Even a 14 year old kid could have hacked into Podesta's emails (Clinton, crime)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Anyone and even a 14 year old could have hacked into Podesta's emails. How do you think Hillary Clinton's and the DNC's emails were able to get hacked and leaked on the web? It's their fault for using an unsecured email server. Plus John Podesta fell for a phishing scam and clicked on a suspicious link which hackers were able to get into his email.
I think you are confused. Hillary Clinton's email server wasn't hacked.
DNC server was hacked. Podesta's individual email was accessed due to phishing.
Even having security software and protection methods on servers doesn't mean they aren't hack proof. The hackers are creating new ways of entry as fast as the security experts are coming up with protective software.
Do you blame people that have been burglarized for getting their house broken into, even when they locked their doors and windows and even when it's against the law to burglarize?
Do you blame the victim of a peeping tom for having a window or for having blinds that had little openings between the slats?
Do you blame banks for getting robbed because they let the robber into the bank?
If someone's car is stolen while they are at work, do you blame them for not having a security alarm, even though they locked the car?
If a lady gets her purse stolen while she's walking to her car in the supermarket parking lot, do you blame her for carrying a purse?
Do you blame the person that had a hate crime or terrorist attack committed against them for being a specific race or a specific religion that was targeted? Or blame them for being in public where they were attacked?
What good are laws if you blame the victim and allow the law to be broken by the purpetrator?
Last edited by sware2cod; 01-04-2017 at 04:32 PM..
I think you are confused. Hillary Clinton's email server wasn't hacked.
DNC server was hacked. Podesta's individual email was accessed due to phishing.
Even having security software and protection methods on servers doesn't mean they aren't hack proof. The hackers are creating new ways of entry as fast as the security experts are coming up with protective software.
Do you blame people that have been burglarized for getting their house broken into, even when they locked their doors and windows and even when it's against the law to burglarize?
Do you blame the victim of a peeping tom for having a window or for having blinds that had little openings between the slats?
Do you blame banks for getting robbed because they let the robber into the bank?
If someone's car is stolen while they are at work, do you blame them for not having a security alarm, even though they locked the car?
If a lady gets her purse stolen while she's walking to her car in the supermarket parking lot, do you blame her for carrying a purse?
Do you blame the person that had a hate crime or terrorist attack committed against them for being a specific race or a specific religion that was targeted? Or blame them for being in public where they were attacked?
What good are laws if you blame the victim and allow the law to be broken by the purpetrator?
Bad analogies. Do you blame dws for info exposed by hack? She got canned so I guess so.
I think you are confused. Hillary Clinton's email server wasn't hacked.
DNC server was hacked. Podesta's individual email was accessed due to phishing.
Even having security software and protection methods on servers doesn't mean they aren't hack proof. The hackers are creating new ways of entry as fast as the security experts are coming up with protective software.
Do you blame people that have been burglarized for getting their house broken into, even when they locked their doors and windows and even when it's against the law to burglarize?
Do you blame the victim of a peeping tom for having a window or for having blinds that had little openings between the slats?
Do you blame banks for getting robbed because they let the robber into the bank?
If someone's car is stolen while they are at work, do you blame them for not having a security alarm, even though they locked the car?
If a lady gets her purse stolen while she's walking to her car in the supermarket parking lot, do you blame her for carrying a purse?
Do you blame the person that had a hate crime or terrorist attack committed against them for being a specific race or a specific religion that was targeted? Or blame them for being in public where they were attacked?
What good are laws if you blame the victim and allow the law to be broken by the purpetrator?
All of them were careless in handling their emails so it was their fault they got hacked. If they were paying attention and had extra security, it would be a different story.
Leave your house unlocked and just try and file an insurance claim for your missing jewelry...
It's still a crime if someone walked into your house and stole your stuff. Breaking and entering - even if they snuck in through an open window or if they took the hinges off the door.
The cops don't let the burglars go based on how well you locked up your house. Or even if you locked all your doors and windows but the burglar picked your lock or broke your window to enter....the cops don't let the burglar go and blame the victim.
I think you are confused. Hillary Clinton's email server wasn't hacked.
This was a public server that would have been known to numerous foreign intelligence agencies. It was running off the shelf software administered by someone part time. There is no direct evidence thus far it was hacked but given the nature of the server and the sophistication of the numerous states the chances it wasn't hacked are pretty small.
Quote:
Even having security software and protection methods on servers doesn't mean they aren't hack proof.
The exception being a classified sytem that is physically separated from the outside world. This doesn't apply to the DNC or Podesta but would certainly apply to Hillary.
Quote:
Do you blame people that have been burglarized for getting their house broken into, even when they locked their doors and windows and even when it's against the law to burglarize?
If we are going to apply this analogy to Hillary not only was she able to have her house in Fort Knox she was required to have it housed in Fort Knox, at least for part of it. If it ever comes to light classified communications were exposed she will be just as much to blame as the person who hacked it.
If you're looking for the Hillary analogy with respect to computer security, and not even touching the thousands of classified emails that were sent, then Hillary's deliberate home server setup to avoid multiple federal investigations is similar to a teenager who is riding on the top of a Buick down Sunset blvd at 50mph while hopped up on prescription meds in the middle of a typhoon.
Actually, age has nothing to do with it. Podesta clicked on an email he did not recognize and got owned. Who does that in 2016? He must be susceptible to sending money to Nigeria to claim his share of some king's inheritance too. No wonder he lost the election for Hillary. BTW, his password was, wait for it, PASSWORD. Idiocy up and down the chain. Even Pizza Hut doesn't allow that.
I think you are confused. Hillary Clinton's email server wasn't hacked.
DNC server was hacked. Podesta's individual email was accessed due to phishing.
You're right, but there were a lot of fake news stories about this, so it depends on where a person gets his (ahem) "news."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.