DNC software breach gave Sanders campaign confidential Clinton Data

[ProgressiveCanadian]

To even take one campaigns own data away from them is insane.

[Blair]

Please Bernie supporters have been waiting a chance to ditch the democrat party, and Clinton. As sad as it is I've probably got more loyalty to the party than the Sanders supporters I've spoken to.

If you're not gonna vote Hillary, that's fine. Just stop being so self righteous about it. This is just like Green Party supporters in the UK election

[Joe Republic]

"The staffer" = Sanders campaign National Data Director.  This part keeps getting deliberately forgotten.

He got fired so what point are you even making?

The shifting narrative coming from the Sanders spin zone.  Earlier today he was merely a "low-level staffer".

Not to mention that somehow we've landed on it being only one guy who did it because only one guy got fired.  I'm not sure where the "he was using all four usernames himself!!" came from.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Please Bernie supporters have been waiting a chance to ditch the democrat party, and Clinton. As sad as it is I've probably got more loyalty to the party than the Sanders supporters I've spoken to.

If you're not gonna vote Hillary, that's fine. Just stop being so self righteous about it. This is just like Green Party supporters in the UK election

Obviously no defense of their actions...your side is wrong on this and as i have seen most Americans are.

[Ebsy]

To even take one campaigns own data away from them is insane.

I agree, the theft of Clinton's proprietary data by the Sanders campaign is insane and should be punished accordingly.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

"The staffer" = Sanders campaign National Data Director.  This part keeps getting deliberately forgotten.

He got fired so what point are you even making?

The shifting narrative coming from the Sanders spin zone.  Earlier today he was merely a low-level staffer.

Not to mention that somehow we've landed on it being only one guy because only one guy got fired.  I'm not sure where the "he was using all four usernames himself!!" came from.

This is a sad attack in desperate times...its called politics get used to it. He got fired end of discussion.

[Ebsy]

"The staffer" = Sanders campaign National Data Director.  This part keeps getting deliberately forgotten.

He got fired so what point are you even making?

The shifting narrative coming from the Sanders spin zone.  Earlier today he was merely a low-level staffer.

Not to mention that somehow we've landed on it being only one guy because only one guy got fired.  I'm not sure where the "he was using all four usernames himself!!" came from.

This is a sad attack in desperate times...its called politics get used to it. He got fired end of discussion.

You know, saying the words "end of discussion" and the end of a thoroughly unconvincing argument does not always have the desired effect.

[Edu]

"The staffer" = Sanders campaign National Data Director.  This part keeps getting deliberately forgotten.

He got fired so what point are you even making?

The shifting narrative coming from the Sanders spin zone.  Earlier today he was merely a low-level staffer.

Not to mention that somehow we've landed on it being only one guy because only one guy got fired.  I'm not sure where the "he was using all four usernames himself!!" came from.

This is a sad attack in desperate times...its called politics get used to it. He got fired end of discussion.

LOL, you are even worse at this "spin" thing than Jfern is.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

To even take one campaigns own data away from them is insane.

I agree, the theft of Clinton's proprietary data by the Sanders campaign is insane and should be punished accordingly.

LOL it was the own data bases fault for the firewall to go down. Also i was obviously pointing out the DNC's action in taking away bernies own data. Plus they now have given the access back so they know they are wrong.

[BaconBacon96]

Why is this thread still going...

[ProgressiveCanadian]

"The staffer" = Sanders campaign National Data Director.  This part keeps getting deliberately forgotten.

He got fired so what point are you even making?

The shifting narrative coming from the Sanders spin zone.  Earlier today he was merely a low-level staffer.

Not to mention that somehow we've landed on it being only one guy because only one guy got fired.  I'm not sure where the "he was using all four usernames himself!!" came from.

This is a sad attack in desperate times...its called politics get used to it. He got fired end of discussion.

LOL, you are even worse at this "spin" thing than Jfern is.

Should bernies own data be taken away? You are saying you agree?

[Joe Republic]

This is a sad attack in desperate times...

I completely agree.  And I fear it's only going to get worse as Sanders slips even further behind.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

This is a sad attack in desperate times...

I completely agree.  And I fear it's only going to get worse as Sanders slips even further behind.

Just wait until tomorrows debate.

[Ebsy]

This is a sad attack in desperate times...

I completely agree.  And I fear it's only going to get worse as Sanders slips even further behind.

Just wait until tomorrows debate.

It's actually today's debate at this point.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

This is a sad attack in desperate times...

I completely agree.  And I fear it's only going to get worse as Sanders slips even further behind.

Just wait until tomorrows debate.

It's actually today's debate at this point.

First thing you are correct about this entire thread.

