Obama Weak On Security & Asking For Help - Actual Proof

Obama campaign seeks Web site security help

Two months after its Web site was hacked by a Hillary Clinton supporter, Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign is looking for a network security expert to help lock down the site. The job requirements posted on Barack Obama.com are pretty much what you'd expect in any help-wanted ad for an online security position: VPN and Unix or Linux experience, plus a "deep understanding" of the LAMP stack of open-source software. And, of course, applicants must be willing to "respond off-hours to high-urgency security situations." Some security researchers said that this is the first time they can remember seeing a Web security job advertised by a political campaign. But even if security jobs aren't always advertised openly, online security is a top priority for political campaigns, said Henry Poole, a co-founder of CivicActions LLC. "Maybe it's just an issue of the Obama campaign being more transparent," Poole added. And with much of the money he has raised coming via the Internet, security is arguably more important to Obama than it has been to any of the other presidential candidates.

ComputerWorld.com

It's happening already.
This clearly demonstrates three things about Obama,
1, he did not prepare himself sufficiently and properly.
2, he is so inexperienced he doesn't understand the arena he is entering.
3, he is extremely complacent with respect to security

How did he allow this to happen?

He clearly let his guard down and now he is scrambling and being reactive to fix something that should have been "priority one" from the very beginning.

Let's face it folks, he is not prepared to be a leader.
Being charismatic is not enough.

Sure, this may just be a web site that is being attacked, but this can also be taken as a sign.

If Obama is elected, will my country soon suffer the same fate as his web site?


[edit on 17-6-2008 by Alxandro]

So, your core argument is because he is working to boost his online security he is weak on security.

Oh shut up.

reply to post by Alxandro


So, let me get this straight... You think that because a Hillary Clinton supporter broke the law and hacked Obama's website, that says something about him and his ability to be the president? Interesting theory.

That's kind of like saying that if someone's identity gets stolen, they're not prepared to take the job of a bank manager.... Yeah, kind of completely unrelated.

1. I seriously doubt that Obama himself had anything to do with website security. That's not his job and is quite a different job, in fact, than running the country. I think we were ALL unprepared for the barrage of attacks, Internet and otherwise, that he would be under. Surely you're not saying that a criminal attack is the fault of the victim, are you?

Further, I think it's pretty responsible for him to advertise for the job. I hope he gets the best there is. He apparently needs it.

2. I don't believe computer and website experience is required to be the president. So, the experience issue is really moot. Besides, IF computer experience is required, John McCain is REALLY in trouble! - Source

3. I have no idea where you get the idea that Obama is "extremely complacent" with security. He hired someone to do a job and a criminal from his opponent's campaign hacked his website. I suppose if you had a security system installed in your house and someone managed to break through it, it would be your fault because of how "extremely complacent" you are about keeping your family safe?

I think the conclusions you draw are FAR OUT to say the least.

And as regards your title"Obama Weak On Security & Asking For Help", in my opinion, if you're weak on something the VERY smartest thing you can do is ask for help from someone who can help. So, since Obama is NOT a computer security professional, I think the right thing for him to do is ask for help from someone who is.

[edit on 17-6-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]

You are wrong in so many ways. It's not Obama's job to be a network security expert. His job is to hire a proficient network security expert to do the job for him. A good leader doesn't have to know everything. A good leader KNOWS that he can't excel at everything and makes sure he gets the right people around him to support the effort.

I don't support Obama at all...but I certainly don't see network security knowledge being a prerequisite for the Presidency.

reply to post by Zepherian


Oh, touchy, touchy,
...must be a sensitive issue.

My point is he doesn't have all his corners covered because of is inexperience.
What is wrong with preparing for the worse and hoping for the best?

In his case he is expecting the best and won't be able to cope with the worse, and neither will his gullible Kumbaya singing followers.

If we get attacked who will he turn to for help?
It's obvious he has not thought of that.

I guess on the job training is OK with you.

reply to post by Alxandro


Touchy touchy? No, genius, your post is total BS.

Do you even understand how government works? Do you think it is just Obama making the shots? NO. That is what a cabinet is for. That is what advisers are for.

Can we please stop it with the posting of this crap??

Originally posted by Zepherian
So, your core argument is because he is working to boost his online security he is weak on security.

Oh shut up.

i agree with you, the title is classic FOX NEWS/NEOCON fear-mongering jargon. heard it in 2000, 2004, and it's unimagative and old....hhhmm...sounds like one of the 2008 presidential canidates

[edit on 17-6-2008 by jimmyx]

...So you expect Obama to be an expert in web security, something even many people with degrees in computer science can't do?

