
What truely amazes me here is that any campaign is storing sensitive data under the control RichVRichV Dec 2015 #44
This message was self-deleted by its author SunSeeker Dec 2015 #56
Unanswered Questions benjamindavidsteele Feb 2016 #57
Latest Discussions»Editorials & Other Articles»What Really Happened With...»Reply #28