Support NeoGAF

[damisa]

The data breach in question is entirely the fault of the vendor(NGP VAN) who hosts the DNC data and thus it is within the legal rights of the Sanders campaign to file a lawsuit because the DNC breached a contract with the Sanders campaign. No where in that contract are there any clauses that allow the DNC to deny the Sanders campaign access without a week notice, which they failed to do.

Leaving a door unlocked doesn't give a thief permission to steal your stuff

Bernie's campaign had been scummy and petty from the beginning, just like the candidate himself. I don't understand how you Bernie supporters put up with his constant BS. If Hillary had stole the data, her campaign would have been over right then and there

 

[pigeon]

Exactly. They did everything they could to the letter, and still paid for it.

This is just false.

They accessed a bunch of Hillary's data and copied it!

We're not six years old here. If you discover a security breach that gives you access to competitor's data, the correct thing to do is to not use that security breach to steal people's data.

If you really want to argue that it's totally moral to take advantage of the security breach because the contract didn't explicitly say you're not supposed to steal other people's data, then, I mean, you do you, but I am honestly disappointed in that position.

You can go ahead and do it, I guess, because you want to win and you're willing to be unethical to do so. If all you care about is winning, then go for it.

But don't then turn around and say that the reason you love Bernie Sanders is because he's honest and you can trust him!

 

[digdug2k]

I don't understand how people have loyalty to a political party. This is why the two party political system is fuck. Do you vote for any democrat no matter who he is?

I used to kinda feel that way but I don't really view the two parties as parties anymore. Theyre coalition's of parties who realized that on their own they were too weak to effect change.

 

[GameAddict411]

He's already almost above Clinton in California.

that's not true at all.

 

[royalan]

The issues you are talking about are entirely on the vendor. Since contractually neither the Clinton or Sanders campaign are obligated to keep the security of that data. In fact the Sanders reason for wanting an independent audit is precisely because there were similar breaches in the past which were reported but never addressed.

Sure, Bernie's campaign wasn't legally or contractually obligated to not peek at Hillary's voter data. Still, it was very poor form, and could be considered cheating. Bernie's campaign got a serious leg up going into Iowa and New Hampshire by basically looking at their competitor's hand.

The DNC HAD to respond somehow.

 

[Ashodin]

I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree with your assessment.

There is no such thing as an amicable lawsuit. The Sanders campaign is litigating against the DNC. They are asking for damages. He could have just let the lawsuit drop but the campaign believes it important enough to keep it open and so they have continued with the process.

Furthermore, my quote selections were not misinforming. I have posted long quotes in threads in the past and people end up getting bored, so I am trying to be more terse. I selected what I believe to be the most important sentences, and people can click the link if they want to read more. The fact that the campaign is calling this procedural does not change the fact that this is a lawsuit and I think most people's responses in this thread would not have changed.

Backing off when they have been wronged is not the way to go, especially not for Sanders' campaign, which is built on the back of fighting corruption in either party. This is a slight against them that the DNC have ignored because they seemingly don't particularly care about Sanders' campaign.

 

[noshten]

It should be likely that you aren't supposed to be accessing this information. As such, either Sanders' campaign did things it shouldn't have done, or Sanders prefers ignorant people to work for him.

You were paddling the whole "hacking" angle now you change the tune?
I work in IT and if as a vendor two competitors were sharing a VPC for example and we dropped the firewall allowing trade secrets to fall into someones lap it would be entirely our fault.

Also the person who accessed and downloaded the data was referred to the Sanders campaign by the DNC and NGP VAN

The Sanders campaign is taking its fight with the DNC to the next level(Dec 25)

Because of the software issue, members of the Sanders campaign were able to access information that belonged to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. On Dec. 17, news of the incident broke and the Sanders campaign announced it had fired its national data director, Josh Uretsky, for taking advantage of the breach to access data belonging to Clinton. The top Sanders adviser told Yahoo News one of the remaining concerns is that Uretsky was recommended to the campaign by people with ties to the DNC and NGP VAN.

“It’s not as if we conjured this guy Josh from thin air. This is an individual … who was recommended to us by the DNC and NGP VAN,” the adviser said.

According to the adviser, one of the references that Uretsky gave when he applied to work with the campaign was the DNC’s National Data Director Andrew Brown, who works closely with the shared voter file program.

“Andrew Brown spoke to us and gave him a positive review, as did this guy Bryan Whitaker,” the adviser said.

