Comey Lied in His July 5th Exoneration Press Conference

Well, the FBI just released some more information from the email probe and it would seem that comey lied, yet again, when he said they were unable to verify if anyone gained unauthorized access to her secret server.

Here's what is in the new report (pg 140/229):

Based on redacted statements and log information, the FBI assesses redacted was accessed without authorization on january 5, 2013. It remains unknown how redacted credentials were compromised and if any information was exfiltrated from her inbox.

This is a pretty direct contradiction to his statement iirc.

a reply to: Dfairlite

Flynn set precedent so I am sure he will be charged soon right?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Maybe he didn't intend to lie?
It just happened when he opened his mouth.

a reply to: Dfairlite

This is a pretty direct contradiction to his statement iirc.

Can you refresh my memory about what Comey said?
Better yet, provide a direct quote.

a reply to: Phage

link no good ....
With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
Well, the FBI just released some more information from the email probe and it would seem that comey lied, yet again, when he said they were unable to verify if anyone gained unauthorized access to her secret server.

Here's what is in the new report (pg 140/229):

Based on redacted statements and log information, the FBI assesses redacted was accessed without authorization on january 5, 2013. It remains unknown how redacted credentials were compromised and if any information was exfiltrated from her inbox.

This is a pretty direct contradiction to his statement iirc.

It appears they are talking about an email account that was compromised. It says the account was hosted on the server, but does the server itself have to be compromised to access the account?

a reply to: MetalThunder

...also in question, from the third paragraph:

“...I have not coordinated or reviewed this statement in any way with the Department of Justice or any other part of the government. They do not know what I am about to say.”

I thought Stzrok (or somebody) helped draft the exoneration, ergo “coordinated,” right?...

Edit to add: www.fbi.gov... -a-personal-e-mail-system

a reply to: japhrimu

Why are these links not working now? I JUST was there...
I still have a working tab open... weird.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Dfairlite
Well, the FBI just released some more information from the email probe and it would seem that comey lied, yet again, when he said they were unable to verify if anyone gained unauthorized access to her secret server.

Here's what is in the new report (pg 140/229):

Based on redacted statements and log information, the FBI assesses redacted was accessed without authorization on january 5, 2013. It remains unknown how redacted credentials were compromised and if any information was exfiltrated from her inbox.

This is a pretty direct contradiction to his statement iirc.

It appears they are talking about an email account that was compromised. It says the account was hosted on the server, but does the server itself have to be compromised to access the account?

Yes
Next question

a reply to: japhrimu

These links show correct in text when going to edit, but for some reason, ATS won’t attach the end of the link... lemme try again...

www.fbi.gov... -a-personal-e-mail-system

a reply to: MetalThunder

Comey's statement is quite specific, "Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail domain." Because of the redaction, we can't determine if the compromised account was part of that domain. So there is some ambiguity.

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Dfairlite
Well, the FBI just released some more information from the email probe and it would seem that comey lied, yet again, when he said they were unable to verify if anyone gained unauthorized access to her secret server.

Here's what is in the new report (pg 140/229):

Based on redacted statements and log information, the FBI assesses redacted was accessed without authorization on january 5, 2013. It remains unknown how redacted credentials were compromised and if any information was exfiltrated from her inbox.

This is a pretty direct contradiction to his statement iirc.

It appears they are talking about an email account that was compromised. It says the account was hosted on the server, but does the server itself have to be compromised to access the account?

Yes
Next question

So if I access work-related emails at home with proper credentials, I am still compromising, or hacking, which was the term used, the server?

It does not look as though the server was hacked in this particular case. The email account was accessed without proper authorization, without access to the entire servers content.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Dfairlite
Well, the FBI just released some more information from the email probe and it would seem that comey lied, yet again, when he said they were unable to verify if anyone gained unauthorized access to her secret server.

Here's what is in the new report (pg 140/229):

Based on redacted statements and log information, the FBI assesses redacted was accessed without authorization on january 5, 2013. It remains unknown how redacted credentials were compromised and if any information was exfiltrated from her inbox.

This is a pretty direct contradiction to his statement iirc.

It appears they are talking about an email account that was compromised. It says the account was hosted on the server, but does the server itself have to be compromised to access the account?

