Bloomberg: Sanders campaign has fired its National Data Director, Josh Uretsky,

[pnwmom]

after he improperly accessed proprietary HRC data.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-12-18/sanders-campaign-fires-data-director-after-breach-of-clinton-files

Bernie Sanders's presidential campaign has fired its national data director after he improperly accessed proprietary data from Hillary Clinton's campaign.

The staffer, Josh Uretsky, viewed data that the Clinton campaign had added to its own files during a temporary glitch in the voter database managed by outside vendor NGP VAN, two people familiar with the matter told Bloomberg.

The Sanders campaign confirmed late Thursday that it had fired a staffer who had accessed modeling data from the Clinton campaign. "That behavior is unacceptable and that staffer was immediately fired," communications director Michael Briggs said in a statement.

Briggs responded to a question about Uretsky by sharing that statement with Bloomberg a second time.

SNIP

[madfloridian]

1. Of course he did. Imagine the pissed off people if he didn't.

[pnwmom]

2. Of course he acted in a way that could subject him to criminal charges?

I don't understand what you're saying.

[madfloridian]

3. Well, let's see the DNC charge him after they were warned months ago.

That will go over big.

[pnwmom]

4. This wasn't some low level staffer. This was the National Data Director

who surely knew he was breaking the law. In fact, it was his job to explain the law to his staffers.

[madfloridian]

5. Then let the DNC powers that be charge him criminally.

[artislife]

16. Don't you mean it wasn't some low level staffer but the SOS?

Oops, sorry, wrong story about data security.

[1StrongBlackMan]

143. Focus, Art ... focus. n/t

[JDPriestly]

46. Puhleeze!

Though the Sanders team has fired a top data staffer, Briggs pointed blame at issues with NGP VAN's system. "Sadly, the vendor who runs the DNC's voter file program continues to make serious errors," he said, noting the campaign had alerted the DNC to problems months ago.

NGP VAN's CEO, Stu Trevelyan, said the breach was an “isolated incident" and that the firm has "introduced additional safeguards to ensure that this issue will not recur."

The DNC has asked the firm to conduct an analysis to identify users who accessed other campaigns' data and the actions they took, and to conduct a full audit of its system as well and to begin a review process with all the campaigns and staffers use it.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-12-18/sanders-campaign-fires-data-director-after-breach-of-clinton-files

The DNC's vendor provided the information to the Sanders campaign. We don't know whether it provided Sanders or O'Malley campaign information to the Hillary campaign. Sanders' campaign did not fetch the data. The data was provided to the Sanders campaign.

Once someone looked at the data or ran a routine process on it, then that person had to leave Sanders campaign whether that person was at fault or not. That is my view of it.

[pnwmom]

56. If all Josh Uretsky did was make a mistake, why didn't they ask for his resignation?

Why did they fire him over it?

[merrily]

128. People who make huge mistakes in the job for which their expertise

supposedly qualified them should NOT be fired? They should be kept on until we see if they make more huge mistakes in a Presidential campaign? Please expand on that theory of management. I don't think they're teaching that one at Harvard Business School yet.

[LiberalArkie]

151. Business 101. If a mistake is made that makes the news, someone has to fall on the sword.

[merrily]

152. Look how much this mistake cost the campaign! A Presidential campaign! Try costing an

important business the equivalent of this in reputation and dollars and see how long you keep your job.

The lust to pretend that a firing for a mistake of this magnitude and cost would be unjust when it is so clearly warranted, mistake or deliberate, is repugnant. Especially when you know that, had there been no firing, the same people would have been smearing Sanders for that, too.

[1StrongBlackMan]

145. I'm not certain this was a criminal offense ...

Though, I could argue the case.

But even if it was ... I highly doubt, the DNC would press it because of all the negatives of drawing attention to the activity.

I suspect the campaign fired old boy to get out in front of the mess and mitigate the punishment. And, the DNC will issue a token, and brief, slap on the wrist.

But that won't stopsome from ignoring the initial wrong to focus on the injustice of having the campaign's hand slapped.

[pnwmom]

8. So if you see the bank left their back door unlocked, and you tell the police about it,

Last edited Fri Dec 18, 2015, 09:07 AM - Edit history (1)

and months later you discover the door is still unlocked, you can go inside and help yourself.

Because, hey, you warned the police months ago.

[Ed Suspicious]

132. Ok this is fucking stupid. Please fix.

[pnwmom]

133. What about the analogy is incorrect? n/t

[1StrongBlackMan]

146. LOL ...

There is nothing wrong with your analogy ... except, it doesn't let the campaign off the hook for the responsibility they took.

[1StrongBlackMan]

142. There is a huge difference between ...

Telling someone, "Hey. The door is open" and, someone going into the house, whether they told you the door was open, or not.

[jfern]

6. No, he didn't do anything clearly illegal like storing top secret classified information

on his home computer

[pnwmom]

7. There is no evidence that she ever stored then-classified information on her home computer.

There is a possibility that she had publicly reported information sent to her personal account that was LATER retroactively classified. The House committee investigating her handled the SAME emails with their non-classified system. So clearly they weren't really concerned about it.

