Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Electronic Burglary in the Senate

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the breaking-and-entering dept.

Security 1391

earthworm2 writes "The Boston Globe is reporting that Republicans on the Senate judiciary committee have spied on confidential Democratic files for a year, studying their strategies and passing on the juicy bits to the media."

cancel ×

1391 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The goods (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055242)


Microsoft backs the Republicans.

Microsoft shares exploit with the Republicans.

Democrats get sodomized.

Fuhrer Bush and Reichstag Security Head Ashcroft smile.

You KNOW it's true because it's on slashdot!

Damn Republicans (5, Funny)

arodland (127775) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055244)

That's why I'm a... damn!

Re:Damn Republicans (1, Offtopic)

Ricdude (4163) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055413)

Green? Libertarian? Reform? Independent?

Power corrupts.

Electronic Burglary (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055245)

Electronic Burglary. What's it all about? Is it good, or is it whack?

Re:Electronic Burglary (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055303)

Of all the (probably) automated first post scripts, this must be the most boring one.

Here's a good suggestion:
Slashdot should automatically grab the text of the linked site, and use the contents as a first post. That way, we'll maybe save some poor soul's bandwidth as well as we get rid of the lame fp kiddies.

ELECTRONIC BUGGERY IN THE SENATE?!?! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055255)

Oh, wait...

W@tergate ?? (3, Funny)

supersnail (106701) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055256)

W@tergate ??

You are not funny. Please go away. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055337)

If you're going to make inane comments, please do so as an anonymous coward. Your shame rubs off on the rest of us registered users.

I haven't had my caffeine this morning... (3, Funny)

gekkotron (641131) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055264)

So I misread that as "Electronic Buggery in the Senate".

/. favoratism!!! (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055330)

Note that an anonymous coward posted this joke prior to paren't post, yet parent received a +1 funny, and the a/c hasn't received moderation. a/c should have +1 funny, and this should be marked redundant.

KTHXBYE.

Re:I haven't had my caffeine this morning... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055346)

IS THIS WHAT YOU WERE DREAMING ABOUT?

*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_
g_______________________________________________g_ _
o_/_____\_____________\____________/____\_______o_ _
a|_______|_____________\__________|______|______a_ _
t|_______`._____________|_________|_______:_____t_ _
s`________|_____________|________\|_______|_____s_ _
e_\_______|_/_______/__\\\___--___\\_______:____e_ _
x__\______\/____--~~__________~--__|_\_____|____x_ _
*___\______\_-~____________________~-_\____|____*_ _
g____\______\_________.--------.______\|___|____g_ _
o______\_____\______//_________(_(__>__\___|____o_ _
a_______\___.__C____)_________(_(____>__|__/____a_ _
t_______/\_|___C_____)/_DEAN_\_(_____>__|_/_____t_ _
s______/_/\|___C_____)__SUCKS|__(___>___/__\____s_ _
e_____|___(____C_____)\_ASS__/__//__/_/_____\___e_ _
x_____|____\__|_____\\_________//_(__/_______|__x_ _
*____|_\____\____)___`----___--'_____________|__*_ _
g____|__\______________\_______/____________/_|_g_ _
o___|______________/____|_____|__\____________|_o_ _
a___|_____________|____/_______\__\___________|_a_ _
t___|__________/_/____|_________|__\___________|t_ _
s___|_________/_/______\__/\___/____|__________|s_ _
e__|_________/_/________|____|_______|_________|e_ _
x__|__________|_________|____|_______|_________|x_ _
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_


YYAAAAAARRRRHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

Re:I haven't had my caffeine this morning... (1)

NSash (711724) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055357)

Close enough to the truth, in this case.

Re:I haven't had my caffeine this morning... (3, Funny)

phorm (591458) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055391)

Not that likely. After all we have this seperation of church and state...

Twisted with grains of truth it is, but let the mods judge its worthiness we shall

Confidential files (4, Funny)

stanmann (602645) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055267)

If the files were supposed to be confidential, shouldn't they have been protected?

And if the Republicans are hackers doesn't that mean we should be supporting them??

Since information wants to be free and all.