The adviser identified Whitaker as the COO of NGP VAN. Whitaker is no longer with the company. His LinkedIn page lists Whitaker as having left the firm for a job at another political data company in August of this year. Uretsky’s LinkedIn says he began working on the Sanders campaign in September.

Brown and Whitaker did not respond to requests for comment on this story. A spokesperson for the DNC declined to comment.

The Sanders adviser described the fact Uretsky was recommended to the campaign by people with links to the DNC as astonishing in light of what happened. Specifically, the adviser pointed out that the campaign was slammed by Clinton’s team for the breach and punished by the DNC.

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/the-sanders-campaign-is-taking-their-fight-with-200738611.html

Sure, Bernie's campaign wasn't legally or contractually obligated to not peek at Hillary's voter data. Still, it was very poor form, and could be considered cheating. Bernie's campaign got a serious leg up going into Iowa and New Hampshire by basically looking at their competitor's hand.

The DNC HAD to respond somehow.

Maybe next time DNC won't recommend people who it appears have questionable responses to data breaches?

 

[loki 16]

I have party loyalty because thus far Democrats have shared my beliefs when it comes to things like Same Sex Marriage, Abortion, how to fix the economy, etc. I don't just vote a straight blue ticket because I'm a democrat, however.

I personally do not vote in elections where I don't know anything about the candidates. That said, I try to find out as much as I can regarding local politics, who my senators are and what they stand for, and what congressman represents my district.

And there you have the difference between party loyalists, and people who are just now jumping into politics because it's a fad. I'd put money down that 99% of the Bernie fans on GAF and Reddit couldn't name their representatives if they tried, and yet those representatives are the "establishment" that they're fighting.

That is what is great about Bernie, he is bringing people who usually don't care about politics to politics. People are learning you can't expect for that 99% who did not care about politics before to know any specifics. Bernie's revolution is about bringing people into the political process and I think he is doing a great job.

 

[Tesseract]

ether

 

[GYODX]

Lol. Bernie is so desperate that it is getting pathetic.

Suing the DNC over his own staff stealing from them. It should be the DNC suing him.



Not to mention his hypocrisy on superdelagates. Deriding them all campaign, then getting on his knees to woo them when it became clear that they were his only chance at the nomination.

This is a lie. Bernie has barely said a word about superdelegates and I doubt you can prove otherwise.

Show me three instances of Sanders "deriding superdelegates". If it has been as common throughout his campaign as you say it is then you should have no problem.

 

[Red]

This doesn't seem at all sensible or productive. Why?

Literally the exact words that popped into my head.

 

[Wafflecakes]

Backing off when they have been wronged is not the way to go, especially not for Sanders' campaign, which is built on the back of fighting corruption in either party. This is a slight against them that the DNC have ignored because they seemingly don't particularly care about Sanders' campaign.

Maybe they should spend some time fighting the corruption in their own campaign first?

Firing someone because they got caught isn't a good excuse when you hired people who were corrupt.

 

[Steel]

I know of the incident. My question is more about the timing. Why now?

Maybe out of some weird sense of principle on an ultimately insignificant issue? Maybe because he for some weird reason feels like losing access to the database for 24 hours ruined his campaign now that it looks like he has no chance of winning? Maybe for the optics of sticking it to the man? I dunno.

 

[Kusagari]

Bernie is a shit politician that wants a revolution without actually helping anyone but himself achieve it.

And now his delusions of grandeur because of the success he has had in the primary is leading to him refusing to bow out quietly and only ramping up this crap. He's trying to drag the Democrats, the party he refused to join until it benefited him(how oddly political), down with him.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Except there is no "hacking", so the DNC can go sue the vendor they hired to host the data whose firewalls failed after Sander's campaign had alerted previously for similar instances, which they failed to address.

A faulty lock on a door is not, in fact, an invitation to walk through the same door. Even if you told the owner of the door and they didn't fix it. This is textbook victim blaming.

The Sanders campaign accessed data that they had no right whatsoever to access. And now after this stupid lawsuit, I'd counter-sue the ever-loving hell out of Sanders' campaign. I would straight up bury them in paperwork and court fees until Bernie Sanders himself publicly apologized for pulling a stunt out his own team's ineptitude and underhanded actions.

I really liked Bernie a few months ago, but it's pretty clear that I was a fan of a person who never really existed. He's a petulant child, and he can get treated like one.

 

[TwoDurans]

You were paddling the whole "hacking" angle now you change the tune?
I work in IT and if as a vendor two competitors were sharing a VPC for example and we dropped the firewall allowing trade secrets to fall into someones lap it would be entirely our fault.

