Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp?
Quote | Reply
http://time.com/...vate-email-whatsapp/

Hmm... this sounds Familiar. Should he be locked up?

Quote:

House Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings sent a letter to White House Counsel Pat Cipollone informing him that he had learned from Kushner’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, that Jared Kushner has used WhatsApp for official work, including with some foreign officials.
According to Cummings, Lowell “could not answer” questions about whether those communications included classified information, which would be a serious breach of security protocol.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Last edited by: BLeP: Mar 22, 19 8:37
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatApp? [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It was used for adoptions of poor Russian children.
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatApp? [FishyJoe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am sure there is nothing to see here.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatApp? [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Did he wipe his phone down with a bleach wipe afterward?? You know, to cover his tracks.

--------------------------
Runners Roost Race Team
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatApp? [mck414] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am sure that this is all a big nothingburger. Same with that other dude who was discussing selling nuke technology to the Saudis via AOL.

AOL? Seriously? Wonder if he still has a MySpace page?

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatApp? [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm sure it will all be cleared up once he revises his security clearance application for the 17th time.
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatApp? [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
He should've used SnapChat

--------------------------
Runners Roost Race Team
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatApp? [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BLeP wrote:
I am sure that this is all a big nothingburger. Same with that other dude who was discussing selling nuke technology to the Saudis via AOL.

AOL? Seriously? Wonder if he still has a MySpace page?

What non-secure media is more secure than AOL? Only us still living relics, who vaguely remember Al Gore's invention, know how to access AOL.
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatApp? [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BLeP wrote:
http://time.com/...vate-email-whatsapp/

Hmm... this sounds Familiar. Should he be locked up?

Quote:

House Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings sent a letter to White House Counsel Pat Cipollone informing him that he had learned from Kushner’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, that Jared Kushner has used WhatsApp for official work, including with some foreign officials.
According to Cummings, Lowell “could not answer” questions about whether those communications included classified information, which would be a serious breach of security protocol.

Facebook owns Whatsapp now so I'm sure it is completely secure :P
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Getting upset when someone uses personal e-mail for classified information is so 2016.

Elections have consequences and one of those is that selective outrage changes teams.

You're such a Trump ball washer! - Duffy - Feb 8, 17 13:18
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Just amazes me that people still don’t understand the difference between a personal email SERVICE and a personal email SERVER for official government business.

Or perhaps it’s more convenient to remain ignorant.

Carry on...
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [JD21] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JD21 wrote:
Just amazes me that people still don’t understand the difference between a personal email SERVICE and a personal email SERVER for official government business.

Or perhaps it’s more convenient to remain ignorant.

Carry on...

So using Whatsapp is ok?

===============
#ITMFA
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [JD21] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
Just amazes me that people still don’t understand the difference between a personal email SERVICE and a personal email SERVER for official government business.
Or perhaps it’s more convenient to remain ignorant.

Carry on...

This x 10000
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [CaptainCanada] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dude, that's like saying a clip is a magazine.
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [efernand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
efernand wrote:
Quote:
Just amazes me that people still don’t understand the difference between a personal email SERVICE and a personal email SERVER for official government business.
Or perhaps it’s more convenient to remain ignorant.

Carry on...


This x 10000

Exactly this is much worse than Clinton. Clinton at least had control of her server, here who know who at facebook had access to this. Could be hundreds.
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [efernand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
efernand wrote:
Quote:
Just amazes me that people still don’t understand the difference between a personal email SERVICE and a personal email SERVER for official government business.
Or perhaps it’s more convenient to remain ignorant.

Carry on...

This x 10000

So using whatsapp is ok?

===============
#ITMFA
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [chaparral] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
chaparral wrote:
efernand wrote:
Quote:
Just amazes me that people still don’t understand the difference between a personal email SERVICE and a personal email SERVER for official government business.
Or perhaps it’s more convenient to remain ignorant.

Carry on...


This x 10000


Exactly this is much worse than Clinton. Clinton at least had control of her server, here who know who at facebook had access to this. Could be hundreds.

No worries, FB is a secured platform...

https://www.wired.com/...intext-change-yours/
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [CaptainCanada] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No, if it’s unauthorized for government use and/or if classified information is shared, it’s not. I wasn’t making any comment about WhatsApp. I was responding to the statement about personal email vs private servers.

I use WhatsApp to communicate with my family when they’re traveling internationally because it’s internet based and not cell based and it’s encrypted.

That said, I don’t know if FB store communications and have the ability, under subpoena, to deliver decrypted communications. Unlike a personal email service which can produce emails under subpoena unlike a private email server.

If you’re outraged about WhatsApp but not a private email SERVER then perhaps this isn’t a topic for you. (Not YOU personally, the collective YOU).

Can anyone answer the question as to whether or not WhatsApp can produce decrypted communiques under subpoena? I’m aware of far better, more secure technologies to use if you’re really hiding messages.
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [chaparral] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
chaparral wrote:
efernand wrote:
Quote:
Just amazes me that people still don’t understand the difference between a personal email SERVICE and a personal email SERVER for official government business.
Or perhaps it’s more convenient to remain ignorant.