[JonLeibowitz]

104. Classified information is classified regardless of marking.

Fact.

[pnwmom]

113. What does that have to do with anything? It wasn't marked classified or in actuality classified

when Hillary was the recipient of the info. It was based on news reports that were -- years later -- retroactively classified.

Some of the retroactively classified info was actually on a state department website for years before they decided to classify it. What a ridiculous system.

[JonLeibowitz]

114. It has everything to do with everything, for those whose eyes aren't wide shut

[pnwmom]

117. It has nothing to do with this case because this information wasn't considered or marked

or treated by anyone as classified when it was passed to Hillary. It was a paraphrase of news reports. YEARS later, they decided to classify it. What nonsense.

[JonLeibowitz]

126. It is your post that is filled with nonsense.

There is no such thing as "then-classified". Information is either classified or not and that is independent of whether it is marked as such or not.

[pnwmom]

135. It was NOT classified at the time (marked or unmarked). It was RETROACTIVELY classified.

Are you not aware that there is such a thing as retroactively classified information?

[1StrongBlackMan]

147. Please don't engage the deflection ...

This has nothing to do with what HRC has been (largely) exonerated of.

[beam me up scottie]

9. LOL!

You should post that in each one of these BERNGHAZI threads, the reaction is hilarious.

[R B Garr]

10. Another phony analogy! Clinton wasn't breaching

Bernie's data to gain a campagn advantage.

Other reports say they were running searches, so it's not just a simple vendor mistake.

[jfern]

11. The Bernie campaign reported the problem months ago

It's the DNC's fault for not having the vendor fix it or find a vendor that doesn't suck.

[R B Garr]

13. The DNC didn't make them run searches from

multiple accounts on the files. That was a willful decision. Someone was fired.

[jfern]

15. Ran searches how? Did they just happen to run a search when the data was available?

[R B Garr]

19. It's in one of the articles in another thread

that is floating around here.

[jfern]

20. It didn't say anything about them purposefully searching Clinton campaign information

[pnwmom]

22. They fired their National Data Director and said what he did was wrong.

So why are you defending him?

[jfern]

23. They probably fired him to try to move on from this rank idiocy

[pnwmom]

28. Why did Weavers call him a "low level staffer"? That doesn't seem very honest. n/t

[R B Garr]

27. LOL

That IS the subject matter -- Bernie's campaign hacking Clinton's files.

[jfern]

29. The vendor says the access was inadvertent.

[pnwmom]

30. Then why does the Sanders campaign say that what their National Data Director

did was wrong?

Why would they fire their top data guy for inadvertently accessing the data and then reporting it?

[jfern]

32. They decided it would be easier to just cut their losses

And the DNC probably wasn't ever going to allow him access to their data again.

[pnwmom]

34. Sounds pretty ruthless that they would smear a guy who did nothing wrong.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-12-18/sanders-campaign-fires-data-director-after-breach-of-clinton-files

The Sanders campaign confirmed late Thursday that it had fired a staffer who had accessed modeling data from the Clinton campaign but did not identify the aide. "That behavior is unacceptable and that staffer was immediately fired," Sanders communications director Michael Briggs said in a statement.

[merrily]

130. Ruthless, my ass. Put "your damned if he does, damned if he doesn't" away.

We can all see right through it.

[R B Garr]

31. But running searches from multiple accounts

is not a vendor mistake. It:s a willful act. Someone was fired. This is just repetitive now.

[jfern]

33. What does running searches mean?

[R B Garr]

35. LOL again.

[VanillaRhapsody]

127. ahhhh

and the Sanders supporters claim ignorance about how easy it is to do such a thing as using multiple accounts to do dastardly deeds like rigging an online poll!

[pnwmom]

37. Do you have a link for that? Because what I've read was that searches were run.

And they have fired the National Data Director and said what he did was wrong.

So either he did something seriously wrong, or they are ruthlessly throwing him under the bus. I thought Bernie was supposed to be above all that political stuff.




http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/12/18/sanders-campaign-disciplined-for-breaching-clinton-data/

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.

[jfern]

38. Here

“The D.N.C. was notified on Wednesday by its data systems vendor NGP VAN that as a result of a software patch, all users on the system across Democratic campaigns were inadvertently able to access some data belonging to other campaigns for a brief window,” said the committee’s communications director, Luis Miranda.

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/12/18/sanders-campaign-disciplined-for-breaching-clinton-data/

[pnwmom]

40. I think the "inadvertently" applied to the NGP -- not the 4 account users who

ran searches of the data while the window was open.

Or else the Sanders campaign decided to smear the National Data Director and leave him with a firing on his record -- not because he did anything wrong, but just to assist their campaign.

If he was so innocent, why didn't they give him a chance to resign -- for the good of the campaign, to put this all behind them?