Also the person who accessed and downloaded the data was referred to the Sanders campaign by the DNC and NGP VAN

Maybe next time DNC won't recommend people who it appears have questionable responses to data breaches?

What does that have to do with anything? You think they planted him there so he would commit computer fraud and get Sanders in trouble? #WhatATwist

 

[cpp_is_king]

Everyone knows that when you're in a fierce strategic battle and you're behind, the best play is to start a fight and pray you come out ahead.

It's risky, but this is his admission that it's all he's got left

 

[Ashodin]

Maybe they should spend some time fighting the corruption in their own campaign first?

Firing someone because they got caught isn't a good excuse when you hired people who were corrupt.

Recommended to them by the DNC and NGP VAN no less. Sound familiar?

 

[paparazzo]

Sore losers gonna sore lose, I guess. What a joke.

 

[Wafflecakes]

This is a lie. Bernie has barely said a word about superdelegates and I doubt you can prove otherwise.

Show me three instances of Sanders "deriding superdelegates". If it has been as common throughout his campaign as you say it is then you should have no problem.

Oh please. You cannot possibly be that dense. For all intents and purposes when a campaign says something (whether from the candidates mouth or not), it is the voice of the person they work for.

Just because he personally didn't speak it doesn't change the fact that his campaign staff have parroted it all year.

 

[jiggle]

This is getting embarrassing now


Looks like Devine looking for a final payout lol

 

[norm9]

He's already almost above Clinton in California.

People wising up in California, just a slow simmer at the moment.

 

[A Link to the Past]

You were paddling the whole "hacking" angle now you change the tune?
I work in IT and if as a vendor two competitors were sharing a VPC for example and we dropped the firewall allowing trade secrets to fall into someones lap it would be entirely our fault.

Also the person who accessed and downloaded the data was referred to the Sanders campaign by the DNC and NGP VAN

If the vendor is at fault, that does not prevent the DNC from protecting their information from a campaign that on multiple occasions took advantage of the situation. Does the campaign believe that it is not responsible for its staffers that the DNC should just assume that it's just one bad apple?

 

[Wafflecakes]

Recommended to them by the DNC and NGP VAN no less. Sound familiar?

If Bernie hates the establishment so much, why would he take their advice to hire people?

 

[pigeon]

Recommended to them by the DNC and NGP VAN no less. Sound familiar?

Why would that be relevant?

The Sanders campaign ultimately made the decision to hire the guy.

Are you suggesting that they just did whatever the establishment told them to do?

Or did they make a bad hiring decision and are now trying to pass the buck?

 

[GK86]

Keep fighting the good fight, Bernie! #bernitalldown

 

[Ashodin]

If Bernie hates the establishment so much, why would he take their advice to hire people?

One would believe there are still trustworthy people out there, at least at the local or middle-class level.

 

[eBay Huckster]

Recommended to them by the DNC and NGP VAN no less. Sound familiar?

yeah, sounds like you're blaming the DNC for something they couldn't have foreseen at the time they made the recommendation so you can absolve the sanders campaign of any major blame.

that definitely sounds familiar.

 

[BoboBrazil]

Bernie's an asshole. More I see and hear the guy the less I like him.

 

[Tesseract]

now he needs to use this, the arizona shit, and hillary's transcripts at the next debate

keep going bernie, we're with you until the convention and superdelegate win

 

[Dirca]

This has been one of, if not the most, hilarious election years in recent memory. Sad that this circus is the best we have.

 

[The Technomancer]

I'm not saying he might not have a legal case

But from a political strategy perspective this is nonsensical

He already has problems working with the Democratic party, problems that are harming him now and would harm him in office. The last thing he needs is to drive that rift even further

Additionally everyone had forgotten about the stupid data thing. Why on earth would you drag it back into the spotlight months later?

What the fuck is going on at Sander's HQ?

 

[hiryu64]

This was always a bit of a joke of an article. Very few states are so strongly Republican that you could safely run a major right-wing third party candidate without just handing the state to Hillary.

Here's the 2012 results in the states they name:
Georgia: Romney 53, Obama 47
Florida: Obama 50, Romney 49
Ohio: Obama 50, Romney 48
North Carolina: Romney 51, Obama 48
Missouri: Romney 54, Obama 44

Nowhere do they have the sorts of margins they need that they could add a third party candidate and avoid a plurality victory by Hillary. Even in the widest gap in that list, Missouri, the Republican block would have to stay united on the same candidate, because even 10.5% falling away would give the state to Hillary if she can perform as well as Obama did.