Either you're very, very ignorant, or you're just trying to smear Obama now. I hate the guy, but give me a break. Hate him for the right reasons.

reply to post by Alxandro


Bill gates once had his credit card information stolen.

The culprit used this information to order Viagra and have it shipped to Bill Gates' house.

Now what is Bill Gates' profession??
Do you think BIll Gates is inexperienced with computers?

Story here

This is just another pointless thread aimed at attacking Obama because the neo-cons have nothing better to argue about.

Obama has them on issues
so they attack his skin color/religion/network infrastructure.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

So, let me get this straight... You think that because a Hillary Clinton supporter broke the law and hacked Obama's website, that says something about him and his ability to be the president? Interesting theory.
...
And as regards your title"Obama Weak On Security & Asking For Help", in my opinion, if you're weak on something the VERY smartest thing you can do is ask for help from someone who can help.

So, since Obama is NOT a computer security professional, I think the right thing for him to do is ask for help from someone who is.

You're missing part of the point and most of the analogy

I know he is not an internet security expert and doesn't need to be one to be an effective President, but when you are as popular as he is, you should expect attacks from all directions.
He should have been proactively prepared for this one, but wasn't.

Yes I agree he should surround himself with the best and most experienced folks, if at least to slap him upside the head when he does something stupid, but my point is should have done this months ago.

Will he have this same lackadaisical attitude about security as President?

How do you proactively prepare for a hacker?

Do you know that many technology experts say that there is no un-hackable database
there is no un-hackable firewall?

Why do you think firewalls need updating?
why do you think virus scanners need updating?

How can you "prepare" for an internet attack, when the attack that happens tomorrow, will be 100% different from the attack that happened yesterday.

In this day and age, Obama, or his staff, should have thought of that, but it's like saying, "McCain sucks at contingency planning, since he ran out of gas on the highway!"

Just to clarify, I am not an american citizen and have a fair bit of distance and neutrality regarding the elections. I was acting a bit touchy, and the keyword is acting, because I don't like loaded and biased political spin that are based on nonsense.

Had the accusation been against McCain I would have probably posted the exact same thing. If you wan't to take sides in an election and help said side, at least have some coherent arguments, not this circular rhetoric that came out of nowhere and is going right back there.

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin


Maybe the fact that it's about a harmless "web site" makes this of no significance, but there is nothing harmless about the word "attack".

I will be the first to agree that there is no such thing as a "hack proof" site, but I'm curious to know just how secure his site was originally, before the proposed beef up.

I have a real problem if he said "Just give me a web site, any old web site will do."

Whether it pertains to a web site or a country, I just hope he now realizes the importance that security can not and should not be taken lightly!

Call it a fear tactic if you want, but what do you say if what's warned about happens?

I'll cut the boy some slack but will there be any future irony from this harmless analogy?
It may be months or years from now, but I sure would hate to come back here and say I told you so.

Originally posted by Alxandro
I'm curious to know just how secure his site was originally, before the proposed beef up.
...
I have a real problem if he said "Just give me a web site, any old web site will do."

These statements indicate that you have no idea how careful he was or how much work he did to insure a secure website, yet your conclusions in the first post have him unprepared, inexperienced and complacent, when there's really no indication of any of that.

I'll cut the boy some slack

Did you really say that?

You do know the pentagon has been hacked several times right? So when it's a republican administration it's a pretext for more security funding and possibly a crackdown on internet usage, but when it's a democrat it's a sign of weakness?

This whole thread is pointless, just admit it and move on. He hired a webmonkey, hurrah.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I know there is some level pettiness in the topic of this thread, but I bring it up only in the name of security.
Also mainly because it's always the little things that most people choose to ignore, yet hold so many clues.

...and yes I said/posted that. I did so only because of his inexperience.
Anyone who knows me can tell you I say it regularly. Plus, compared to McDaddyCain he is a boy.

reply to post by Alxandro


Sorry, my comment was a bit snippy, but Obama is younger than I am and I wouldn't think to call him a boy. He does seem to have a refreshing "youth" about him, though.

These guys must be getting desperate because this is the most inane thread atacking Obama I have seen yet.

reply to post by Alxandro


I really don't like Obama at all but, I don't think that his Online security has anything to do with his bodyguards. I'm sure most candidates throughout this election has had a problem with online security. So lets not rush to conclusions.