[jfern]

42. Who knows, but they fired him either way so it doesn't really matter

[pnwmom]

45. You don't think it matters if he improperly accessed her data and got fired for it?

[jfern]

48. In terms of the rest of the campaign, no

[pnwmom]

53. Well, the campaign thought it was so important they FIRED him, instead of asking

for his resignation.

Very strange.

[Live and Learn]

61. Sorry, but that is the exact same thing. nt

[pnwmom]

71. Resigning and being fired are very different things, and if an employee hasn't done

something very wrong, most employers will give them the dignity of allowing them to submit a resignation.

[Live and Learn]

75. No they aren't. You are wrong again. nt

[madfloridian]

12. The DNC was warned months ago by the Bernie campaign.

Let the DNC go ahead and file charges.....that will be the final straw for me.

[R B Garr]

17. It says there will be an investigation, which

sounds reasonable and necessary. I would think any charges, if any, would depend on the investigation.

[madfloridian]

18. In such a "neutral" setting....

Any investigation should come from an outside source.

[JDPriestly]

39. I think that if the DNC wants to completely alienate Bernie voters, it will continue to cut off

access to the database to Bernie's campaign.

The DFA just voted to endorse Bernie. That's a lot of very hardworking Democrats who won't like it if the DNC blames Bernie and his staff for mistakes made due to problems that the DNC was warned about and did not fix.

This "scandal" makes the DNC look, and I must say, look once again, very incompetent.

The DNC is incompetent is my take on this matter.

And they are blaming Bernie's campaign for their own incompetency.

They are, no doubt, investigating to determine the extent of the incompetency of their own staff at the DNC. That's how I figure this.

[JDPriestly]

47. Here is the real story:

Though the Sanders team has fired a top data staffer, Briggs pointed blame at issues with NGP VAN's system. "Sadly, the vendor who runs the DNC's voter file program continues to make serious errors," he said, noting the campaign had alerted the DNC to problems months ago.

NGP VAN's CEO, Stu Trevelyan, said the breach was an “isolated incident" and that the firm has "introduced additional safeguards to ensure that this issue will not recur."

The DNC has asked the firm to conduct an analysis to identify users who accessed other campaigns' data and the actions they took, and to conduct a full audit of its system as well and to begin a review process with all the campaigns and staffers use it.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-12-18/sanders-campaign-fires-data-director-after-breach-of-clinton-files

[Live and Learn]

62. Wouldn't it be something if the investigation shows that Hillary's team had access, used it and

didn't report it? I would bet my life that was true. Will it ever come to light? I doubt it.

[R B Garr]

158. The real story is not the vendor.

The real story is the Sanders staffer downloading proprietary files. That"s what I see all over the news now. The vendor was doing a software patch and Sanders exploited a breach to download files. It was just on MSNBC now.

Quit blaming the vendor for the Sanders campaign willful act.

[VanillaRhapsody]

77. Ooooohhhhhh

So as long as its not illegal?

How very Republican that sounds like......anything goes as long as its not illegal

[jfern]

78. The staffer was fired

I'm still waiting for Hillary to be canned

[VanillaRhapsody]

80. SO?

It was the National Director......who sure as hell knew better..

[Cha]

14. KIck&REC while I read this.. Thank you!

[JDPriestly]

49. Be sure you read this:

Though the Sanders team has fired a top data staffer, Briggs pointed blame at issues with NGP VAN's system. "Sadly, the vendor who runs the DNC's voter file program continues to make serious errors," he said, noting the campaign had alerted the DNC to problems months ago.

NGP VAN's CEO, Stu Trevelyan, said the breach was an “isolated incident" and that the firm has "introduced additional safeguards to ensure that this issue will not recur."

The DNC has asked the firm to conduct an analysis to identify users who accessed other campaigns' data and the actions they took, and to conduct a full audit of its system as well and to begin a review process with all the campaigns and staffers use it.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-12-18/sanders-campaign-fires-data-director-after-breach-of-clinton-files

This was not the fault of the Bernie campaign. It was the fault of the DNC's vendor.

[1StrongBlackMan]

148. Come on, JD ...

It's the vendor's fault that a staffer knowingly accessed proprietary data?

Does that even make sense to you?

[Live and Learn]

63. LOL Why would you need this when you were so sure Hillary would win anyway?

Hillary supporters are way too transparent.

[Historic NY]

21. If you think its funny BS campaign is totally locked out of access to the DNC computers..

and voter info. It could take a while to investigate the breach .

[pnwmom]

25. Maybe they'll find out the Clinton and O'Malley campaigns did the same thing.

Then they can lock them all out of the computers.

That would be interesting . . .

[Feeling the Bern]

36. DWS knows that MOM isn't a threat to HRC's coronation. Bernie is!

[VanillaRhapsody]

129. Where?

[JDPriestly]

50. Here is what they are investigating:

Though the Sanders team has fired a top data staffer, Briggs pointed blame at issues with NGP VAN's system. "Sadly, the vendor who runs the DNC's voter file program continues to make serious errors," he said, noting the campaign had alerted the DNC to problems months ago.

