Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2016 10:27:22 GMT -5
With Hillary's reputation continuing to take more hits there is a beneficial side effect.
1. I suspect that ALL government officials, especially at the highest levels will do ALL their government business on secure government servers. I doubt that any of them will discuss government business on their personal e-mail accounts or on unsecured phone lines going forward.
2. Non profit foundations connected with high level officials will be confronted with a new transparency (whether they want it or not), so these entities will have to be more ethical (or at least appear to be) in the future.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Aug 24, 2016 10:46:09 GMT -5
With Hillary's reputation continuing to take more hits there is a beneficial side effect. 1. I suspect that ALL government officials, especially at the highest levels will do ALL their government business on secure government servers. I doubt that any of them will discuss government business on their personal e-mail accounts or on unsecured phone lines going forward. 2. Non profit foundations connected with high level officials will be confronted with a new transparency (whether they want it or not), so these entities will have to be more ethical (or at least appear to be) in the future. Those Clinton's are always about helping the public aren't they? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2016 11:19:12 GMT -5
They are political hacks
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,442
|
Post by TC on Aug 24, 2016 12:09:55 GMT -5
With Hillary's reputation continuing to take more hits there is a beneficial side effect. 1. I suspect that ALL government officials, especially at the highest levels will do ALL their government business on secure government servers. I doubt that any of them will discuss government business on their personal e-mail accounts or on unsecured phone lines going forward. No way. The takeaway here is not that you can prevent an election year Congressional fishing expedition into your emails by checking all the boxes and following all the rules. The takeaway is that not even "secure government servers" are safe from nation-state hackers. No one has actually shown evidence that Clinton's server was hacked and that's basically because it wasn't well known - although security through obscurity should not be the lesson here. On the other side, you have a plethora of agencies on "secure government servers" who have definitely been hacked - State Department, NOAA, etc. I think the DNC hack probably is going to be the one people are going to look at for lessons. Maybe the DNC shouldn't be using their own servers and should be using GMail with two-factor-auth. I certainly would not want to be an IT director running an email server and having to explain why all our information has been hacked when outsourcing that could give me advanced security, the best spam filters out there, someone else to point a finger at, and the ease of use that would actually get people to use the company email system. My takeaway : Google is going to completely own e-mail, which will be completely outsourced everywhere where it matters some day. $50 a head a year * however many employees at Fortune 500 companies, government agencies, etc = a lot of revenue. |
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Aug 24, 2016 12:43:59 GMT -5
With Hillary's reputation continuing to take more hits there is a beneficial side effect. 1. I suspect that ALL government officials, especially at the highest levels will do ALL their government business on secure government servers. I doubt that any of them will discuss government business on their personal e-mail accounts or on unsecured phone lines going forward. 2. Non profit foundations connected with high level officials will be confronted with a new transparency (whether they want it or not), so these entities will have to be more ethical (or at least appear to be) in the future. Dream on. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2016 14:06:09 GMT -5
Hi TC and ED
It is not a dream. If a high government official decides to conduct official business on other than a government website, it will be easy to detect. Presently government agencies are starting to use PIV card identification to even get on the official government sites. Keyboards have slots to insert your PIV card and then you have to put in your 6 digit code for access. The card identifies which sector of the government website a user will have access to. Everything is encrypted and it is getting harder all of the time to unencrypt these messages. Yes government websites have been hacked in the past, but the hackers are not getting access to everything.
I am not saying that government officials have become more honest. I am simply saying that if a high government official gets caught conducting official business on other than a government website in this environment, they will be creamed by the press, their superiors and by public outrage. So why do it??
Remember that if you use your private e-mail to conduct official business, the recipient dare not respond in kind because he/she too will be in violation.
It is infinitely more difficult to hack e-mail streams on a government server than a private unsecured server. Not totally impossible, but becoming more difficult all the time.
|
|
SirSaxa
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by SirSaxa on Aug 24, 2016 17:29:32 GMT -5
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,319
|
Post by tashoya on Aug 24, 2016 17:57:09 GMT -5
With Hillary's reputation continuing to take more hits there is a beneficial side effect. 1. I suspect that ALL government officials, especially at the highest levels will do ALL their government business on secure government servers. I doubt that any of them will discuss government business on their personal e-mail accounts or on unsecured phone lines going forward. 2. Non profit foundations connected with high level officials will be confronted with a new transparency (whether they want it or not), so these entities will have to be more ethical (or at least appear to be) in the future. I admire your optimism though, to be honest, I don't share it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2016 7:28:41 GMT -5
Hi Tashoya
It isn't optimism, it is just rational behavior. We tend not to do anything illegal or unethical if there is a good chance we will be caught, and that is the case here. In light of the current situation, do you really believe that a very high government official would set up a private e-mail server to conduct government business, or even use their private e-mail account for that purpose??
I don't believe that they are more honest, just more realistic.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Aug 25, 2016 7:50:51 GMT -5
I think the means of lawbreaking may be changed by these developments. That said, given human nature (and the subhuman nature of many politicians) they will find a new way to cheat and steal.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,319
|
Post by tashoya on Aug 25, 2016 9:11:54 GMT -5
Hi Tashoya It isn't optimism, it is just rational behavior. We tend not to do anything illegal or unethical if there is a good chance we will be caught, and that is the case here. In light of the current situation, do you really believe that a very high government official would set up a private e-mail server to conduct government business, or even use their private e-mail account for that purpose?? I don't believe that they are more honest, just more realistic. It may be rational but I'm not sure the "we" you're referencing applies to the particular segment(s) of the population we're talking about. I have more faith that the cover-ups will become more elaborate and secretive well before the underlying behavior/actions change. If the sales of WaMu and Bear Stearns to Chase (aided and fast-tracked by the government) taught us anything, it's that. There should have been every expectation of that information being discovered and made public and, yet, what's changed since? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2016 11:41:05 GMT -5
Hi again!
I think we are talking apples and oranges. I am talking about 2 items only: The use of government services to conduct official business and charitable foundations connected with high level government officials. Thieves will still be thieves and government officials will still inappropriately use the power of their offices. However, the two items above will be improved ONLY because it will now be too easy to be caught. I didn't say eliminated, only improved.
Incidentally, pay for play permeates our entire country. For example:
Suppose I contribute $2,000,000 to the basketball program at Georgetown. Then I ask if I could have a face to face meeting with JT3 and 2 season's tickets in good seats. And by the way I mention that my son is applying to Georgetown.
I suspect, my son would be admitted (unless his grades were truly terrible), I would get my seats and my meeting. Is it fair? No, but that is still our culture. Universities still give preference to legacies. It is much worse in most other countries throughout the world.
And yes, the cover-ups will continue.
|
|
