What is the difference between the "Server" Hillary was using for her eMails

[AverageGuy]

and the "personal computer" that I use for my eMails? Please inform me, thank you.

[MADem]

1. Why not ask the right wing Republicans shitting their pants over this issue?

No.


One.


Cares.

[pinboy3niner]

5. I'm sure 'Name Removed' would have had a brllliant reply to make if only he had the chance

I may be ahead of the curve here, but not by much I expect.

[MADem]

6. You are--as always--wise, clever and 'punny!' nt

[pinboy3niner]

9. Thanks, amigo. I specialize in #2 threads. nt

[still_one]

2. Depends on how each machine is secured, operating system used, etc

[Alfalfa]

30. +1

[karynnj]

3. most likely the content of the emails for one thing nt

[Egnever]

4. I am betting you don't use your personal computer for your emails

You probably get your email on your pc but I am betting it is not doing more than retrieving it from a server that handles mail traffic.

[pnwmom]

7. Was yours set up by the Secret Service for the former President to use?

Last edited Sat Aug 1, 2015, 05:01 AM - Edit history (1)

Do you even know what a server is?

Hint: it's not something most people have in their houses.

[Electric Monk]

10. "it's not a computer" Whut? nt

[pnwmom]

20. Thanks. Brain blip. nt

[applegrove]

8. You log onto the Internet and go to the website of your email provider

where, once you have logged on, you are actually at their server. What is on their server, in a huge building filled with cables and computers somewhere where rent or property is cheap, then sends back images that then render on your screen in an interactive way. Or you could do like what Hillary did and run your own server. You'd need quite a bit of expertise. And her email provider would have a different address than the typical @hotmail or @gmail.com. It would be @hillary or something like that. And her server would be a computer at her home.

[pinboy3niner]

11. My server stlll says 'Hillary'

What's up with that?

[Llewlladdwr]

12. This might be helpful...

Depending on how you access your electronic communications, there may not be any "e-mail" on your PC at all.

For example, if you're using a web-based e-mail client such as Gmail, what's happening is that you're using a web browser to connect to a remote server using the ports and protocols associated with the World Wide Web. Your e-mails are generally stored on a remote server and are not accessible without an Internet connection, although individual e-mails and attachments can be downloaded to your local device. A copy of the e-mail usually remains on the server and can be accessed from another device later. In this case, there's technically no e-mail software running on your PC.

You might though, be accessing your e-mails using something like Microsoft Outlook. In this case there will be actual e-mail client software running on your device which will connect to a server using the ports and protocols associated with e-mail. Depending on how the client is configured you may automatically download a copy of all e-mails to your PC each time you connect. A copy will generally be retained on the server as well.

In both of these cases the only e-mails that are available are those directly sent or received by you.

At the server level things get much more interesting. It will contain e-mails for anywhere from a few to several thousand users. The server will communicate with other e-mail servers using some TCP/IP voodoo that no normal person cares about, but the interesting part is that whoever administers the server has access to ALL the e-mails that pass through it. And yeah, your e-mails will generally be passed through multiple servers.

Anyway, that's quick and dirty. If you'd like more nerdy detail please ask.

[bemildred]

29. +1. nt

[linuxman]

13. Your computer isn't receiving top secret emails, thereby jeopardizing national security.

A minor issue for the highest ranking member of the state department, i'm sure.

[VanillaRhapsody]

18. Have you worked on govt servers?

What makes you think at least 10 yr old antiquated technology is safer? Do you know about the recent OPM hacking?

[linuxman]

22. I have and I do.

[VanillaRhapsody]

24. So have and do I..and after what I have seen

I don't blame her.....how could you?

[Adrahil]

32. Then you know they suck.

Further, you know that email is not used to transfer classified information.

Whoever sent he unmarked classified information via an insecure method is at fault.

[VanillaRhapsody]

42. Yes that is my point!

[name not needed]

38. Oh, so it's a safety issue, rather than a "how dare these little people question me" issue.

[pnwmom]

21. The Secret Service protects this one for President Clinton. And during the same period of time

when 250K of the .gov State Department emails got leaked to Wikileaks, none of Hillary's got leaked.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/258299543/Clinton-Email

Where was the server for her email located?
The server for her email was physically located on her property, which is protected
by U.S. Secret Service.