NGP VAN's CEO, Stu Trevelyan, said the breach was an “isolated incident" and that the firm has "introduced additional safeguards to ensure that this issue will not recur."

The DNC has asked the firm to conduct an analysis to identify users who accessed other campaigns' data and the actions they took, and to conduct a full audit of its system as well and to begin a review process with all the campaigns and staffers use it.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-12-18/sanders-campaign-fires-data-director-after-breach-of-clinton-files

I wonder whether this mistake was made on purpose.

A lot of data was being worked with. I wonder how Hillary's data was identified and differentiated from other data in the database.

[murielm99]

55. Have you ever done any phone banking,

or worked with a Democratic candidate or group that had access to the VAN software? I have, and I was trained to use the VAN software. The software can be used to generate call lists and walk lists. It can provide scripts to phone bankers and walkers. Only parts of it are accessible to people, depending on their role in a campaign.

Why are you wondering if the mistake was made on purpose? Are you implying that the vendor who is responsible for the administration of the software is out to get the Sanders campaign? I hope not. That would be a ridiculous conspiracy theory.

There had to be a problem with the software that allowed people to see more data than they were entitled to see. That would be an honest mistake on the part of the vendor, and something they needed to repair. It is too bad that a dishonest staffer took advantage of a problem in the software. Bernie's campaign made the right call when they fired him.

I hope we don't see one OP after another on this topic. There are more important things to discuss.

[1StrongBlackMan]

153. There was probably a label portal, segmenting off the data ...

Yes, I know that is not the technical terms; but, you get my point.

[Live and Learn]

64. Not funny at all and it totally illegitimizes any Hillary victory.

Does anyone find that funny?

[pnwmom]

72. Why would the firing of a dishonest Bernie employee "illegitimize" a Hillary victory? n/t

[Live and Learn]

74. Seriously? If it were Hillary, you would be fine with it?

It is quite obvious that your posts are not to be taken seriously.

[pnwmom]

79. If what were Hillary? No one's accusing Bernie of anything.

The issue is whether a top computer staffer improperly accessed proprietary information.

[Live and Learn]

86. Now you are denying your own accusations?

How Hillary-like of you.

[pnwmom]

92. What are you talking about? Where did I accuse Bernie of anything?

[leftynyc]

144. You're babbling

And making no sense whatsoever. You're also accusing another DUer of something you yourself is doing.

[1StrongBlackMan]

154. Because? ??? n/t

[ProudToBeLiberal]

24. First it was a "low level staffer"

Then we find out it was actually the National Data Director. Earlier it was claimed that only 1 staffer accessed Hillary Clinton's database. Now, we find out four people from the Sander's campaign accessed the data.

Something fishy is going on from the Sander's campaign.

[JDPriestly]

41. No. It was probably a low level staffer who actually might have seen the data. But the National

Data Director would be held responsible for the error made by the low level staffer.

It is reasonable that the people from the Sanders campaign would have accessed data that was provided to them thanks to a glitch at the DNC's office for handling the data of all candidates.

In other words, the low level staffers may have run processes on information without fully understanding what it was. That is how I would figure this.

Have you ever dealt with large amounts of computer data provided to you from a third party? Mistakes are made. There was a third party provider involved.

[joshcryer]

44. If they reported the breach months ago...

...then I guess it went down like this.

Sanders people find a loophole / backdoor / security vulnerability in the way people access the data.

Sanders people report said vulnerability.

DNC does nothing about it or just shrugs it off.

Sanders people talk about it and look into the hole every now and again.

Some low level Sanders people hear about this supposed hole and try it out. 3 or 4 of them this time. Some might even try to get actual data.

They get found out. All hell breaks lose.

Director gets fired / resigns because it looks really bad.

[JDPriestly]

52. Either sloppiness or intentional breach on the part of the DNC and/or its vendor.

And Bernie gets blamed.

Have you ever worked with computer data that a third party provided to you?

You just take what you get and look it over.

That's the way it works. The people who really look at the data are usually pretty low level and then their boss looks at it too.

But once anyone looked at the data, they probably would quit or be fired because they would have information that they aren't supposed to have.

More on this.

Though the Sanders team has fired a top data staffer, Briggs pointed blame at issues with NGP VAN's system. "Sadly, the vendor who runs the DNC's voter file program continues to make serious errors," he said, noting the campaign had alerted the DNC to problems months ago.

NGP VAN's CEO, Stu Trevelyan, said the breach was an “isolated incident" and that the firm has "introduced additional safeguards to ensure that this issue will not recur."

The DNC has asked the firm to conduct an analysis to identify users who accessed other campaigns' data and the actions they took, and to conduct a full audit of its system as well and to begin a review process with all the campaigns and staffers use it.


http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/clinton-campaign-raises-8-million-at-manhattan-fundraiser-216925#ixzz3ueZSmngp

Of course, we will never know whether this "breach" was deliberate in order to embarrass Sanders' campaign.