The talk of their third-party candidate actually winning electoral votes is even more far-fetched. The only states where that would even be a possibility would be states that the Republicans expected to carry anyway. You're not going to get a victory in a swing state like this, and swing state victories would be the only way for this strategy to work.

I honestly have no idea who they could conceivably put up that would have the sort of appeal to sway someone who would vote Hillary but not Trump yet doesn't feel strongly enough about Hillary that they would go for <THIRD_PARTY_CANDIDATE>, but it is what it is. Perhaps it is simply a thought-experiment, but the fact that it's a very real strategy being weighed by the Republican party should say that it shouldn't be taken lightly. This party has proven that they will do A-NY-THING to get what they want--even shutting down the government.

 

[TheOohChild]

Thanks Bernie. Just saved me some time on primary day.

 

[Allard]

Sure, but it was handled well, and they were STILL denied.

They handled it well, and the company they responded to handled it logically as well. If there is a breech due to user privileges settings, users having more access then they should, the logical step is to lock the user so it can't be used again for said purpose, investigate how much was accessed during that time period, either give them new users with more limited roles and/or audit the user permissions till they know it can't be used for such purposes again. There is more then one party in play in this scenario, its not just Bernie sanders, Hilary is a victim in this too, she would have just as much grounds to sue the company/DNC for the leak as Bernie has for losing contractual access. She isn't because in the end she knows its petty and a misunderstanding. Which is why I feel it is also petty for Sanders to continue to sue the company/DNC given how long they were shut out and the reason for it. To me the issue is grey rather then black and white, but in the end only one of the parties is actually suing for so little damage.

 

[Piecake]

Backing off when they have been wronged is not the way to go, especially not for Sanders' campaign, which is built on the back of fighting corruption in either party. This is a slight against them that the DNC have ignored because they seemingly don't particularly care about Sanders' campaign.

So Bernie's staff takes advantage of a systems failure and copies Clinton's proprietary polling data. Bernie loses access to his data for 24 hours in response.

Can you explain to me how Bernie was wronged in this scenario because I just don't get it. And please, don't resort to very legalistic and technical justification because you are being very moralistic and ethical in your post right here.

 

[Wafflecakes]

One would believe there are still trustworthy people out there, at least at the local or middle-class level.

So it is the DNC's fault he hired a corrupt person.

What a joke.

 

[Ashodin]

yeah, sounds like you're blaming the DNC for something they couldn't have foreseen at the time they made the recommendation so you can absolve the sanders campaign of any major blame.

that definitely sounds familiar.

Nah. The DNC recommended the guy, which they could have done more to make sure he was a legit guy, and Sanders' campaign is nascent, so they're not experienced in vetting people like this.

In taking him on, the campaign was trying to solidify that yes, they can work with the DNC.

Turns out the DNC doesn't really want to work with them, it seems.

 

[A Link to the Past]

So wait, the argument is actually at the point where people are saying that Hillary hatched a plot to have someone invade her privacy? Sounds like GamerGate conspiracy level silliness to me

 

[noshten]

A faulty lock on a door is not, in fact, an invitation to walk through the same door. Even if you told the owner of the door and they didn't fix it. This is textbook victim blaming.

The Sanders campaign accessed data that they had no right whatsoever to access. And now after this stupid lawsuit, I'd counter-sue the ever-loving hell out of Sanders' campaign. I would straight up bury them in paperwork and court fees until Bernie Sanders himself publicly apologized for pulling a stunt out his own team's ineptitude and underhanded actions.

I really liked Bernie a few months ago, but it's pretty clear that I was a fan of a person who never really existed. He's a petulant child, and he can get treated like one.

A few months ago Bernie filed a lawsuit against the DNC and you liked him, or perhaps a few months ago you weren't politically engaged to follow the outrage back than when the very same news broke out?

What does that have to do with anything? You think they planted him there so he would commit computer fraud and get Sanders in trouble? #WhatATwist

Right the person who actually downloaded the data has nothing to do with the issue at hand...

If the vendor is at fault, that does not prevent the DNC from protecting their information from a campaign that on multiple occasions took advantage of the situation. Does the campaign believe that it is not responsible for its staffers that the DNC should just assume that it's just one bad apple?

There is pretty clear rules within the contract between the DNC and the Sanders campaign.