Re:Confidential files (5, Insightful)

shaka999 (335100) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055341)

If I leave the door to my house unlocked it isn't an invitation for people to come in. It may be dumb but anyone coming in is still trespassing.

Re:Confidential files (5, Insightful)

wwest4 (183559) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055376)

not everyone on /. adheres to that juvenile interpretation of the hacker ethos.

besides, this isn't the same. if you correctly interpret the 2600 definition of hacking, the GOP folks should have disclosed the security vulnerability, not exploited it for their own benefit.

Re:Confidential files (4, Insightful)

Lordrashmi (167121) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055453)

According to the article, the Republicans claim to have informed the Democrats about it along time ago. However, the Democrats say they were never told.

Since both parties are stinkin liars, I don't think you can believe either story.

Re:Confidential files (5, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055435)

Since information wants to be free and all.

Source code wants to be free (or so thinks 95% of the /. readership -- disclaimer: I'm part of that 95%), but I think you'd take an entirely different approach when you start talking about private memos.

If I access your computer and steal your private journals or letters to your sweetheart and leak them to the media is that "freeing information"? And don't go saying that they deserved it because it wasn't password protected (according to the article the techie neglected to put a password on the documents) -- if I steal handwritten letters to/from your sweatheart out of an unlocked filing cabinet does that make it ok?

The truely disgusting part about all of this is that the "Liberally-biased media" (in the eyes of Fox News and all the Conservative pundits) probably won't even pick up on this -- think we'll be seeing this on CNN or MSNBC anytime soon? I doubt it. Imagine the uproar if the Dems got caught doing something like this....

Re:Confidential files (1)

Krapangor (533950) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055462)

And if the Republicans are hackers doesn't that mean we should be supporting them??

They might be script kiddies.
But we will soon see whether the democrats' website gets defaced by r3pvbl1|4|\|Z leader 45|-|cruv7.

buttsex (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055269)

I like buttsex, receiving that is.

Patriot Act (5, Insightful)

mkarolow (527474) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055271)

Let's see how they like "terrorism" charges brought aginst themselvs.

Re:Patriot Act (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055421)

Whether the memos are ultimately deemed to be official business will be a central issue in any criminal case that could result. Unauthorized access of such material could be punishable by up to a year in prison -- or, at the least, sanction under a Senate non-disclosure rule.

WTF? Skylarov was probably looking at more than that for just demonstrating security flaws, not exploiting them like in this case.

Oh yeah, I forgot, the new computer security/terrorist/fear laws don't apply to those making them.

In other news... (0, Funny)

Hiro Antagonist (310179) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055273)

it is confirmed that Nixon will be replacing Cheney as Bush's running mate in the upcoming elections...

Re:In other news... (1)

puff the barbarian (709196) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055331)

Umm, Richard M. Nixon has passed away...

Okay, well, maybe he can still run, I don't know.

Re:In other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055386)


+1, Amazing Grasp of the Obvious

Re:In other news... (2, Funny)

Hiro Antagonist (310179) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055402)

"Umm, Richard M. Nixon has passed away..."

Which means he's in a more stable condition than Cheney. And likely more photogenic to boot.

Re:In other news... (1)

R.Caley (126968) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055423)

Umm, Richard M. Nixon has passed away...

That's what he says, but who is going to believe him?

(This does seem to be tyhe most vacuous news story for a loooong time: ``Politicians are dishonest: Film at 11'')

Obligatory Futurama Quote (1, Offtopic)

Joe the Lesser (533425) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055428)

Nixon: Oh no? Well listen here missy. Computers may be twice as fast as they were in 1973. But your average voter is as drunk and stupid as ever. The only one whose changed is me. I've become bitter and lets face it, crazy over the years. And when I'm swept into office, I'll sell our childrens organs to zoos for meat, and I'll go into peoples houses at night and wreck up the place! MWUHAHAHAHAH!

Re:In other news... (1)

glenrm (640773) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055451)

Except that he is dead and he got us out of Vietnam and into China so let him rest in peace ok?

Pubbies (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055277)

What? The pubs are finally playing the game?

Dodgeball (0, Flamebait)

CGP314 (672613) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055278)

Republicans on the Senate judiciary committee have spied on confidential Democratic files for a year

Why bother? They are all on the rich kids' team anyway.