The DNC has played so unfairly with Bernie all along. The debate schedule is an absolute farce.

[joshcryer]

54. The system absolutely is at issue.

People have a natural tendency to try out locked doors.

Question is, as I posted up thread, if they actually tried to access data. If they did then they deserved to be fired because as they were clicking buttons they would've known the moral implications of doing so. It's one thing to try out a locked door, it's another thing to go into the house when the door opens and start taking things.

Overall though I suspect this won't be a big a deal as certain people are making it.

[pnwmom]

76. Most of this seems plausible, but

Bloomberg reported that the fired Director had himself accessed the data.

Bernie Sanders's presidential campaign has fired its national data director after he improperly accessed proprietary data from Hillary Clinton's campaign.

The staffer, Josh Uretsky, viewed data that the Clinton campaign had added to its own files during a temporary glitch in the voter database managed by outside vendor NGP VAN, two people familiar with the matter told Bloomberg.

The Sanders campaign confirmed late Thursday that it had fired a staffer who had accessed modeling data from the Clinton campaign but did not identify the aide. "That behavior is unacceptable and that staffer was immediately fired," Sanders communications director Michael Briggs said in a statement.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-12-18/sanders-campaign-fires-data-director-after-breach-of-clinton-files

[joshcryer]

89. It still remains how much data was "got" if any.

Viewing is not the same as dumping. He could have gained access and told some other staffers about it after viewing and then realized it was the real deal, and they then went on to get red flags raised. Whatever it was, it was admittedly stupid. And I don't think we should make excuses for it and firing the actors is the right decision.

[merrily]

137. Very sensible.

[pnwmom]

149. Uretsky says he did a lot more than simply view it. But it was all in a good cause.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251909206#post6

[6chars]

107. if it was caused by a new patch, how was it reported months ago?

[joshcryer]

110. It sounds like the firewall goes down when a patch goes out.

So whenever they update the system all the systems are accessible for a brief period of time.

[1StrongBlackMan]

155. I suspect you are correct. n/t

[Live and Learn]

65. +1000 nt

[pnwmom]

73. Bloomberg reported that it was Uretsky, the National Data Director, not some underling,

who accessed the data.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-12-18/sanders-campaign-fires-data-director-after-breach-of-clinton-files

Bernie Sanders's presidential campaign has fired its national data director after he improperly accessed proprietary data from Hillary Clinton's campaign.

The staffer, Josh Uretsky, viewed data that the Clinton campaign had added to its own files during a temporary glitch in the voter database managed by outside vendor NGP VAN, two people familiar with the matter told Bloomberg.

The Sanders campaign confirmed late Thursday that it had fired a staffer who had accessed modeling data from the Clinton campaign but did not identify the aide. "That behavior is unacceptable and that staffer was immediately fired," Sanders communications director Michael Briggs said in a statement.

[uponit7771]

121. +1

[uponit7771]

120. +1

[SunSeeker]

26. The National Data Director surely knew what he was doing was wrong.

It is basically theft from the Clinton campaign.

[JDPriestly]

43. Maybe not. Maybe the Clinton data was provided to the Sanders campaign in error and the

news media is using that error to try to harm the Sanders campaign.

It won't work.

Sanders is doing well because of his stands on the issues and for no other reason. He is essentially honest. Everybody knows that. This was probably a mistake, a mistake made by various people in various offices.

[riversedge]

58. "Searches were run from four user accounts while data from Clinton's campaign was exposed"...

Are you saying the Director did not know what he was doing?? 4 times?



Sanders campaign accesses Clinton data, gets suspended from party voter files

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/18/politics/bernie-sanders-campaign-dnc-suspension/

By Catherine Treyz, CNN

Updated 3:29 AM ET, Fri December 18, 2015


.............The New York Times said the staffer was the campaign data director. Searches were run from four user accounts while data from Clinton's campaign was exposed, the Times said. But it's difficult to say what that means, since one person could have had more than one user account.

The Sanders campaign will remain suspended until it provides the DNC with a full explanation of the episode and provides proof that any accessed data has been discarded. ................

[Live and Learn]

66. Generally a user assumes that searches they do are authorized. This was a security failure on the

part of the vendor and those (read DNC) that hired the vendor.

[riversedge]

87. ha ha. Blame others is silly. The Director did the snooping FOUR times. Simple as that.

[Live and Learn]

88. You are making things up. Simple as that. nt

[pnwmom]

95. If it was a simple error, why did they fire the Director and make him leave in disgrace?

Instead of just asking for his resignation?

[Live and Learn]

99. Asked and answered a multitude of times. Please re-read my previous replies tp refresh

your memory.

[pnwmom]

100. I read them. I saw no answer. n/t

[Live and Learn]

70. +1000 nt

[pnwmom]

84. If it was the vendor's error, why did they fire their own National Data Director

and force him to leave in disgrace?