[Alcon]

The contract is in the lawsuit.

http://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000151-b72f-d1ae-add5-f76f14db0001

Thanks.  You appear to be completely right that there is no clause that addresses improper access or distribution of data, beyond that third-party vendors must contract with the DNC.  The ten-day requirement to resolve a breach also seems clear.  I don't know if there's any standard of law that allows for service terminations in the case of illegal activity, or whether downloading improperly insecure data counts as illegal.  However, it doesn't seem like anyone who reads this ToS would infer that what the staffer did would result in instant termination of the contract.

The staffer was immediately fired and they said his behavior was unacceptable.

Right, which all else being equal should mitigate any punitive action, but you haven't really directly tackled my question.  A high-level staffer knowingly accessed and attempted to retain third-party data that was accidentally left insecure because of vendor error.  The DNC's data is their most valuable asset, and their leverage is minimal (partially because that contract seems dumb to my layman's reading).  It may be that the staffer's swift firing should be sufficient -- I probably agree -- but it's not like a punitive response to a data breach like this is insane.

Also note discussion of a prior incident involving the Hillary campaign that had no discipline.

Again, worth discussing, but I don't think hypocrisy is an affirmative defense.

He got fired so what point are you even making?

To even take one campaigns own data away from them is insane.

I've responded to these points.  It's kind of weird to go "what point are you making considering x?!  It's clear that y!" while ignoring a post that considers x and disputes y.

LOL it was the own data bases fault for the firewall to go down. Also i was obviously pointing out the DNC's action in taking away bernies own data.

Wait, are you saying that the Sanders campaign holds no responsibility for improperly accessing Clinton campaign data stored on the DNC's vendor's platform, because it's Clinton's fault for signing up to use the DNC's vendor's platform when the DNC's vendor's turned out to be insecure?  That's a bizarre ethical argument, and it also ignores that the Clinton campaign clearly has a potential claim for damage from the DNC's vendor, since the contract states that the vendor will follow industry best-practice standards for data security...and also kind of silly, since the Sanders campaign readily agreed to use the same vendor platform.

Plus they now have given the access back so they know they are wrong.

oh come on, you know that's not how political decisionmaking works.  You were complaining earlier that it isn't how the DNC's decisionmaking works.  Why is it a sign of corrupting and folding to pressure when they do something you dislike, and a recognition of moral virtue when they do something you do like?

[Ebsy]

The thing about this legal argument is that the contract was never terminated and neither the Sanders campaign nor NGP VAN has said that the contract was terminated. So I don't see how the 10 day notice applies.

[Joe Republic]

This is a sad attack in desperate times...

I completely agree.  And I fear it's only going to get worse as Sanders slips even further behind.

Just wait until tomorrows debate.

That's the spirit!

[ProgressiveCanadian]

The contract is in the lawsuit.

http://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000151-b72f-d1ae-add5-f76f14db0001

Thanks.  You appear to be completely right that there is no clause that addresses improper access or distribution of data, beyond that third-party vendors must contract with the DNC.  The ten-day requirement to resolve a breach also seems clear.  I don't know if there's any standard of law that allows for service terminations in the case of illegal activity, or whether downloading improperly insecure data counts as illegal.  However, it doesn't seem like anyone who reads this ToS would infer that what the staffer did would result in instant termination of the contract.

The staffer was immediately fired and they said his behavior was unacceptable.

Right, which all else being equal should mitigate any punitive action, but you haven't really directly tackled my question.  A high-level staffer knowingly accessed and attempted to retain third-party data that was accidentally left insecure because of vendor error.  The DNC's data is their most valuable asset, and their leverage is minimal (partially because that contract seems dumb to my layman's reading).  It may be that the staffer's swift firing should be sufficient -- I probably agree -- but it's not like a punitive response to a data breach like this is insane.

Also note discussion of a prior incident involving the Hillary campaign that had no discipline.

Again, worth discussing, but I don't think hypocrisy is an affirmative defense.

He got fired so what point are you even making?

To even take one campaigns own data away from them is insane.

I've responded to these points.  It's kind of weird to go "what point are you making considering x?!  It's clear that y!" while ignoring a post that considers x and disputes y.

LOL it was the own data bases fault for the firewall to go down. Also i was obviously pointing out the DNC's action in taking away bernies own data.

Wait, are you saying that the Sanders campaign holds no responsibility for improperly accessing Clinton campaign data stored on the DNC's vendor's platform, because it's Clinton's fault for signing up to use the DNC's vendor's platform when the DNC's vendor's turned out to be insecure?  That's a bizarre ethical argument, and it also ignores that the Clinton campaign clearly has a potential claim for damage from the DNC's vendor, since the contract states that the vendor will follow industry best-practice standards for data security...and also kind of silly, since the Sanders campaign readily agreed to use the same vendor platform.