--
In London? Need a Physics Tutor? [colingregorypalmer.net]

American Weblog in London [colingregorypalmer.net]

WTF! (1, Interesting)

Scott Lockwood (218839) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055280)

Didn't a republican president resign over things like this? How much do you want to bet we'll just roll over and tollerate this, rather than procecuting the people responsible.

It's okay to spend $$44 million dollars on a multi year witch hunt to find nothing more than a stain on a dress. Why can't we spend the same amount to investigate THIS administration, and the cronies in the congress who support them?

Re:WTF! (4, Insightful)

finkployd (12902) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055418)

I don't remember anyone going to jail when Clinton illegally pulled the FBI records of some 500+ Republicians...

Not that it makes this right, but let's face it, since Watergate this kind of stuff has been happening with both sides and nobody has been punished yet.

Finkployd

Let's call it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055282)

ComputerGate and lets's start the impeachment trial today :)
I was going to call it BillGate but I thought nobody would get it ;)

No, let's call it (1)

Theatetus (521747) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055389)

Gatewaygate.

you know they are both doing it... (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055283)

Is this is a surprise? Both sides are doing the same thing. The problem is that the media, for the most part, is pro-liberal and will report spin on any story that favors non-republicans.

Move along.

Re:you know they are both doing it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055295)


Both sides are doing the same thing.

You can back up that claim?

Re:you know they are both doing it... (1)

tomdarch (225937) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055434)

No, of course (s)he can't. Just like the lie of 'liberal media bias' can't be proven.

Re:you know they are both doing it... (1)

garcia (6573) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055457)

of course the AC can't. If you read the comment and understood what it said you would have realized that he closed that option...

"The media is pro-liberal and puts spin on any story to make the non-republicans look bad."

That would mean that there is no proof out there (accessable to the general public) that would back any claim that the liberals are doing it too.

Re:you know they are both doing it... (1)

finkployd (12902) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055471)

Ummm, yeah. Filegate. Remember? Clinton somehow ends up with 500+ FBI records of Republicians. It wasn't THAT long ago...

Finkployd

Re:you know they are both doing it... (1)

Rydia (556444) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055469)

So, we have an investigation by the senate sergeant-at-arms with 120 interviews, plus the admissions by prominent republicans [washingtontimes.com] that it happened (though not that they had anything to do with it) in one corner. In the other corner we have you making the statement that this is a) commonplace and that b) the liberal media is out to get the poor republicans.


So, uh, I guess my question is, what manner of magic have you obtained to give you such insight into congress? And, perhaps, a bonus followup, how can you in your right mind say there's a liberal media when no one is calling the president on his story in the runup to Iraq, the felonous ouster of a CIA operative, and the continued stonewalling of the 9/11 commission (which, heck, is even headed by a republican).

But the Patriot Act says that it's legal! (5, Funny)

Trigun (685027) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055284)

After all, the Democrats were against the war, and thusly terrorist sympathizers!

We are exactly 20 years off on our calendar.

Re:But the Patriot Act says that it's legal! (4, Interesting)

jabber01 (225154) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055361)

The Patriot Act also says that hacking is an act of domestic terrorism.

Oh, the conundrum!

Re:But the Patriot Act says that it's legal! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055443)

have you actually read the patriot act or do you just believe any hyperbole you read about it because you so want it to be true to fulfill your dystopian fantasies?

Can you say (1)

shystershep (643874) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055286)

Watergate, anyone?

Seriously, though, it'll be interesting to see if this is just a case of an overzealous intern and an incomptent tech, or if there is more to it.

"strategy" (1)

magarity (164372) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055287)

So far, the Deomocrat's judiciary strategy has been to not allow nominations to come to the floor for a vote. What's the secret?

Re:"strategy" (1)

jd142 (129673) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055321)

And considering the Repubs did the same thing to Clinton's nominees, it should hardly come as a surprise.