They didn't even allow him to resign. This isn't logical or fair if he did nothing wrong.

[Cha]

51. Knowing full well why he was FIRED!

[shenmue]

57. Ghost of Nixon on line one

[Live and Learn]

67. How in the hell is this anything like Nixon? Watergate was more like Hillary and Emailgate since the

persons at the top knew and approved of the activities. Bernie did not.

[Cha]

59. Wow..

The fallout from the breach, first reported by the Washington Post, is a blow to the Sanders campaign, which is unable to access crucial data just as the Iowa caucus approaches on February 1. The Democratic National Committee maintains a master file of voter information that campaigns rent from the party and update with their own data. Access won't be restored until an investigation is completed, a Democratic source said.

And, of course, the blame goes elsewhere..

Though the Sanders team has fired a top data staffer, Briggs pointed blame at issues with NGP VAN's system. "Sadly, the vendor who runs the DNC's voter file program continues to make serious errors," he said, noting the campaign had alerted the DNC to problems months ago.

I don't believe anything from the sanders campaign.. I've seen how they distort especially regarding President Obama.

Mahalo pnwmom~

[murielm99]

60. I asked upthread if anyone here

has ever used this software.

All the Sanders campaign had to do was notify the vendor. Then, the glitch could be fixed. The Sanders campaign has no business blaming them for their own behavior.

I am not sure how this software is being used to differentiate likely Sanders voters from likely Clinton voters. It is a huge database of people who have voted for Democrats in past elections.

[Live and Learn]

68. They notified the DNC that hired the vendor months ago. Not their job to notify the vendor

since they didn't hire the vendor.

[joshcryer]

94. I have to disagree with that.

You report to the vendor because your data is at risk, too.

If this was the Clinton camp looking into Sanders' data I'd be rightly pissed and I wouldn't buy this excuse from a Clinton supporter, not one bit.

It might turn out if they do an audit that Clinton staffers were getting data from the other camps, too, so nobody should be going "oh it's a bug in the system big deal."

[merrily]

140. Disagree. Communicating directly to someone you did not engage or choose is overstepping by a lot

and never looked on well in the business world by anyone, not by an employee or an independent contractor or a vendor or the person who engaged any of the foregoing.

Also, it's your decision if you want to put your own data at risk or don't care. If I leave my engagement ring on a counter at Macy's, I breach no duty to anyone by so doing. The only one who has a right to complain about an employee of the Sanders' campaign leaving Sanders' campaign data at risk is the Sanders campaign.

[1StrongBlackMan]

157. Okay ... it's not the job of users to notify the vendor of ...

Glitches that allows them access to proprietary data? Well, so much for ethics ... wouldn't they do so because the glitch might run both ways, giving HRC/M O'M access to their data?

Okay please explain how it wasn't their job to not exploit the breach.

[Live and Learn]

165. You notify the agency in charge of the vendor, in this case (the DNC).

Not really rocket science.

[1StrongBlackMan]

166. Before or after you exploit the breach ...

Which brings us to the problem at hand.

[joshcryer]

91. It uses special API keys as far as I can tell.

But there must be some kind of bug where, when the software gets updated, you can see the other campaign's data. It begged for someone to go digging but that doesn't excuse that behavior and they were taken care of appropriately.

If they have only locked out the Sanders camp that is wrong, especially since it appears other staffers had access. That means that anyone with high enough access can get it. What would happen if there was a mole or someone working in a campaign who wanted to make mucho money dumping the data and selling it to the Republicans? It's House of Cards level stuff here. The only reasonable solution is to lock everyone out until the problem is resolved.

[murielm99]

172. As I mentioned,

I have used the software. I have been trained to use it, and have trained others to use it.

If the Sanders people are blocked, they still have tons of lists they have printed out already. They can access these to phone bank and to use as walk lists and email lists. We generated voter lists before VAN existed. And there are smaller campaigns that do not have the money to use the lists. They generate voter lists, too.

If Bernie's people do not have a lot of information already, they are not doing their jobs. And if they are moaning and whining the way his supporters are doing on DU, they really need to grow up. I have a feeling they are not doing any of that. They are working with their existing information and doing what they are paid to do. They are not children.

Where do you think the lists originated? County clerks have the voter data. Precinct committeemen get the data from them, and work with those lists. County Democratic organizations have the voter lists of all the people who have voted in their county. They generate lists from these. That is how VAN gets its information, and how it started. VAN is updated constantly, just like any voter list. This is not top secret stuff. The idea is that it has been sorted for use, and it is easier than wading through a lot of voter names and data that are not useful to volunteers and paid staff.

I am still looking for another DU member who has used the software, as I have. Maybe they can help me explain it to other DUers. Do we really have so few activists here?

[Live and Learn]

69. In other words, you will be happy to see Hillary elected at any cost, even illegitimately?

It is rather hard to believe that I once looked upon your posts favorably.

[pnwmom]

82. No, the person who wanted a candidate elected at any cost appears to be

Josh Uretsky, who was apparently willing to cheat for Bernie, which is why he got fired by the Sanders campaign.