What level of encryption was employed? Who was the service provider, etc?

The security and integrity of her family’s electronic communications was taken
seriously from the onset when it was first set up for President Clinton’s
team.While the curiosity in the specifics of this set up is understandable, given what
people with ill-intentions can do with such information in this day and age, there
are concerns about broadcasting specific technical details about past and current
practices. However, suffice it to say, robust protections were put in place and
additional upgrades and techniques employed over time as they became available,
including consulting and employing third party experts.

Was the server ever hacked?
No, there is no evidence there was ever a breach.

[KeepItReal]

27. Hackers aren't thwarted by physical security

And electronic intrusions like the ones at OPM, Sony, United Airlines, etc. go on for days and even months without being detected.

[pnwmom]

34. Well, it's been years since Hillary's was discontinued. And we KNOW 250,000 .gov emails

from the State department got leaked to Wikileaks.

Hillary's can't have been less secure than that.

[VanillaRhapsody]

43. Hillary's personal server certainly wasn't....little fish in a big pond method

[DesMoinesDem]

35. Please provide a link to these 250k State Department .gov emails that you claim Wikileaks released

I have asked you repeatedly to prove your claim and you have never, ever done so. Probably because you know it is a lie.

[pnwmom]

37. Please provide a link to your claim that I said Wikileaks released all those emails.

Try reading my post again, and pay close attention to syntax.

[DesMoinesDem]

39. You're claiming 250k .gov emails were leaked to Wikileaks (but not released?) Where's your proof?

Provide a link.

[pnwmom]

40. Here you go.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?pagewanted=all

The 251,287 cables, first acquired by WikiLeaks, were provided to The Times by an intermediary on the condition of anonymity. Many are unclassified, and none are marked “top secret,” the government’s most secure communications status. But some 11,000 are classified “secret,” 9,000 are labeled “noforn,” shorthand for material considered too delicate to be shared with any foreign government, and 4,000 are designated both secret and noforn.

[DesMoinesDem]

41. I know Wikileaks released diplomatic cables. Where are the 250k .gov State Department emails

that you are always talking about. Do you think diplomatic cables are .gov emails?

[pnwmom]

45. The term "cable" is defined by the state dept. as a "communication (message) sent electronically."

Which most of the time would be an email sent through a .gov account.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/162969.pdf
Cable/telegram: Used interchangeably to refer to communications (messages) sent electronically.

[DesMoinesDem]

46. Cables are not the same as emails. That is a fact.

Your argument that Clinton's emails were not secure because cables that literally MILLIONS of people had access to were leaked is a joke. It makes no sense at all. You know that which is why you lie and claim that emails were leaked, not cables. You can stop using that excuse now.

[pnwmom]

49. I just showed you that by the State Department's own definition, the word "cable" includes emails.

Welcome to the 20th century -- when this transition occurred. The State Department has entered the electronic world, even though they're still behind a lot of businesses, and some old-timers object to the transition.

If you can prove otherwise, please do.

But REGARDLESS of this semantics argument, there is no evidence Hillary's emails on her personal server were compromised. The 250K cable/emails on state.gov accounts, which were supposed to be highly secure, DID get leaked to Wikileaks, which passed them on to the NYTimes and other media outlets.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2010/11/whats_a_diplomatic_cable.html?from=rss

The backroom chatter of American diplomats was put on display Sunday, as WikiLeaks began to release 251,287 diplomatic cables allegedly disclosed by a dissident U.S. soldier. What, exactly, is a "cable," and why is the State Department still using them?

It's kind of like a group e-mail. For many years the term cable referred to the formal telegrams that consular staffers would send across the oceans and around the world in Morse code. Employees on the other end would decipher the pulses coming through their headphones or decode printed sheets of dots and dashes. (As recently as the Cuban Missile Crisis, American and Soviet diplomats were sending urgent messages via Western Union.) But in more recent times, the cable started to function almost exactly like an e-mail, and as of 2008, the State Department handles both modes of communication with the same Microsoft Outlook-based computer system.


