Support NeoGAF

[docbon]

I mean... how do you tell if you've actually breached the database without running a query?

This is the classic penetration test problem. (result is that you either 1. need a waiver going in, which doesn't apply in this case, or 2. pretend you didn't see anything)

The staffer being fired is standard damage control. "Locked out until you prove you don't have the data" is standard dirty politics.

I really don't think it was done maliciously given the timeframe of the vulnerability, and the fact that they reported it so fast. The bad news is, "it isn't as bad as it looks" doesn't matter as much as the fact that it looks bad.

 

[Basileus777]

I don't even care if it was malicious or not, fuck Hilary and her corporate campaign. Within reason the goal justifies the methods to stop her nomination. This might end up badly though looking at the fact that people in general care more about drama than the improvements of their own lives.

Bernie has created a monster.

 

[CDX]

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...paign-disciplined-for-breaching-clinton-data/

The decision by the party committee is a major blow to Mr. Sanders’s campaign. The database includes information from voters across the nation and is used by campaigns to set strategy, especially in the early voting states.

The breach occurred after a software problem at the technology company NGP VAN, which gives campaigns access to the voter data. The problem inadvertently made proprietary voter data of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign visible to others, according to party committee officials.

The Sanders campaign said that it had fired a staff member who breached Mrs. Clinton’s data. But according to three people with direct knowledge of the breach, there were four user accounts associated with the Sanders campaign that ran searches while the security of Mrs. Clinton’s data was compromised.​

 

[pigeon]

I mean... how do you tell if you've actually breached the database without running a query?

This is the classic penetration test problem. (result is that you either 1. need a waiver going in, which doesn't apply in this case, or 2. pretend you didn't see anything)

Sure. But since you're not in quality assurance and don't work for the database owner, you don't need to tell if you actually breached the database. You can just send an email to the technical folks immediately when something looks weird and have the actual quality assurance people who work for the shared resource you don't own do the test. If your data access was really just accidental discovery, it's your job to keep your hands clean and own up to it as soon as it happens, not check it out with four different accounts. (Plus, of course, if your goal was really just testing, you can do that on your own data with an account that shouldn't have access.)

This is kind of classic exploit justification. Usually you see arguments like this on Reddit from people who just got banned from stuff.

The staffer being fired is standard damage control. "Locked out until you prove you don't have the data" is standard dirty politics.

Why would the DNC care about preventing Sanders from building a ground game?

 

[Kite]

I don't even care if it was malicious or not, fuck Hilary and her corporate campaign. Within reason the goal justifies the methods to stop her nomination.

wtf.. they're trying to win the party nomination, not fighting a holy war lol

 

[Elfforkusu]

Sure. But since you're not in quality assurance and don't work for the database owner, you don't need to tell if you actually breached the database. You can just send an email to the technical folks immediately when something looks weird and have the actual quality assurance people who work for the shared resource you don't own do the test. If your data access was really just accidental discovery, it's your job to keep your hands clean and own up to it as soon as it happens, not check it out with four different accounts. (Plus, of course, if your goal was really just testing, you can do that on your own data with an account that shouldn't have access.)

This is kind of classic exploit justification. Usually you see arguments like this on Reddit from people who just got banned from stuff.

I'm not saying there's no wrongdoing, I'm saying that technical people have curiosity and their curiosity can get the best of them even if there was no ill intent.

Why would the DNC care about preventing Sanders from building a ground game?

Because Bernie is not a Democrat and they would end the primary season now (really, months ago?) if they could?

 

[pigeon]

I don't even care if it was malicious or not, fuck Hilary and her corporate campaign. Within reason the goal justifies the methods to stop her nomination. This might end up badly though looking at the fact that people in general care more about drama than the improvements of their own lives.

I agree that running a campaign with integrity is pretty central to any justification for Sanders's campaign and that stuff like this calls that way into question.

 

[Dixon's Jet]

How long until they can prove they've deleted the data?

 

[Wafflecakes]

I don't even care if it was malicious or not, fuck Hilary and her corporate campaign. Within reason the goal justifies the methods to stop her nomination. This might end up badly though looking at the fact that people in general care more about drama than the improvements of their own lives.

When did Bernie supporters become the liberal equivalent of Fox News watchers?

 

[reggieandTFE]

We use the VAN on my job. It's going to really hamper Bernie's GOTV ability in the early states as it doesn't just store the data but allows adding assessments, printing turf, phone and walking lists, etc.