[Live and Learn]

85. Jumping to conclusions and being judgemental without even knowing the facts are not progressive

traits.

[pnwmom]

93. It is a FACT that the Bernie campaign announced Uretsky was fired

and that his behavior was unacceptable.

They already sat in judgment and fired him -- they didn't let him resign. They must have thought he deserved to be fired. Why should I not believe them?

[Live and Learn]

96. First of all, the news media often uses fired, resigned interchangeably.

Second of all, it is quite possible that Bernie or someone else below him but above the person in question decided he needed to go because he was responsible for the low level staffers and hadn't trained them well enough (up to Bernie's ethical standards. I doubt Hillary could survive a day in the Bernie campaign since his standards are so much higher than hers.

Thirdly, letting someone go is not a necessarily a judgement call and can be done for a myriad of reasons.

Maybe you should wait for the facts to come out before you believe anyone. And maybe i should quit talking to someone that seems incapable of doing so,

[pnwmom]

101. Bloomberg reported that Uretsky himself accessed the proprietary information.

So it wasn't just some underling.

And we have the fact that he was FIRED -- according to Sanders's official spokesperson. And unless you think the Bernie campaign would FIRE someone for a small issue, you have to conclude that this was serious.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/dnc-suspends-bernie-sanders-campaign-access-clinton-info

Jeff Weaver, Sanders' campaign manager, told the Washington Post that a low-level staffer accessed the information. And a spokesman for the campaign said that the employee had been fired.

"That behavior is unacceptable and that staffer was fired immediately," Sanders' spokesman Michael Briggs told CNN.

[Live and Learn]

102. And only Bloomberg has said that and they couldn't possibly know that. Looks like bad

reporting to me.

Like I said, Sanders, unlike Hillary takes ethics seriously so he would have released the director for even a hint of impropriety of his staffers unlike Hillary. I fail to see how you don't understand how much more ethical this makes Bernie than Hillary.

[pnwmom]

103. Did you miss the quotes around the words of the campaign spokesman, Briggs?

Why couldn't they "possibly know that" if Briggs, the spokesman, told them that?

Here, this time I'll bold the words for you so you can't miss it:


http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/dnc-suspends-bernie-sanders-campaign-access-clinton-info

Jeff Weaver, Sanders' campaign manager, told the Washington Post that a low-level staffer accessed the information. And a spokesman for the campaign said that the employee had been fired.

"That behavior is unacceptable and that staffer was fired immediately," Sanders' spokesman Michael Briggs told CNN.

[Live and Learn]

105. And that has what to do with Josh Uretsky? Nothing. nt

[pnwmom]

108. You're funny. n/t

[Live and Learn]

111. You're not. nt

[merrily]

131. "It's funny 'cause it's true." Stephen Colbert.

[pnwmom]

118. CNN is now reporting that they were told it was Josh Uretsky.

So now it's both Bloomberg and CNN.

[pnwmom]

81. And in this case, Weavers loses credibility for trying to pass this off

as the mistake of a low level staffer.

Rather than of their National Data Director.

[Cha]

97. Ah yes.. right away Jim Weaver loses credibility by trying to disingenuously shift the blame. He's

the long time campaign manager of sanders who said about Hillary after the 1st debate.. ".. We'd be willing to consider her for VP." remember that?

"We're willing to give her more credit than [President] Obama did," he quipped. "We'll even interview her."

Condescending twerp. Best he stop talking about President Obama.

[uponit7771]

122. +1

[orpupilofnature57]

83. Integrity .

[riversedge]

90. No integrity for the Sanders data Director. He saw the lid off the cookie jar and ate the

cookies 4X that we know of--at this point.

[DFW]

98. Sanders himself said long ago he knew something like this would eventually happen

In the TIME interview, he specifically said that he realized that some people on his side would go over the limit and have to be disavowed. I can't imagine there has been a major campaign where this has NOT occurred at least once. I'm sure Sanders himself had nothing whatsoever to do with this, and should not be penalized as though he were. I say leave the overreaction to Chicago cops, and see this for what it is, and no more than it is. DWS will not be doing Hillary any favors if she treats this like the sinking of the Maine.

[Thinkingabout]

106. It is similar to Watergate in a computer world. Nixon tried to cover

Up the story and resigned after it was evident of the involvement.

[winter is coming]

109. It's nothing like Watergate, although it's interesting this talking point is being parroted.

[Thinkingabout]

115. IMO this is similar, though a clitch allowed access, a breakin allowed access in

The Watergate incident. What is different is who ordered or who decided to take advantage of the opportunity. In this case Sanders realized this was a breach and he terminated the staff member. It is still a breach, this is my point.

[Vinca]

112. He fired the person and that should be the end of the story.

But we know how this will play. After the 50 threads finally disappear from old age, they'll be resurrected like clockwork until all the primaries are over. Who was the staffer trolling for anyway . . . bankers?