SNIP

This distinction isn't always very clear. Ever since State Department employees got e-mail access in the 1990s and early 2000s, higher-ups have worried that important information will end up in e-mails that eventually get deleted. The new messaging software is intended, in part, to address this hole in the record-keeping system by allowing senders or recipients of regular e-mail to note (by checking a box) that their message is to be maintained in a long-term database as a FOIA record. Naturally, this capability makes the system for sending cables redundant, and in fact people inside the department have noted that there's little functional difference between the two. The developers responsible for the new communications program even proposed eliminating the "cable" classification altogether. But Foggy Bottom old-timers objected, arguing that to get rid of cables would be an abandonment of a grand diplomatic tradition.

[DesMoinesDem]

52. LOL. You're really grasping at straws trying to argue that cables are email.

It doesn't matter if cables are sent electronically because that isn't your argument. Your argument is that State Department emails are not secure because diplomatic cables were leaked. That's like saying your house isn't secure because someone once stole something from a building that millions of people had access to. Emails sent to Hillary's State Department email address go only to Hillary. Aside from some system administrators she is the only one that has access to them. Cables sent out can be access by MILLIONS of people. They aren't even comparable. Some soldier in Iraq doesn't have access to State Department emails. Do you even know what your argument is anymore?? LOL. It seems to be "Hillary's home email was more secure than state department email because diplomatic cables, which are sent electronically so I'll call them .gov State Department emails LOL, that could be accessed by literally millions of people, were leaked."

[pnwmom]

53. You obviously didn't read the whole article because you didn't learn anything from it.

There is no functional difference -- or security difference -- between State department emails or cables, as they are run on the same system using Windows Outlook.

A cable is like a group email, and sent and secured the same way.

[DesMoinesDem]

54. I already know what cables are. You obviously are furriously trying to learn about them

in order to justify your ludicrous claim that .gov State Department emails were leaked when they were really cables. Not only do you not understand the difference, but you obviously have no idea how the cables were acquired. They weren't intercepted by some hacker. One of the millions of people that had access to them leaked them. Do millions of people have access to individual .gov email addresses? No. So why are you claiming cables, accessible by millions of people, are just as secure as email accessible by a few? How does it make any sense at all to claim Hillary Clinton's state department email was not secure because someone that had access to cables leaked them???? IT MAKES NO SENSE AT ALL!

[pnwmom]

55. No, millions of people weren't supposed to have access to all 250K emails.

They were leaked by a disturbed governmental employee who never should have been trusted with his job.

[DesMoinesDem]

56. They weren't emails, they were cables. Available to millions of people.

You don't even know what your argument is anymore. I'll ask you again: How does it make any sense at all to claim Hillary Clinton's state department email was not secure because someone that had access to cables leaked them?

[pnwmom]

59. No, they weren't all available to millions of people. And the difference these days between cables

and group emails is purely semantics. They use the same Windows Outlook system.

Someone could hack Hillary's state department email as easily as they could her state department cables because they are both on the same Outlook system.

[DesMoinesDem]

60. Wow. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Yes, cables are accessible by millions of people. Emails are not accessible by millions of people. The system they use to view the cables or emails is irrelevant. The cables weren't hacked. They were downloaded by someone that had access to them. Your argument makes no sense at all.

[pnwmom]

61. And Hillary's .gov emails could have been downloaded by someone who had access to them.

That email address would have been a much likelier target , along with all state department .gov email addresses, than her personal address.

[DesMoinesDem]

62. Again, very few people have access to individual email accounts.

Millions of people had access to the cables. They aren't comparable at all. Your argument makes no sense at all. It may have if it was emails that were leaked (like you thought), not cables. When I informed you that it was cables you should have just admitted you didn't know what you were talking about instead of ridiculously claiming that cables are .gov emails.

[pnwmom]

63. Millions of people don't have access to ALL those cables, and you know that perfectly well.

And all it took was a Snowden or a Manning to easily compromise the whole government system.

