Dude on reddit said it better than I ever could:
| u/KineticEngineer: At least according to Comey's statement, the security culture at State was shit. I 100% believe this because (a) the inspector general position went unfilled for years, and (b) State IT, like other federal IT, is underfunded and glacially slow to change. HRC is the poster girl for a much bigger problem. Also, I'm not surprised this didn't rise to the level of a criminal act. Laws about technology tend to be bad fits and out of date. The people making those laws tend to be about HRC's age and social category. I've told friends for months that if this isn't illegal, it should be, but it's so arcane that only top experts can say what is currently legal and what isn't. And it appears to be legal, despite being the worst publicly advertised IT security breach in US government history. The thing is, there are different standards for computer security than there are for the legal system. In law, innocent until proven guilty, and in this specific situation, intent matters a lot. For computer security, it isn't "Innocent until Proven Guilty"; it's "The Enemy Knows the System." The hilarious irony here is that if the server had just been slightly more secure, there might have been evidence of intrusion. Cooper's complete incompetence meant that invading actors left no trace, so Comey can only say that hacking was "possible," even though we all know it happened again and again. Honestly, I hope Comey testifies in front of Congress. It's Congress that blocked appointment of an Inspector General, and it's ongoing budget turf wars that leave IT budgets looking like crap. Not to excuse anything HRC did. But this problem goes well beyond her, and we need to see the forest, not just the tree in the pantsuit. |
A warrior keeps death on the mind from the moment of their first breath to the moment of their last.
  |
  |