Re:"strategy" (1)

magarity (164372) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055416)

considering the Repubs did the same thing to Clinton's nominees

It's all very cute to say this but it just isn't true. From the Senate Judiciary committee [http://www.senate.gov/~judiciary/oldsite/ogh06260 1fair.htm]:

How did we accomplish the confirmation of 370-plus Clinton judicial nominees? Well, for one thing, I held prompt hearings on many nominees. For example, 20 Clinton judicial nominees received a hearing within two weeks of their nomination. Thirty-four Clinton judicial nominees received a hearing within three weeks of their nomination. And 66 Clinton judicial nominees received a hearing within a month of their nomination.

Re:"strategy" (1)

JordanH (75307) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055466)

You both have it wrong, the Dems can't block the nominees from reaching the floor, they just aren't getting a vote on the floor due to filibuster.

The Republicans blocked the Clinton nominees from getting out of Committee, but there always was an up or down vote in the Committee.

Re:"strategy" (1)

nelsonal (549144) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055403)

The Juicy bits are in the form of the level of influence certain organizations have over which nominees come to the floor for a vote, and the exact wording of why certain nominies should not. Leaking that to the media, gives those organizations a bloody lib, if you will.

Burglary? (3, Interesting)

JZ_Tonka (570336) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055296)

If the common sentiment here is that copying files isn't stealing, then how is what the Republicans may or may not have done considered burglary?

Trespassing? Perhaps. Spying? That's a stretch. But BURGLARY?? This looks more to me like Michael once again using inflammatory headlines to push his well-known anti-Republican agenda on the readers of Slashdot.

Mod me down if you don't like what I'm suggesting, but really folks, think about it for a minute.

Re:Burglary? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055388)

Trespassing? Perhaps. Spying? That's a stretch. But BURGLARY??
Think about what you're saying for a minute, and compare it to the following:

"Assault? Perhaps. Murder? That's a stretch. But HARASSMENT??"

Burglary is perhaps the least inflammatory word that could be used to describe the allegations here! By your statement, you'd rather have seen the Republicans accused of spying as opposed to burglary...

Re:Burglary? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055410)

The order had nothing to do with the severity, but the appropriateness of the charges. Exactly what was 'stolen' here?

Re:Burglary? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055393)

Thought about it. Concluded you're a fucking retard. Go home fucknugget republican shithead.

Re:Burglary? (1)

rotomonkey (198436) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055408)

Trespassing? Perhaps. Spying? That's a stretch. But BURGLARY??

I'm sure further investigation will help determine whether any laws were broken (the knuckleheads left the files unprotected, after all), but at the very least, the Republican staffers' behavior was highly unethical. Considering that the staffers are part of the system that makes sure justice is being properly served, it's very disappointing.

Re:Burglary? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055414)

Don't worry, you just issued the "Mod Me Down" clause. Your +5 Insightful will be granted shortly, thank you, drive through.

Re:Burglary? (1)

happyfrogcow (708359) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055429)

If the common sentiment here is that copying files isn't stealing, then how is what the Republicans may or may not have done considered burglary?

It seems your statement is based on copying music files. I think the sentiment is that sharing music is unjustifiably restricted (by cost or otherwise).

In my opinion, copying files in general, if they do not belong to you, and they were not intended to be viewed by you is stealing. Accessing the computer they came from without being given permission is trespassing.

Jail the creeps. They were trusted and broke our trust.

Re:Burglary? (1)

FuzzyDaddy (584528) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055467)

push his well-known anti-Republican agenda on the readers of Slashdot.

Are you saying this is not outrageous? Do you think that this consitutes acceptable behavior on the part of lawmakers? Surely the difference between "copying files", as in copying a copyrighted song, is different from "copying files", as in, using unauthorized computer access to find out what your political enemies are talking about.

If you really think this is OK, I guess Bush has failed pretty badly in his attempt to "change the tone in Washington"

Mark my words... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055299)

"Hackergate." The media will be eating it up. Well, except for Fox News ;)

Wow! (3, Insightful)

DRUNK_BEAR (645868) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055300)

Can we call that a SECURITY FLAW!!

"A technician hired by the new judiciary chairman, Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, apparently made a mistake that allowed anyone to access newly created accounts on a Judiciary Committee server shared by both parties -- even though the accounts were supposed to restrict access only to those with the right password."