Plus they now have given the access back so they know they are wrong.

oh come on, you know that's not how political decisionmaking works.  You were complaining earlier that it isn't how the DNC's decisionmaking works.  Why is it a sign of corrupting and folding to pressure when they do something you dislike, and a recognition of moral virtue when they do something you do like?

The Sanders campaign was going through their own data when all of a sudden the firewall went down and got access to Clintons...but nope of course you are right only Sanders is to blame lol.

[Alcon]

The thing about this legal argument is that the contract was never terminated and neither the Sanders campaign nor NGP VAN has said that the contract was terminated. So I don't see how the 10 day notice applies.

I mean, the contract clearly lists the data services that were revoked as being provided under the terms of the contract (sections 1-4).  I'm no lawyer, but isn't knowingly terminating access to the services listed in the contract without terminating the contract a big ol' breach?

[Alcon]

The Sanders campaign was going through their own data when all of a sudden the firewall went down and got access to Clintons...but nope of course you are right only Sanders is to blame lol.

You neglected the whole part when the high-level campaign staffer accessed the data, apparently recognized what it was, and unless the access logs posted recently were misleading or fabricated, apparently began to save it to local folders, and at minimum continued to access additional data.  It's possible that NGP VAN's statement is more accurate than the logs (where are those from, anyway?).  But you haven't given a reason for why you believe that to be certainly true.

Obviously, Sanders personally isn't really to blame at all, and NGP VAN also deserves blame for leaving the door to their proverbial house wide open.  That doesn't mean that someone who walks in to that house and sees confidential documents strewn about is justified in looking through those documents and possibly photocopying them.

This is frustrating, because I understand how this software works, and I'm interested in talking about what a reasonable response from the DNC might be.  You seem entirely uninterested in talking about anything that might be unflattering to the campaign of the candidate of your choice, to the point where you seem to be avoiding discussion of totally intellectual valid questions.  Come on, dude.

[Ebsy]

The thing about this legal argument is that the contract was never terminated and neither the Sanders campaign nor NGP VAN has said that the contract was terminated. So I don't see how the 10 day notice applies.

I mean, the contract clearly lists the data services that were revoked as being provided under the terms of the contract (sections 1-4).  I'm no lawyer, but isn't knowingly terminating access to the services listed in the contract without terminating the contract a big ol' breach?

Section 6a:

I would imagine the NGP VAN would have a pretty strong argument that temporarily suspending access to Votebuilder falls under "all measures necessary" to protect Clinton's proprietary data in the case of a confirmed breach of this magnitude.

[Alcon]

The thing about this legal argument is that the contract was never terminated and neither the Sanders campaign nor NGP VAN has said that the contract was terminated. So I don't see how the 10 day notice applies.

I mean, the contract clearly lists the data services that were revoked as being provided under the terms of the contract (sections 1-4).  I'm no lawyer, but isn't knowingly terminating access to the services listed in the contract without terminating the contract a big ol' breach?

Section 6a:

I would imagine the NGP VAN would have a pretty strong argument that temporarily suspending access to Votebuilder falls under "all measures necessary" to protect Clinton's proprietary data in the case of a confirmed breach of this magnitude.

That's possible, although I'm not sure whether maintaining the terms of Clinton's contract can be a defense for breaching Sanders' contract.  Maybe the law allows for this if Sanders engaged in some abusive behavior, although I'm not sure how that claim would go, considering the contract doesn't seem to indicate that accessing data that was unintentionally made public is abusive.  Maybe there's a legal standard for that.  I have no idea, and I also know that probably nobody here does either, which is why it's weird* to see people so damn convinced that they know the DNC is being reasonable/insane here.

* - and by "weird" I mean totally predictable.

[Ebsy]

The Licensee, in this case the Sanders campaign, did not have permission to access third party (Clinton) data hosted by NGP VAN but knowingly did so. This seems like it might qualify as a breach of contract, but regardless, I'm sure the DNC has great lawyers and would have been able to hold this suit up in court for days had they wanted to. They obviously chose not to, but I don't think that particularly reflects on the merit of this petition.

[Alcon]

The Licensee, in this case the Sanders campaign, did not have permission to access third party (Clinton) data hosted by NGP VAN but knowingly did so. This seems like it might qualify as a breach of contract, but regardless, I'm sure the DNC has great lawyers and would have been able to hold this suit up in court for days had they wanted to. They obviously chose not to, but I don't think that particularly reflects on the merit of this petition.

Again, I'm no lawyer, but I read the agreement as a list of services the DNC promises to provide via VAN.  I don't see any reason to believe that access to items not included on that list constitute a breach of the agreement; none of the language indicates that the Sanders campaign is limited by the agreement.  That's not to say they aren't somehow -- I'm no lawyer® -- I just don't know how that would work with the way this agreement is written.