[uponit7771]

123. It was more than one person who saw the data

[pnwmom]

138. Uretsky is saying that he got into the system to "create a record."

For the purpose of demonstrating that he had access where he shouldn't.

So it is entirely reasonable for the DNC to say that they want proof that the info is no longer in the Sanders' campaign's possession.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251909206

[Vinca]

159. The DNC has already alienated a whole lot of voters and this isn't going to help.

They've got the thumb on the scale for Hillary and I do not believe her campaign would be shut out of their own records if the roles were reversed. It makes me think twice about how I might vote next November if Bernie isn't the nominee. That's never happened before.

[pnwmom]

160. It turns out that all they're asking for is an "assurance" that they haven't retained HRC data,

according to the WA Post.

Is that too much to ask?

[Vinca]

167. But, according to the Sanders lawyer, without access to the computer data they can't prove anything

one way or the other. Curious, too, that he mentioned Sanders campaign data had been compromised back in October but rather than make a public stink accusing anyone of anything, they chose to lock up data from other campaigns that landed - unasked for - in their lap and notify the DNC. I guess it all depends what the DNC agenda is.

[pnwmom]

168. He's insinuating that someone else COULD have breached their data

but didn't assert that they DID.

[Vinca]

169. He suggested an independent review and I think that's the best idea.

In the meantime, Bernie's data shouldn't be held hostage.

[pnwmom]

170. That definitely needs to be done.

[upaloopa]

116. The defence of the Sanders campaign in this thread is fucking unbelievable.

Cognitive dissonance

[arthritisR_US]

141. Exactly! nt

[uponit7771]

119. Wapo said it was a low level staffer.... Yeah right

[alcibiades_mystery]

124. "Josh who? Some low level staffer. Never heard of him." - Sanders Campaign

"...that staffer..."

The national data director.

[1StrongBlackMan]

134. From what I've read ...

Big ups to the Bernie campaign in firing the staffer. It shows that staffers are being held to an ethical standard.

Good job Team Bernie.

[pnwmom]

136. Yes. That was the correct thing to do. Once again, Bernie is reacting better

than many of his supporters.

[1StrongBlackMan]

139. AND better than at least one of his continuing staffers ...

The Communication Director, Briggs, said the accessing of file ("to his knowledge&quot provided nothing that would benefit the Bernie campaign. It is either, ignorant or dishonest to say accessing your opponent's canvassing modeling doesn't benefit you.

[workinclasszero]

150. Wow

"after he improperly accessed proprietary HRC data" SMH

[Larkspur]

156. Firing the Data Director was the right thing to do and NGP VAN should fire those on their side

who caused this data breach.

Firing their Data Director was a decisive display of leadership as it shows that Bernie's campaign will not tolerate misbehavior. He didn't tell Josh, "Cut it out!" He was fired. That is what should have at least happened to many Wall Street banksters.

The DNC needs to give precise instructions as to how the Bernie campaign can get reinstated to NGP VAN's database asap and be fair about it as this was not a campaign strategy by the Sanders campaign and the DNC should ask NGP VAN to fire those on their side who caused this data breach.

The other option that the Bernie campaign can do is make a deal with Nationbuilder, one of NGP VAN's main competitors and is rated the #1 platform for political campaigns worldwide. Getting Bernie's campaign would be a PR coup for Nationbuilder. Nationbuilder also has a voter file.

[EndElectoral]

161. First mistake of Sanders campaign. Firing the guy. Implies guilt.

[pnwmom]

162. The guy has already had an interview and admitted that he purposely

entered the system in order to "create a record." His claim is that he wanted to be able to show what he could improperly access, because he was worried about the safety of Sanders's data.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251909206

[workinclasszero]

163. From the story...

Sanders’s campaign has sought to downplay the severity of the incident, initially saying that only a single “low-level” staffer accessed the Clinton data and that none of it was saved. But the audit of the database's logs created by the vendor that manages the data, NGP VAN, show that four accounts associated with the Sanders team took advantage of the Wednesday morning breach. Staffers conducted searches that would be especially advantageous to the campaign, including lists of its likeliest supporters in 10 early voting states, including Iowa and New Hampshire.

After one Sanders account gained access to the Clinton data, the audits show, that user began sharing permissions with other Sanders users. The staffers who secured access to the Clinton data included national data director Josh Uretsky, who was fired on Thursday, and his deputy, Russell Drapkin. The two other usernames that viewed Clinton information were “talani" and "csmith_bernie."

Though the Sanders campaign initially claimed that it had not saved Clinton data, the logs show that the Vermont senator’s team created at least 24 lists during the 40-minute breach, which started at 10:40 a.m., and saved those list to their personal folders.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-12-18/sanders-campaign-fires-data-director-after-breach-of-clinton-files

Seems like none of these facts are being discussed at all.

[pnwmom]

164. Thanks for spotting the updated info! That wasn't in the article when I posted it.

[McCamy Taylor]

171. Good grief!