[DesMoinesDem]

64. I know perfectly well that millions of people had access to all those cables.

For some reason you haven't figured that out. Manning wasn't some hacker or system administrator. He was just one of millions with access to diplomatic cables. It has absolutely no relevance to the security of individual email accounts, no matter how hard you try to make it. YOUR ARGUMENT MAKES NO SENSE SO JUST STOP.

[treestar]

58. Bit if Eddie renvealed it he'd be a hero

[Sunlei]

14. your ISP owns the 'server' your emails are stored on. The Clintons owned a 'server' .

I'd own a private server too, if I had to manage millions of emails over about a 30ish years period.

[pinboy3niner]

15. Are you coming back to reply to respondents to your thread, or what?

[AverageGuy]

17. First, thank you all for answering me

So I go to Go Daddy and buy the HRC.com or the Iwanttobepres4.us domain. I buy the domain using an alias Sara Palian and pay Go Daddy the extra $10 to hide the fact Iwanttobepres4.us is owned by Sara Palian. Go Daddy then points its Name Servers to the ISP Sara Palian (me) gives them. I put up my firewall and a few other security software programs on my eMail server to protect it from run-of-the-mill hackers. I am lost in a sea of a billion ISP addresses. I would think this would be more secure then [e-mail], which would be a known target.

[VanillaRhapsody]

19. EXACTLY !!!

I keep telling people this exactly. And govt technology is at least 10 yrs out of date....they dont buy tools...they throw bodies at a problem.

[pansypoo53219]

16. sound like a more secure cloud to me.

[fadedrose]

23. My personal computer

means I pay somebody to send and receive email thru their server - that could be AT&T, Comcast, etc. Also, large companies and universities have their own servers and offer free servicer to employees in many cases....

That's what wifi is about. Places that offer it so you can use your computer there have to have either their own server or are subscribers to a large telecom company. It costs to dial into the internet and most people can't afford a server.

Without a server, your personal one or a large one that you pay for "service," you cannot send emails or receive them, or visit DU, check your bank account, shop online, use dictionary, and all kinds of stuff. Your computer without a server is nothing but an electric typewriter....and a good way of playing solitaire and other games you own.

[Exilednight]

25. Two part answer here

Last edited Sun Aug 2, 2015, 06:54 AM - Edit history (1)

1. As previously stated, it has to do with where the emails are stored.

2. She OWNS the server, but those emails belong to the U.S. government.

Those emails are paid for by my tax dollars. Technically, those emails belong to us. We are a goverment of the people, by the people and for the people; with that being said those emails are the people's.

[VanillaRhapsody]

44. Only her WORK ones...not her personal ones...

[Exilednight]

47. Where did you get the idea I was talking about anything other than her SoS correspondence?

[VanillaRhapsody]

48. Same place you got the idea that she isn't being forthcoming....

[Exilednight]

50. Based on Hillary's past experience, what makes you believe she is?

[VanillaRhapsody]

51. based on Hillary's past experience, what makes you BELIEVE she isn't

I'll just let the history speak for itself... http://ontheissues.org/hillary_clinton.htm

[Exilednight]

57. Do you really want to go down the road of Hillary's lies over the past three decades?

[bemildred]

26. As hardware, not much. The difference would be software.

All it really means is that she was running her own email server, a piece of software anybody can run, I have run email servers, sendmail no less, a programming atrocity if I ever saw one, and there are lots of free versions out there too.

[Alfalfa]

31. System admins and other people have access to the server

And therefore access to the emails stored on there.

[jwirr]

33. Do not know the difference but when this first came out they said it was a computer that had

been installed in their home when Bill was president. Every President has a home away from the WH that the government pays to update so that they can vacation at home. I am assuming that these computers are very secure.

So if this is true it was installed so that a president could conduct government business (even sensitive business) from it. So to me the question should be this system less secure than it was during the Clinton administration? We do know that it is an older system but what updates were made to make it secure today?

[Motown_Johnny]

36. Is yours in a mansion? n/t