- The Agreement requires Defendant to implement best practices and reasonable data security to protect Confidential Information and data submitted by the Campaign and the Competing Campaign.
- Defendant has failed to implement reasonable data security measures, resulting in the inadvertent disclosure of the Competing Campaign&#8217;s Confidential Information. Upon information and belief, the Plaintiff&#8217;s Confidential Information has also been disclosed.
- The [voter database] Agreement does not permit the Defendant to suspend or terminate service to Plaintiff in the absence of ten days&#8217; written notice to Plaintiff, and Plaintiff&#8217;s failure to cure any breach or default within a period of ten days.

 

[catmincer]

So Bernie's staff takes advantage of a systems failure and copies Clinton's proprietary polling data. Bernie loses access to his data for 24 hours in response.

Can you explain to me how Bernie was wronged in this scenario because I just don't get it. And please, don't resort to very legalistic and technical justification because you are being very moralistic and ethical in your post right here.

Any sane person gave up long trying to reason with who you quoted. Either they're an elaborate troll or highly deluded, don't even waste your time.

 

[GYODX]

Oh please. You cannot possibly be that dense. For all intents and purposes when a campaign says something (whether from the candidates mouth or not), it is the voice of the person they work for.

Just because he personally didn't speak it doesn't change the fact that his campaign staff have parroted it all year.

Vocal Bernie supporters have derided superdelegates. Bernie and his campaign staff, as far as I know, have not. Can you point me to three instances of Sanders' campaign staff deriding superdelegates? I am legitimately curious.

 

[Makai]

My client is offended by allegations that his campaign is a money laundering scheme.

 

[eBay Huckster]

Nah. The DNC recommended the guy, which they could have done more to make sure he was a legit guy, and Sanders' campaign is nascent, so they're not experienced in vetting people like this.

so it's the DNC's fault for not vetting him sufficiently, but not sanders' [campaign's] fault for not vetting him sufficiently

got it

My client is offended by allegations that his campaign is a money laundering scheme.

:jnc

 

[EatinOlives]

Nah. The DNC recommended the guy, which they could have done more to make sure he was a legit guy, and Sanders' campaign is nascent, so they're not experienced in vetting people like this.

In taking him on, the campaign was trying to solidify that yes, they can work with the DNC.

Turns out the DNC doesn't really want to work with them, it seems.

This is straight up tinfoil hat shit. So now the campaign staffer who started this shit was actually a DNC establishment guy planted in so that he ruins their shit by accessing unauthorized data, and the DNC jumps on the opportunity to fuck the Sanders campaign over?

The persecution complex is real.

EDIT: Ever heard of the saying "the longer the explanation, the bigger the lie"?

 

[riotous]

Maybe next time DNC won't recommend people who it appears have questionable responses to data breaches?

It would be incredibly odd for a presidential campaign to hire someone without experience and references; how in the world does that fact suddenly point the fingers towards the DNC?

So the guy hadn't fucked up like this before; and?

 

[Tesseract]

So wait, the argument is actually at the point where people are saying that Hillary hatched a plot to have someone invade her privacy? Sounds like GamerGate conspiracy level silliness to me

Sounds like something a Clinton would do, or any establishment neocon or neoliberal politician

 

[Hazmat]

Can you imagine the shitfit that would be thrown if a Clinton staffer accessed the Sanders' campaign's data and copied it? I don't think we'd be hearing about how it's all the vendor's fault.

 

[B-Dubs]

My client is offended by allegations that his campaign is a money laundering scheme.

OK, this got me. :lol

 

[Kaladin]

I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree with your assessment.

There is no such thing as an amicable lawsuit. The Sanders campaign is litigating against the DNC. They are asking for damages. He could have just let the lawsuit drop but the campaign believes it important enough to keep it open and so they have continued with the process.

Furthermore, my quote selections were not misinforming. I have posted long quotes in threads in the past and people end up getting bored, so I am trying to be more terse. I selected what I believe to be the most important sentences, and people can click the link if they want to read more. The fact that the campaign is calling this procedural does not change the fact that this is a lawsuit and I think most people's responses in this thread would not have changed.

Your quote selections were bent to your Anti-Sanders rhetoric which has fueled the responses here. The lawsuit was filed to pressure the DNC to act on the promised audit and the judge forced the campaigns hand on keeping the lawsuit or dropping it. The audit still isn't complete so they had to officially file.

It is as simple as that. When the issue is resolved to their liking with the audit or otherwise, it will go away.