Yes
Next question

So if I access work-related emails at home with proper credentials, I am still compromising, or hacking, which was the term used, the server?

It does not look as though the server was hacked in this particular case. The email account was accessed, without access to the entire servers content.

No , you are logging in to the email server.
Completely legit.
You are either playing naive or do not understand how an email (and email relay) servers work.
And I dont have time and space to explain

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MetalThunder

Comey's statement is quite specific, "Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail domain." Because of the redaction, we can't determine if the compromised account was part of that domain. So there is some ambiguity.

It had to be....
"Jeez , Louise...."
Research domains ( or MS forest and trees)
Domain is the legacy term.

a reply to: Gothmog

No , you are logging in to the email server. Completely legit.

So it wasn't a server hacking? They just accessed the email account, unauthorized of course?

You are either playing naive or do not understand how an email (and email relay) servers work.

I am not privy to all of the in and outs of email systems, but I understand the words being used.

It appears that Comey was correct and that in this case the server was not hacked. The email account itself was accessed without authorization. So the email account was hacked.

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Dfairlite
Well, the FBI just released some more information from the email probe and it would seem that comey lied, yet again, when he said they were unable to verify if anyone gained unauthorized access to her secret server.

Here's what is in the new report (pg 140/229):

Based on redacted statements and log information, the FBI assesses redacted was accessed without authorization on january 5, 2013. It remains unknown how redacted credentials were compromised and if any information was exfiltrated from her inbox.

This is a pretty direct contradiction to his statement iirc.

It appears they are talking about an email account that was compromised. It says the account was hosted on the server, but does the server itself have to be compromised to access the account?

Yes
Next question

So if I access work-related emails at home with proper credentials, I am still compromising, or hacking, which was the term used, the server?

It does not look as though the server was hacked in this particular case. The email account was accessed, without access to the entire servers content.

No , you are logging in to the email server.
Completely legit.
You are either playing naive or do not understand how an email (and email relay) servers work.
And I dont have time and space to explain

Unfortunately there are alot of self proclaimened enlightened geniuses around here playing really dumb the last few days.
You don't have to explain anything to them, it won't do you any good. Yesterday he was arguing about how the definition of the word Justice is completely different depending on if you are a Democrat or a republican...lol
BOOM😍

a reply to: Gothmog
I know what a domain is. I know that Clinton's server carried several domains. I don't know if the email account which was accessed was Clinton's personal email domain. I do know that Comey specified Clinton's personal email domain.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Gothmog
I know what a domain is. I know that Clinton's server carried several domains. I don't know if the email account which was accessed was Clinton's personal email domain. I do know that Comey specified Clinton's personal email domain.

You are correct and I think I am being to broad in my looking at this. It's not about the server.

Comey's claim was specific about the domain.

Accessing any account with stolen credentials is still a hack

Hackers mostly use one of two main ways to get access to your site—exploiting code vulnerabilities and stealing credentials of valid users. Taking advantage of code vulnerabilities takes specialized skills. So, while this still happens, it is not as popular as credential stealing.

Hackers would much rather use an easier and more reliable way to unlock a door into your site—taking over your users’ accounts. It is the most popular way to gain unauthorized access these days. According to the Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report (VDBIR) using stolen credentials has been the number one attack vector for web applications for the past two years.

Hacking Happens: Stolen Credentials

Saying someone accessing an account with stolen credentials does not necessarily mean they got access to the server is like saying you know someone was in your bedroom without authorization, but they weren't in your house.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Gothmog

No , you are logging in to the email server. Completely legit.

So it wasn't hacking? They just accessed the email account, unauthorized of course?

You are either playing naive or do not understand how an email (and email relay) servers work.

I am not privy to all of the in and outs of email systems, but I understand the words being used.

It appears that Comey was correct and that in this case the server was not hacked. The email account itself was accessed without authorization.

"There you go again"
How would you access your email on an email server without YOUR credentials ?
Your statement should not have made sense to anyone whatsoever .
The only way you could not log in on a personal device is if the company forbid it or you had to access an "intranet" to get there.

No , how else would you have accessed an email server (or relay) without credentials ?
Your credentials are stored on that EMAIL SERVER in that DOMAIN
And you HAVE to HAVE those BEFORE you ACCESS your EMAIL
So , yes , the authentication part is on the server .
Enough....