This is actually scary news for Americans!

Re:Wow! (1)

wwest4 (183559) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055470)

> Can we call that a SECURITY FLAW!!

many (probably most) vulnerabilities could ultimately be classified as configuration mistakes.

admins should be allowed to make mistakes from time to time. not auditing periodically to find them is harder to excuse.

Clueless... like a fox (4, Interesting)

RobertB-DC (622190) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055302)

As the extent to which Democratic communications were monitored came into sharper focus, Republicans yesterday offered a new defense. They said that in the summer of 2002, their computer technician informed his Democratic counterpart of the glitch, but Democrats did nothing to fix the problem.

While it sounds like the Dems' tech guy is missing his distro of Clue, I wonder... what if he/she left the backdoor open on purpose?

Here's a scenario:

1. Repo tech tells Demo tech about security problem.
2. Demo tech realizes that any security breach could bite the Repos in the butt if discovered.
3. Optional: Tech tells Demo leadership about the plan.
4. Demo tech keeps an eye on traffic through the breach, letting the Repos pull info until...
5. ... they get caught with both hands in the honey pot.

Step 3 is optional because it assumes cluefulness on the part of political leadership, which I wouldn't want to assume. But there are some tech-savvy members of Congress (surely!) who might understand the honeypot concept.

Re:Clueless... like a fox (5, Insightful)

Wingchild (212447) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055383)

Step 3 is optional because it assumes cluefulness on the part of political leadership, which I wouldn't want to assume. But there are some tech-savvy members of Congress (surely!) who might understand the honeypot concept.

I worked down in the Pentagon for two and a half years. I thought I had a really good grip on political machinations, having read a lot of polysci theory and having always been marginally decent at manipulating people. When I got down to Arlington I realized that the political power players are like sharks in a vast tank full of guppies.

I couldn't even believe the level of shit that people were capable of doing, willing to do, and doing every day to advance their careers and positions. A clever honeypot trick like this wouldn't be a wondrous masterstroke to top off someone's career - it'd be a move executed before they finished breakfast!

Sometimes I'm really upset by our divisive and angry Two Party System; it seems like nothing ever gets done. Other times I am very, very grateful that the government is not one gigantic unified son of a bitch, because then all those manipulative, controlling and totally evil tendencies would be aimed squarely at me.

Having clearly marked opponents gives them something to aim for and exert their energy upon.

heh. (5, Interesting)

Wingchild (212447) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055306)

In DC, this is called `Business As Usual`.

Skip from this incident of Republicans spying back to the years during the Clinton White House, wherein the FBI was found to have pulled confidential files on tons of prominent Republicans and provided that information (quite illegally).

Quick link to info on Filegate [judicialwatch.org]

Quick summary for people who don't remember 1998: "[There was a] class action suit on behalf of the more than 900 Bush and Reagan appointees and possibly others whose FBI files were unlawfully obtained by the Clinton White House. Louis Freeh, Director of the FBI, has admitted that there was an "egregious violation of privacy without justification."

It goes around, it comes around, Watergate wasn't the first time, and this isn't the last time.

Politics.

feh.

Criminal (4, Interesting)

Albanach (527650) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055312)

In the UK, this would be a breach of the computer misuse act and could land them with a jail sentence.

In the US, however, doesn't this make them terrorists and entitled to a free, one way, all expenses paid trip to Cuba? [navy.mil]

Digital Commandments (4, Funny)

Bighph (655499) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055444)

Thou Shalt not be suprised when the documents saved in a public share show up the the Wall Street Journal.

It's the Dem's fault (4, Funny)

L. VeGas (580015) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055319)

Further investigation reveals that the Democrats were using Usenet for their correspondence.

Well it was about time... (1)

Yoda2 (522522) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055322)

...that "Deep Throat" re-enter the popular vernacular.

Re:Well it was about time... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055468)

I don't know about you, but it's always been rather popular around my parts.

political P2P downloading (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055332)

It's called political P2P downloading.
What is the jail term for that? Really?

National news here it comes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055336)

This could very well be the next Washington fiasco.

Unfortunately, congress can't seem to do anything, particularly with respect to policing itself ...