 

[Elfforkusu]

I agree that running a campaign with integrity is pretty central to any justification for Sanders's campaign and that stuff like this calls that way into question.

Doesn't bother me if they cheat and steal, just don't lie.

I understand that not everyone would agree with me though.

 

[Dixon's Jet]

When did Bernie supporters become the liberal equivalent of Fox News watchers?

Hillary supporters treat Hillary as Fox news treats conservatives. Nobody cares when Hillary acts like a neoconservative, what matters is that she's electable. This is Fox News tier thinking.

 

[Neuromancer]

If Hillary wasn't running a server out of her house and using AOL for her official email address, would this have happened? I doubt it.

 

[Condom]

Bernie has created a monster.

Yeah wait until TTIP gets passed and all other beautiful stuff Clinton has planned like even more wars.

 

[Grizzlyjin]

This thread is a treasure already.

 

[Elfforkusu]

When did Bernie supporters become the liberal equivalent of Fox News watchers?

Is Hillary a liberal? If so, I'm certainly not one.

She's a hawk, she's pro-corporation abuse if the system, she's pro status quo. She's socially liberal, so there's that. (but I also think that the president has very little control of the direction of the country on social issues. We'd have gay marriage even if Romney was president)

I'll vote for her over the GOP guy, but that's a function of the GOP being a clown show. I won't enjoy it.

 

[atr0cious]

We'd have gay marriage even if Romney was president)

Shit Post of the day right here.

 

[Hazmat]

I don't even care if it was malicious or not, fuck Hilary and her corporate campaign. Within reason the goal justifies the methods to stop her nomination. This might end up badly though looking at the fact that people in general care more about drama than the improvements of their own lives.

Oh man, Bernie supporter meltdowns are starting already. Now apparently Clinton is a monster and rules must be broken to stop her.

 

[pigeon]

I'm not saying there's no wrongdoing, I'm saying that technical people have curiosity and their curiosity can get the best of them even if there was no ill intent.

I have a jaundiced view of people who claim "I was just curious" to excuse their sins, because I've seen it be a lie way too often.

But also, I think you're kind of assuming that this was a technical guy trying to poke at a problem. They're not dealing with an in-house tool, they're dealing with an outsourced service provider. There's no reason to assume the people using the tool are at all technical.

Because Bernie is not a Democrat and they would end the primary season now (really, months ago?) if they could?

So what? Bernie is way behind in the polls and has no chance of winning as far as the DNC can see. Even if we assume for the moment that they have the malice necessary to screw him, they have no reason to actually do it if he's already going to lose. Like, dirty politics is not pathological. You're not required to cheat even when you're winning.

 

[Antiwhippy]

Is Hillary a liberal? If so, I'm certainly not one.

She's a hawk, she's pro-corporation abuse if the system, she's pro status quo. She's socially liberal, so there's that. (but I also think that the president has very little control of the direction of the country on social issues. We'd have gay marriage even if Romney was president)

I'll vote for her over the GOP guy, but that's a function of the GOP being a clown show. I won't enjoy it.

Classic liberalism is all about laissez faire capitalism to be fair.

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

This looks bad on the Sanders camp for sure

But does one individuals bad actions make an entire organization look bad? We've been down this route before a lot lately- Particularly with BLM.


I want to hold off judging before there is more tangible proof. It was a stand up move to come forward immediately. I can't think of many political candidates who would offer the same transparency.

 

[Gattsu25]

Well, this was an unexpected turn of events.

Not a good look. Not at all.

 

[Elfforkusu]

Shit Post of the day right here.

You really think we wouldn't?

It's not like god king Obama stood up, clapped his hands, and made that reality true. It was the culmination of decades of hard work.

I have a jaundiced view of people who claim "I was just curious" to excuse their sins, because I've seen it be a lie way too often.

But also, I think you're kind of assuming that this was a technical guy trying to poke at a problem. They're not dealing with an in-house tool, they're dealing with an outsourced service provider. There's no reason to assume the people using the tool are at all technical.

It's hard to break into systems without at least technical curiosity. That doesn't mean said hacker had a CS degree (though he/she might be CS material!), but it implies an affinity for the technical to me.