Carry on...


This x 10000


Exactly this is much worse than Clinton. Clinton at least had control of her server, here who know who at facebook had access to this. Could be hundreds.


BS.. if it's unsecured it's unsecured... it's not much worse then Clinton?.. to me it's same.
Last edited by: spntrxi: Mar 22, 19 10:19
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [JD21] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JD21 wrote:
No, if it’s unauthorized for government use and/or if classified information is shared, it’s not. I wasn’t making any comment about WhatsApp. I was responding to the statement about personal email vs private servers.

I use WhatsApp to communicate with my family when they’re traveling internationally because it’s internet based and not cell based and it’s encrypted.

That said, I don’t know if FB store communications and have the ability, under subpoena, to deliver decrypted communications. Unlike a personal email service which can produce emails under subpoena unlike a private email server.

If you’re outraged about WhatsApp but not a private email SERVER then perhaps this isn’t a topic for you. (Not YOU personally, the collective YOU).

After 30 years of working for the DoD it has been drilled into us that we are not to use personal email for work. Why can't I be upset with both Clinton AND Jared and Ivanka and the other idiots who work(ed) for Trump who are using personal email for government business. I don't particularly care if it's a personal server or a personal service. You're not supposed to be doing that!

It was bad when Clinton did it and it's still bad now. And I don't give a shit if they are forwarding to their government accounts for record keeping because that sounds WAY to easy to oopsie and "forget" to send something that should have been.

Also, I've got a government iPhone that is locked down tight as a drum. I'm pretty sure that WhatsApp isn't on my list of approved apps.

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [nslckevin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No, no, see it's ok that Jared did this because... Obama. And this is just a WITCH HUNT anyway.

So unfair.

Sad.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [nslckevin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I completely agree. From what I can gather, I believe virtually 100% of Congress members use personal email for govt matters, or atleast gray area discussions.

The difference between a personal service and private server is retention. A private email provider can be subpoend and even your deleted emails can be retained. If one controls the server, they can bleach bit the drive and wipe the data forever. Neither are properly secured but one gives the opportunity to avoid providing records under subpoena. It’s some order of magnitude worse though either way is not appropriate.

I held govt clearances in the past and we both know the treatment we would’ve received if we ran our work email through a private server or service or WhatsApp. It’s a shame these folks, on both sides, get away with it.

Not to mention the hypocrisy that HRC’s situation was fine as SOC but WhatsApp is criminal. They are both absolutely inappropriate to say the least.
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [nslckevin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
nslckevin wrote:
JD21 wrote:
No, if it’s unauthorized for government use and/or if classified information is shared, it’s not. I wasn’t making any comment about WhatsApp. I was responding to the statement about personal email vs private servers.

I use WhatsApp to communicate with my family when they’re traveling internationally because it’s internet based and not cell based and it’s encrypted.

That said, I don’t know if FB store communications and have the ability, under subpoena, to deliver decrypted communications. Unlike a personal email service which can produce emails under subpoena unlike a private email server.

If you’re outraged about WhatsApp but not a private email SERVER then perhaps this isn’t a topic for you. (Not YOU personally, the collective YOU).


After 30 years of working for the DoD it has been drilled into us that we are not to use personal email for work. Why can't I be upset with both Clinton AND Jared and Ivanka and the other idiots who work(ed) for Trump who are using personal email for government business. I don't particularly care if it's a personal server or a personal service. You're not supposed to be doing that!

It was bad when Clinton did it and it's still bad now. And I don't give a shit if they are forwarding to their government accounts for record keeping because that sounds WAY to easy to oopsie and "forget" to send something that should have been.

Also, I've got a government iPhone that is locked down tight as a drum. I'm pretty sure that WhatsApp isn't on my list of approved apps.

^^^^ THIS

I'm not sure anyone is saying it was ok when Clinton did it. Question is, is anyone saying what Kushner and Ivanka did was ok?
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [spntrxi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
spntrxi wrote:

BS.. if it's unsecured it's unsecured... it's not much worse then Clinton?.. to me it's same.


It's just as much a problem that it's secured. If not more. The government security services can view government email at will. Employees relinquish the right to any privacy in government-business communication. (unless executive privilege is used for the select few, etc). If you use WhatsApp, the government loses that ability. Or at least makes it orders of magnitude harder. And beyond that it requires the security services to go before a judge to subpoena the property of private messaging/email services. And some libertarian-minded Silicon Valley companies have taken a hard line against turning over data to the government without exhausting every legal hurdle first, e.g. proving probable cause of a crime, etc. The security services should not have to do that to get the communications of government employees.
Last edited by: trail: Mar 22, 19 10:34
Quote Reply
Re: But, but, but... Kushners WhatsApp? [JD21] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JD21 wrote:
Just amazes me that people still don’t understand the difference between a personal email SERVICE and a personal email SERVER for official government business.

Or perhaps it’s more convenient to remain ignorant.

Carry on...

Though they have their different sets of issues, they're both equally not allowed by government employees, and both have very serious issues. Not sure why you're trying to make such a big deal out of the difference.
Quote Reply

Prev Next