No evidence of hacking found in Clinton's private server

The former Hillary Clinton aide who agreed to cooperate with the Justice Department in exchange for immunity turned over computer security logs showing no evidence of foreign hacking in Clinton’s private server, according to reports.

The logs provided by Bryan Pagliano back up assertions by the Democratic presidential frontrunner that American secrets were not at risk when she used a personal email account while secretary of state, the New York Times reported Thursday.

http://m.nydailynews.com/news/natio...ound-clinton-private-server-article-1.2552366

My take: obviously setting up her own server was a calculated effort to avoid releasing emails she wanted to keep hidden and was a horrible idea. However those hoping for an indictment are living in fantasy land.

 

Except for me, you won't even hear the crickets today; http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/04/u...-are-said-to-show-no-evidence-of-hacking.html

 

I just linked this thread to another where someone was using the idea that her server could have been hacked as a reason not to vote for her. Thanks to you and [MENTION=61264]bwk[/MENTION] for the links.

 

Thanks for the additional link. That's actually the article I wanted originally.

 

You maybe! I'm sure there are others who aren't so interested in that link, seeing that they were counting on her server being hacked.

 

I have my doubts, though I am glad these logs were provided. Thing is...a -good- hacker could and would scrub the logs of their presence. It's one of the basic steps in APT attacks. It'd be really hard to prove the logs weren't tampered with.

I will give Hillary benefit of the doubt, though, and assume she is innocent until proven guilty--that's how it's supposed to work, right?

 

This is not good news for the Clinton lynch party. They've been working on tightening that rope for years. Too bad the tree and the rope they were using was too rotten, just like the folks who tried to use them.

 

It's good if they weren't hacked, but it was pointed out by another poster there is really no way to prove that. It still doesn't exonerate here passing top secret information and allowing those without clearance to see or move it. They also would have not offered Pagliano immunity if there was no there there.

The FBI is still investigating so this little tidbit of good news I can see is making liberals giddy with relief. The fat lady hasn't sung, so sit back and watch it happen. It also doesn't change the fact that she is an inept corrupt liar

 

It's good for America that her server wasn't hacked. Those hoping to hear her server had been hacked don't want what is good for America, because it wouldn't help their partisanship. I do not understand putting party over country, but then I'm an independent and don't really care about parties. I just want my country to work. I'm glad the server wasn't hacked.

 

Agreed. But I'm still curious to know why they gave the admin immunity.

I'm assuming the FBI just wants to get through this, and to find out if there were any improprieties taken when the server was set up and to let him avoid prosecution if they come across any mistakes in protocol.

 

Investigating yes, but Hillary isn't the target

 

Couple of things;
1)From the NYT article; They (security logs) are not definitive, and forensic experts can sometimes spot sophisticated hacking that is not apparent in the logs.
2) This information is being leaked by people (unnamed) close (how close we have no idea) to a federal investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s emails.

It's not over, far from it. And, even if it's never proven her server was hacked, it does not excuse her reckless decision to set up her own shoddy, unsecured communications network while conducting US business as SoS.

 

This whole thing is a RW partisan attack and will go nowhere like all the other Clinton attacks....

 

Do any of you think a person should be able to be convicted based solely on electronic data obtained from a server?

 

I don't know why they gave him immunity, except that on advice of his lawyer he took the 5th and wouldn't say anything otherwise. If he is in the business of setting up computers and secure networks, being grilled before a Congressional hearing on television might not be good for business? The committee did appear to be looking for a way to gain leverage or place blame. I think the real question is why he accepted immunity and agreed to testify now unless the situation has changed from when he took the 5th. Maybe this is about closure?

 

Perhaps the supersleuths and "patriotic" like yourself could also take a little effort to try to see what happened to the 10's of MILLIONS of often critical and secret emails sent in the insecure and illegal email servers operated by the RNC!

Oh wait! All thos millions of emails were LOST WITHOUT A TRACE from the RNC, without even a thought about what secrets were in the hands of the enemy!

Oh, well, not a SINGLE Republican has given a damn about that!

 

Yes, it's good for the country the server wasn't hacked (if it really wasn't). It's also good luck for Clinton, but just because she was lucky doesn't mean that her actions weren't reckless and irresponsible. Let's say you hired a security guard, and he left your front door unlocked. Let's say that no one happened to check the door, and so no one robbed you. Does that make him a good security guard? One you'd like to promote?

 

That geeky hacker kid who lives across the street from me is better at hacking a computer than I knew.

 

Hello from America!

I only know what I saw on television and have read, but it appeared to be partisan to me too. I didn't have a problem with the first time it was investigated and didn't see that one as partisan. However, as they began to pile up investigation after investigation after investigation with the same result, it seemed like a huge waste of taxpayer money to me. I resent that so much money was wasted when that money could have been used better otherwise.

 

This is pathetic. With a good hacker, the one hacked has no clue they've been hacked, especially at this juvenile level.

Meanwhile, Hillary communicated from her private server email with Sydney Blumenthal. Guccifer hacked those emails.
https://www.rt.com/usa/complete-emails-guccifer-clinton-554/

And then there's this:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/emails-clinton-private-server-sale-report-article-1.2347762

 

There are more than a few sitting in prison today just because the hard drive showed kiddie porn on it.

 

She most certainly is !!!!

 

If I am driving down the road in traffic, and a deer jumps out in front of me, but I swerve enough to miss it and not wreck, am I just lucky or am I aware and responsive to surroundings?

Hypothetical situations can be answered in many ways.

It's good that her server wasn't hacked. Some government servers have been hacked. I wish we had hack proof computers, but we don't.

 

That's basically what I was saying. I know you can't rush to judgement, but they probably don't want to drag this out on legal machinations.

And while I'm still on the fence about whether or not a personal server is a good idea for any SoS, the fact that this guy received full security clearance from the White House to set it up takes away a lot of noise from the right-wing shriek machine, IMO.

 

This is like saying Clinton didn't rob a bank because no one found any money on her when they caught her.