So what? Bernie is way behind in the polls and has no chance of winning as far as the DNC can see. Even if we assume for the moment that they have the malice necessary to screw him, they have no reason to actually do it if he's already going to lose. Like, dirty politics is not pathological. You're not required to cheat even when you're winning.

They aren't winning yet, none of the voting has started. They can increase their chances of winning. Why would they not lock him out? Do they not want to make it more likely she wins?

 

[excelsiorlef]

But does one individuals bad actions make an entire organization look bad? We've been down this route before a lot lately- Particularly with BLM.


I want to hold off judging before there is more tangible proof. It was a stand up move to come forward immediately. I can't think of many political candidates who would offer the same transparency.

Did you just compare one guy and the people he directly employs to an activist group that spans the country?

 

[Dixon's Jet]

So what? Bernie is way behind in the polls and has no chance of winning as far as the DNC can see. Even if we assume for the moment that they have the malice necessary to screw him, they have no reason to actually do it if he's already going to lose. Like, dirty politics is not pathological. You're not required to cheat even when you're winning.

Indeed. The DNC strategy seems to be to hold back until Clinton wins the primary, which is hers by right. This should never be forgotten. It's a flagrant attack on democracy and a reminder that the Democrats share key flaws with the Republicans.

 

[Man God]

Oh man, Bernie supporter meltdowns are starting already. Now apparently Clinton is a monster and rules must be broken to stop her.

Pretty much the opposite of what happened eight years ago, though the chances of Bernie running a campaign that's even remotely competitive are slim.

 

[excelsiorlef]

You really think we wouldn't?

It's not like god king Obama stood up, clapped his hands, and made that reality true. It was the culmination of decades of hard work.

Who do you think appointed Kagan and Sotomayor aka the ones that made it possible for the ruling to happen.

Yes there'd be no same sex marriage under Romney because he'd have appointed conservative judges who would have voted against it,

 

[atr0cious]

You really think we wouldn't?

It's not like god king Obama stood up, clapped his hands, and made that reality true. It was the culmination of decades of hard work.

It must great to have no skin in the the struggle and call it a day when gay marriage is still being fought over in this country, let alone that half the country is fine with discriminating against them. But yea, we're in a genderless post racial society.

 

[chaobreaker]

Would be ironic if Sander's ultimate downfall was his fervent followers sabotaging his campaign in an attempt at aiding him.

 

[Wafflecakes]

Hillary supporters treat Hillary as Fox news treats conservatives. Nobody cares when Hillary acts like a neoconservative, what matters is that she's electable. This is Fox News tier thinking.

How do you breathe while drowning in so much hyperbole?

 

[Basileus777]

Who do you think appointed Kagan and Sotomayor aka the ones that made it possible for the ruling to happen.

Yes there'd be no same sex marriage under Romney because he'd have appointed conservative judges who would have voted against it,

Obama hasn't appointed any Justices in his 2nd term.

 

[Condom]

Oh man, Bernie supporter meltdowns are starting already. Now apparently Clinton is a monster and rules must be broken to stop her.

Anyone who considers TTIP is a monster but naw let's rather focus on how cool and trendy she is and all

 

[Elfforkusu]

Who do you think appointed Kagan and Sotomayor aka the ones that made it possible for the ruling to happen.

Yes there'd be no same sex marriage under Romney because he'd have appointed conservative judges who would have voted against it,

So Romney would have taken office in 2013 and... gone back in time to stop Obama from appointing those justices?

 

[Dixon's Jet]

How do you breathe while drowning in so much hyperbole?

Are politics not financed by billionaires from wall street? Is the current cycle not dominated by a rambling narcissistic billionaire?

We're past hyperbole.

 

[benjipwns]

So what? Bernie is way behind in the polls and has no chance of winning as far as the DNC can see.

Polls that happen to come from the very same media that refuses to consider Bernie a serious candidate and wrote him off from day one. And employ Clinton campaign workers as TV show hosts.

There's lots of thumbs on those scales.

 

[Wafflecakes]

Obama hasn't appointed any Justices in his 2nd term.

Romney also ran in 2008. He just wasn't the nominee.

Either way, his point is correct. The president mattered MASSIVELY to the legalization of gay marriage.

 

[Instro]

But does one individuals bad actions make an entire organization look bad? We've been down this route before a lot lately- Particularly with BLM.


I want to hold off judging before there is more tangible proof. It was a stand up move to come forward immediately. I can't think of many political candidates who would offer the same transparency.

