Posted by bad_luck on 5/5/2016 3:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 5/5/2016 3:37:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 5/5/2016 3:31:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 5/5/2016 2:36:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 5/5/2016 2:28:00 PM (view original):
How do you know the server wasn't encrypted and behind a firewall?
Do you know that is was?
And where do you think a server would be more secure, both physically and from a hardware/software/network security perspective? In a private home, or in a secure government facility?
I think it's safe to assume that her server was behind a firewall. I dont think anyone is worried about physical security. Chinese hackers aren't breaking into Clinton's house.
I'll admit that I'm not a networking and firewall expert, but I sit around 10 feet away from somebody who is. And I'm pretty sure that there's a difference between the firewall software you buy for $69 at Best Buy, and the firewall software that the federal government likely uses for the servers under their jurisdiction.
Can you provide any technical details about the firewall that Hillary used on her server? Or are you just pulling **** out of your *** with your assumptions?
You're also making assumptions.
I'm guessing that it's more likely than not that the ******* United States Secretary of State hired professionals to set up the server.
All guesses and assumptions, with no facts.
Let's try this: what do you think is more likely to be better secured: a server presumably set up by unidentified "professionals" at a private residence, or a server set up, hosted and supported at a federal government facility?