Should have used DRM! (4, Funny)

ewg (158266) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055347)

They should have used Digital Rights Management:

Ideological opponents: ( ) Allow (+) Deny

Grr! (4, Funny)

CaptainAlbert (162776) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055348)

Stop spoiling my well-ingrained stereotype of republicans as slack-jawed rednecks who couldn't crack into a nut, let alone a computer! How can this be? :)

Sweet merciful crap! (1)

ArmenTanzarian (210418) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055349)

I try not to post anything about my political beliefs on Slashdot, I find it to be -1 Offtopic. But seriously, they really need to go down for this one.

Sounds familiar (1)

Waltan Hammett (694698) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055350)

A leak through Robert Novak that benefits the White House agenda?

This sounds just like the Valerie Plame deal. And that leak was supposedly from high-level White House officials.

Very curious where this leads. It could actually be a Watergate...

Way to go GOP! (3, Insightful)

WIAKywbfatw (307557) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055351)

Preach one thing, practise another!

Tell everyone that you're all for fair play, an even playing field for everyone but then read other people's confidential memos to gain an unfair advantage. How sleazy is that?

I wonder what Republicans who thought Bill Clinton getting a blowjob was worthy of impeachment have to say about Senators and their staffs committing crimes punishable by up to a year in prison?

That will teach them (1)

cflorio (604840) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055352)

That will teach them not to lock down their 802.11b access point!

Pure Politics (1)

glenrm (640773) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055354)

Is this salon.com now? Give me a break this is a stupid story, guess all you hackers and crackers should support the Republicans now, and there should be plenty of cries of how stupid the Dems are for not securing their own files and using Windoz etc.

Wow (0, Redundant)

techsoldaten (309296) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055363)

Wow, what do you say about this? Watergate, anyone?

Considering the Patriot Act has made most of the crimes that occured in the Watergate affair a legal activity, this smacks of someone bending the rules a little too far in their favor. Who is watching what these people are up to these days?

you should elect me (1, Troll)

theMerovingian (722983) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055369)

i teh s3n4t0r

Don't blame the tech! (1)

NinjaPablo (246765) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055371)

It probably didn't help that several of these people most likely had post-it notes on their monitor saying "Username pleahy Password republicanssuck12"

RIAA where are you? Dems should have... (2, Funny)

FerretFrottage (714136) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055373)

told the RIAA that there were GOPs sharing music in Senate. That would have gotten them all sued and surely lead to a decline of unshared online documents.
It is believed that the Gops used a new p2p network called "Democrapster"

They had to (2, Funny)

Omni Magnus (645067) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055375)

They had to do it. The Democrats are a threat to national security. Heck, many of the voted against the Patriot Act.*

*note: This is sarcasm.

Hubris! (1)

tomdarch (225937) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055378)

I heard an analysis recently of Tyco/Enron/Martha that was along the lines of "Power and success leads to hubris. That hubris leads one to think that they are above the rules or that one thinks that (s)he can get away with things." With the White House, House and Senate in their clutches, there's just a bit of hubris among most of the Republicans.

It also seems important to point out the irony of this kind of illegal activity among members of the JUDICIARY committee.

Finally, even with this secret information, the Republicans still had to stoop to some really sick stuff - remember Protestant Orrin Hatch acusing Catholic Richar Durbin of anti-Catholic prejudice? Or other ultra-whitey Republicans acusing Democrats of racism? Crazy. This reminds me of Watergate - Nixon was solid going into the election, but he couldn't resist going that extra bit and got into this sort of illegal 'dirty tricks'.

not surprising... (1)

zasos (688522) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055380)

I'm not surprised that they are spying on each other...
I am surprised that it get's into the press...
I am dissapointed that it doesn't get into the press more often...
but there isn't much you can do when the parent company of an "independent" and "free" paper has an agenda that should not be published then it will not be published

I'm also curiouse about "behind the scenes" of this story - who own Boston Globe (all the parent and related corps.) and where the involeved senators are from, who supports them financially, and how they vote, etc.

Don't do it (1)

patternjuggler (738978) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055385)

Inserting 'gate' into the short hand term for a new political scandal automatically robs that scandal of any real importance.