Unless I'm misunderstanding the nytimes article, they didn't come forward at all.

 

[Wafflecakes]

Are politics not financed by billionaires from wall street? Is the current cycle not dominated by a rambling narcissistic billionaire?

We're past hyperbole.

"Conservatives are morons, so we have to be morons to keep up!"

Bernie stans have a new creed apparently.

 

[Basileus777]

Romney also ran in 2008. He just wasn't the nominee.

Now that's some spin.

 

[Hazmat]

Anyone who considers TTIP is a monster but naw let's rather focus on how cool and trendy she is and all

I'm a Clinton supporter, and I don't think I've heard anyone ever call her cool or trendy.

 

[Wafflecakes]

Now that's some spin.

Nice selective quote to ignore the fact that you are dead wrong and the Presidency does matter as to gay marriage.

Which is what was actually being discussed in the post you quoted.

 

[docbon]

Unless I'm misunderstanding the nytimes article, they didn't come forward at all.

Buzzfeed article says:

During that period, the Sanders campaign discovered the breach, accessed the Clinton campaign’s data, then called the vendor to point out the flaw, according to the official. The DNC has since cut off Sanders’s access to the voter file — until his campaign officials can “prove” they’ve deleted the Clinton data.

We'll see how it unfolds throughout the week tho.

 

[Dixon's Jet]

"Conservatives are morons, so we have to be morons to keep up!"

Bernie stans have a new creed apparently.

This seems unfair. What have I said to be compared with conservatives?

I'm genuinely curious to know because I do like to accept feedback.

 

[benjipwns]

I'm a Clinton supporter, and I don't think I've heard anyone ever call her cool or trendy.

 

[Basileus777]

Nice selective quote to ignore the fact that you are dead wrong and the Presidency does matter as to gay marriage.

The rest wasn't relevant to the argument of whether or not a Romney victory in 2012 would have changed the supreme court's ruling on gay marriage, nor is this additional attempt to change the topic of discussion.

And also, you might want to go back and read who posted what before throwing random accusations about things I never said.

 

[pigeon]

They aren't winning yet, none of the voting has started. They can increase their chances of winning. Why would they not lock him out? Do they not want to make it more likely she wins?

As far as anybody at the DNC can see, Hillary's chances of winning are already 100%. I feel like this dirty politics idea is a complex form of wishful thinking. Pretty much nobody is afraid that Bernie will beat Hillary, so nobody is going to lie and cheat to make sure he doesn't beat her.

Indeed. The DNC strategy seems to be to hold back until Clinton wins the primary, which is hers by right. This should never be forgotten. It's a flagrant attack on democracy and a reminder that the Democrats share key flaws with the Republicans.

This post...makes no sense? Did you respond to the wrong person or something? What are you suggesting the DNC is doing?

 

[excelsiorlef]

Obama hasn't appointed any Justices in his 2nd term.

Touche. I'll retract the conservative judges specifically in regards to Romney since that wouldn't have happened, got my terms mixed up. However my initial point still stands as Obama had a huge factor in that ruling happening which was what I was refuting to begin with (it's rather arbitrary to say the US would still have same sex marriage even with Romney and use that statement as proof that Obama had little influence, since it explicitly ignores what he did in his first term to make it happen). Like you can't say use the fact that Obama was influential to then say he wasn't influential later. Also who knows what would have happened with a GOP president and house and eventual senate.

 

[Wafflecakes]

This seems unfair. What have I said to be compared with conservatives?

I'm genuinely curious to know because I do like to accept feedback.

Calling a Hillary a neoconservative for one. Laughable.

Straight out of the Fox News playbook when they call ANY republican who isn't a tea party member a liberal.

Anyone who thinks Hillary is neoconservative on anything has no idea what a neoconservative reactionary actually is.

 

[Volimar]

Data breeches can't melt steel beams.

I'm really hoping this thread is the height of sarcasm because if not, some of you are legit scaring me as a Bernie supporter.

 

[East Lake]

As far as anybody at the DNC can see, Hillary's chances of winning are already 100%. I feel like this dirty politics idea is a complex form of wishful thinking. Pretty much nobody is afraid that Bernie will beat Hillary, so nobody is going to lie and cheat to make sure he doesn't beat her.

Seems good enough reason not to overreact to a flaw in their system!