It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. House committee chairman asks Justice Department to prosecute Platte River Network’s CEO

page: 2
31
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 12 2017 @ 06:03 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Yes, thanks for understanding my typo.

I was able to backtrack to the congressional hearings
and found Jim Jordan's questioning former director
James Comey.

jordan.house.gov...

Looking back on that, knowing what we know know,
some things seem more obvious....like how the entire
investigation was set up to protect all those who broke laws...




posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 04:44 PM
link   
This is an interesting PRN email that is part of the evidence on the House Oversight .gov site.

oversight.house.gov...

More about the PRN Hearing Sept. 2016.

Examining Preservation of State Department Records



edit on 6/20/17 by BlueAjah because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

Yeah, they knew that being asked to modify the back up schedule would end up deleting items which should have been preserved. They also knew that they could be facing questions on who ordered what when.

Not the end of that emails also says, "Maybe it's now time to start reading some of their emails. LOL. Maybe not..."

In other words, they had access to the emails and could, at any time, retrieve data that only people with proper clearances should be able to access.

I sure hope something comes of this because if you or I were ever to act in this manner, I am certain we would be facing serious repercussions.



posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 05:56 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Yep - it looks like many people at PRN had access to the emails.


We are trying to tighten down every possible security angle on this customer. It occurs to us that anyone at PRN with access to the Datto Partner Portal (ie, everyone here) could potentially access this device via the remote web feature. Can we set up either two-factor authentication, or move this device to a separate partner account, or some other method (disable remote web altogether?) to allow only who we permit on our end to access this device via the internet?


This email was from August 2015. Even if they did manage to tighten it, how many people had access to it before that? And how many still had access after that?

oversight.house.gov...



new topics

top topics
 
31
<< 1   >>

log in

join