Unethical Repubs discover Democrats also unethical (2, Funny)

mc6809e (214243) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055404)

Hmmm, Republicans use unethical means to determine Democrats also unethical.

File this under: double plus obvious, tell us something new.

Hmmm (1)

jav1231 (539129) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055409)

First, BG just endorsed Kerry. Second, it would appear that tracing this back to Republicans in general is hardly the case. On the other hand, who among us given an open share wouldn't view a tantilizing document. I have a good friend who was a sysadmin at a firm. While restoring data onto a laptop he "came across" a document outlining his co-workers salaries. It cost him his job, event though this was (as I recall) a document that he needed to restore for this user. His downfall was mentioning to the exec he was doing this for.

"I don't reveal my sources." (2, Insightful)

Aexia (517457) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055411)

Novak declined to confirm or deny whether his column was based on these files.

"They're welcome to think anything they want," he said. "As has been demonstrated, I don't reveal my sources."


At least he's consistant in enabling criminals. A Bush administration official got Novak to blow the cover of a CIA operative involved in stopping WMD proliferation and Novak won't reveal his source in that case either. Whatta patriot!

as I've said for some time now (3, Insightful)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055415)

they are all corrupt.

Interesting how we are supposed to trust a government that doesn't trust itself, eh?

Gah. I'm moving to Emland. It's a small island off the coast of your imagination. Right next to the Citgo, across the street from the Chinese takeout/wireless internet cafe/pizzaria/gas station/home depot/Publix.

Bah.

Really the technician's fault? (3, Informative)

GillBates0 (664202) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055424)

A technician hired by the new judiciary chairman, Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, apparently made a mistake that allowed anyone to access newly created accounts on a Judiciary Committee server shared by both parties -- even though the accounts were supposed to restrict access only to those with the right password.

That's about all the article says about the "glitch" that occurred, presumably due to human error. At first I thought the account was probably M$ Windows related, since it is would be harder with Linux/UNIX to "accidentally" create accounts which were accessible to anybody.

But then, the technician could have done anything stupid like assigning the easily guessable password across to all accounts. Or who knows, maybe they were using a database system or other software which created accounts on top of the OS.

A little more information about the OS/software in use would certainly shed more light on who was actually responsible for the glitch...instead of blaming it outright on the technician.

what did you expect? (0)

xutopia (469129) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055425)

them to act like little fairies?

You can't have it both ways. (2, Insightful)

Bill_Royle (639563) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055427)

It's funny - if this was Diebold with the insecure files, most here would think it was ok as it might expose some "truth."

Since the Republicans did it, it's a travesty.

Go figure.

Pentagon (1)

savagedome (742194) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055430)

Atleast this burglary in their own (political) backyard should make them think twice with the SERVE voting system that Defense Dept is so keen on accepting [cnn.com]

Slashdot covered [slashdot.org] the SERVE story earlier.

Clueless media (4, Insightful)

andy1307 (656570) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055439)

a computer glitch [reference.com]

A technician hired by the new judiciary chairman, Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, apparently made a mistake

That wasn't a computer malfunction. The computer and the software worked exactly like the way they were supposed to work.

In other news, the sun rose this morning (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055441)

(No, not Sun Microsystems stock!)

Seriously, given the political leanings of the Boston Globe is it any doubt they claim it's the Republican's killing firstborn children and all?

Kinda balances out what the Washington Times says about the Democrats.

Old News (3, Funny)

pyite69 (463042) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055446)


This story is appalling, but also ancient. Let's
bring it back out closer to election time, though,
when it is again relevant.

Oh big deal.... (1)

ellem (147712) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055461)

I mean it's not like the Republicans were downloading music or anything.

Hrm (1)

BenBenBen (249969) | more than 10 years ago | (#8055472)

"There appears to have been no hacking, no stealing, and no violation of any Senate rule," Miranda said. "Stealing assumes a property right and there is no property right to a government document. . . "
Since when does unauthorised access to a computer system not count as "hacking"? And if there's no property right on a government document, what's to stop any old citizen walking into the OEOB and taking whatever they feel like?

one word (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8055474)

Censure
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>