Judicial Watch Releases Former Clinton Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin Deposition Testimony

a reply to: burntheships

Could it be that Platte River and Datto were actually the ones "delivering" the goods to foreign agencies ?

They had the whole ball of wax.

Hmmm.

Something we have not heard yet.

a reply to: burntheships

Yes indeed, I found the same thing. Lookie here at the invoice:



Why in the hell would they charge $19283.10 for "PR for Clinton email inquiries," and $25733.50 for "Legal activity re: Hillary Clinton..."

related:

Despite Boian’s statement that Platte River set up a 30-day revolving retention policy for Clinton’s emails, Johnson’s letter noted that Platte River employees were directed to reduce the amount of email data being stored with each backup. Late this summer, Johnson wrote, a Platte River employee took note of this change and inquired whether the company could search its archives for an email from Clinton Executive Service Corp. directing such a reduction in October or November 2014 and then again around February, advising Platte River to save only emails sent during the most recent 30 days.

Those reductions would have occurred after the State Department requested that Clinton turn over her emails.

...

“If we have it in writing that they told us to cut the backups,” the employee wrote, “and that we can go public with our statement saying we have had backups since day one, then we were told to trim to 30 days, it would make us look a WHOLE LOT better,” according to the email cited by Johnson.

The above bolded and underlined statement is another way of saying that they were instructed to delete data (emails) from the back up.

McClatchy

originally posted by: xuenchen

They had the whole ball of wax.

Yes, and it was not secure in the slightest.

The firms included Platte River Networks, a Denver-based firm that hosted her server; SECNAP, which sold her a firewall program known as CloudJacket SMB to detect hackers; and Datto, Inc., a cloud storage company that backed up Clinton’s emails in case her server crashed.

The companies, which are relatively unknown, have been described by some cyber security experts as odd choices for such a high-level public figure.

“I’ve never heard of SECNAP or CloudJacket SMB, which says a lot right there,” Michael Borohovski, CEO and founder of TinFoil Security, told Business Insider. “But the ‘SMB’ in ‘CloudJacket SMB’ means Small Medium Business, which Hillary Clinton is not.”

“She was evidently using the cheapest plan of this tool, which is a run-of-the-mill firewall to begin with,” Borohovski added. “If you’re Secretary of State, or running for President....

www.businessinsider.com.au...

As it stands, other sites are reporting that Russia indeed did hack her emails,
and to the extent of NATO now making cyber-security part of the agreements.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Yes, lookie at that!

Posting a few choice snippets here with lots more names.

InfoGrate CEO Tania Neild, the New York-based technology broker for millionaires who put the Clintons in touch with Platte River in 2013, invoked a nondisclosure agreement she had with her client when she declined interviews with the panel.

"I said, ‘Look, I have an NDA.'… and they left me alone," she said when reached by phone. Neild, however, gave over documents to the FBI.

Dennis Nowak, a lawyer for a fourth tech company involved in the server issue, Florida-based SECNAwouldn't say if they were answering the committee's questions. But he explained that electronic communications technology companies like theirs are governed by a law that imposes criminal and civil penalties for disclosing customer information.
www.politico.com...

a reply to: burntheships

Extremely suspicious.

A good "front" company.

And maybe they were the "Doorman" so to speak.

a reply to: xuenchen

Yep. And Datto admitted it was vulnerable to attack.

Tech firm running Hillary Clinton's email server ADMITTED it was vulnerable to hackers - as it emerges private system has been under attack from China, South Korea and Germany

A tech firm helping to run Hillary Clinton's contentious private email server warned that it was vulnerable to hackers - but nothing was done to protect it.

Datto, a small subcontractor which helped store Clinton's emails, warned its bosses that their systems needed extra security when a political battle erupted over the system this summer.

The company, which is more used to working with small businesses than politicians dealing with national security, tried to tell Platte River Networks that protection measures needed beefing up.
Warning: Tech experts dealing with Clinton's email affairs warned her server was vulnerable, it has emerged. She is pictured above this week on the campaign trail in Iowa
source

Mysteriously, afterwards they came up with 75 million dollars

“We don’t need this money to fund operations,” Datto CEO Austin McChord said. “We’ve been profitable since 2013. We’ll use this cash to make future investments in technologies and geographies, and we want to bring TCV into the fold.”

searchstorage.techtarget.com...

a reply to: burntheships

The timing couldn't have been more *Perfect* for that &75 million.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: burntheships

The timing couldn't have been more *Perfect* for that &75 million.

A wonder...that.

Going back a bit further, Datto in 2014 had acquired Backupify.

Datto is acquiring Backupify to expand backup and cloud disaster recovery capabilities. The companies play in different markets and back up different types of data. Terms of the deal were not disclosed, but Backupify has about 100 employees, while Datto has about 400. Together the two will have close to 2 million customers and 8,000 partners worldwide.
www.datacenterknowledge.com...

Somewhere in here there is the weakest of weak spots.

a reply to: burntheships

Now I wonder if Platte River was involved since 2009 ?

All the "official" accounts say mid-2013, after Hillary was out of office.

Hmmm.

And who there had the security clearances?

And I bet they have no federal contracts either.

a reply to: xuenchen

Her testimony is detrimental to Clinton as she contradicts a lot of what Clinton has stated.

a reply to: xuenchen


Going back to 2013, there were two backups for one.
Doublemint.

Backupify's proposition is that two clouds are better than one. Its service, available in the app stores for Salesforce and Google Apps, backs up enterprises' data from those SaaS, or software as a service, platforms in Backupify's storage bucket on Amazon S3. Each enterprise's data there is encrypted with a customer-specific key.


www.computerworld.com...

Aslo here: Second Clinton Backup
www.miamiherald.com...

Going back to 2009....

While that's certainly possible, it's far more likely her emails were hosted elsewhere. AP continues: "In November 2012, without explanation, Clinton's private email account was reconfigured to use Google's servers as a backup in case her own personal email server failed, according to internet records."

That sounds a lot like MX records. The way internet mail works is it finds where to send mail based on an MX record that's part of the domain name record. If mail can't be delivered to one named server (if the server at the domain or IP address is unresponsive for too long), a mail transmission is attempted to the next lower priority IP or domain in the MX record stack.

Along similar lines, AP describes an additional change in her configuration: "Then, in July 2013, five months after she resigned as secretary of state, Clinton's private email server was reconfigured again to use a Denver-based commercial email provider, MX Logic, which is now owned by McAfee Inc., a top internet security company."
www.zdnet.com...

Here is Justin Cooper again ( finally found it) with NO security clearance
...and more about Platte River.

Platte River took over management of the server from Bryan Pagliano, who had served as IT director for Hillary Clinton's unsuccessful 2008 presidential campaign and became an IT specialist in the U.S. State Department after Clinton was named secretary of state in January 2009.

Before that, the Post reported, the system was maintained by Justin Cooper, a longtime aide to Bill Clinton with no security clearance and no expertise in safeguarding computers.


www.crn.com...

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical


Why in the hell would they charge $19283.10 for "PR for Clinton email inquiries," and $25733.50 for "Legal activity re: Hillary Clinton..."

Also looks like those last two handwritten entries are
196 @ 250 and 149 @ 325 hourly.

Enormous fees....

So from my understanding,

The next question should have been:
"how did you come about this understanding? exactly how did you get this "understanding" in your mind? did someone tell you this? was this something that you decided on your own to understand? what did someone say to you or what did you read that caused you to come to this "understanding" in your own mind?
why do they let witnesses get away with such ambiguous answers as that without even trying to pin them down on the specifics, it`s like they aren`t even trying

obviously she wasn`t reading hillary`s favorite reciept for corn bread when she suddenly got this "understanding" do whatever criminal thing she did.

ATTENTION!!!

Now is the time to start throwing knock-out punches. Every thread that points out these catastrophic weaknesses in Hillary Clinton should be starred and flagged to the max. She is not qualified to be President of the U.S.A.. President of the local Kiwanis club...maybe. But NOT as the leader of the United States of America and the 320,000,000 people who live here.

a reply to: carewemust

The problem is, her "supporters" will be along shortly to do damage control. I bet we hear "this means nothing. She is totally innocent until proven guilty".

Thanks for reading the deposition and quoting the important sections for us to read. This has been a good thread so far. Let's see how it turns out for Hillary.

a reply to: burntheships

Those are either cheap legal fees or really expensive private IT consultant fees.

Out of all the possible security firms at her disposal and seemingly bottomless cash flow, her choosing a third rate small business firm is damning in itself especially when the companies concerns for her security were shared.

She risked and compromised national security so she can continue being the crook that she is.

The real question here is; how will our government respond to this? .....The world is watching.

a reply to: Rosinitiate

If I had to guess a larger more well known and larger business would most likely not have slipped under the radar like this one did. Secondly I wonder if they thought it would be easier / cheaper to "remove" evidence with the business they used. Bear in mind the firm they hired was told to delete the information and opted not to.

Maybe this IT company will be the patsy that takes the sword. Hillary can claim that they were the ones whi were hacked. I don't know, it just seems shady to use a small, unknown company to do your business with. I would to read their testimony about this situation.

And it's unusually quiet from the Hillary supporters in this thread. I thought for sure by now we'd be hearing about how this isn't anything new, wrong, damning, damaging, unusual, or suspect. Hmm.

originally posted by: rollanotherone
Maybe this IT company will be the patsy that takes the sword.

They saw that coming.

“Starting to think this whole thing really is covering up some shaddy #,” the employee continued. “I just think if we have it in writing that they told us to cut the backups, and we can go public saying we have had backups since day one, then we were told to trim to 30 days, it would make us look a WHOLE LOT better.”
www.politico.com...

And if people didn't know it then, they surely will know it now.
The Clinton's are like the creeping crud.