A new development in the scandal over Hillary Clinton's private email server means that this issue won't be going away any time soon:

Source

Hillary Clinton's private emails may be recoverable: Washington Post

The company that managed Hillary Clinton's private email server said it has "no knowledge of the server being wiped," indicating that tens of thousands of emails Clinton said were deleted could be recovered, the Washington Post reported on Saturday.

Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, and her aides have said she deleted her personal emails from her time as secretary of state, but unless the server has been "wiped" experts say those 31,000 emails could be recovered, the Post reported.

A representative of the Clinton campaign could not immediately be reached for comment on the report.

The controversy over her use of an unsecured private server to conduct government business while America's top diplomat has cut into her lead in opinion polls for the Democratic nomination to run in the November 2016 election.

Denver-based company Platte River managed the server.

"Platte River has no knowledge of the server being wiped," company spokesman Andy Boian was quoted as saying by the Washington Post. "All the information we have is that the server wasn't wiped."

Republican Senators Charles Grassley and Ron Johnson, chairmen of the Judiciary and Homeland Security committees, respectively, said they would push for the deleted emails to be reviewed if they can be recovered, the Post said.

On Tuesday, Clinton apologized for using a private server rather than the government system.

Clinton has said she sent no information via email that was classified at the time and received no material marked that way.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is examining the server to see whether any information, including classified information, was mishandled.

The State Department, under a court order, has been releasing more than 30,000 Clinton work-related emails in monthly batches.

(Reporting by Eric Beech; Editing by Grant McCool)

Understanding the gravity of the situation here requires some knowledge of how 'deleting data' works. Typically, when you 'delete' something, the data isn't actually erased immediately: the operating system just removes it from the user's view, and behind the scenes, marks the data such that it's no longer important and can be overwritten.

Overwriting is one way to make data difficult to recover. Some programs and operating systems have features that will deliberately write over deleted data. The Department of Defense recommends seven 'passes', or overwrites, to sanitize data on a storage medium. (And for added security, one should probably encrypt that data before deleting it.)

It's probably no surprise that a 67-year-old (or most people) wouldn't think of doing something like that.

So if these emails were to be recovered, their contents wouldn't be the only source of negative attention for Clinton--it'd be the lack of steps taken to actually secure that data.

Biden could get the nomination so easily.

i've never followed this e-mail scandal because i'm not voting for hillary anyway

if someone could give me a quick run-down, that would be cool

lol ggs hills

Now I'm no fan of Hillary, but it still confuses me as to why people are making a big deal out of her doing it when every Secretary of State that's proceeded her in the modern era has done the same thing.

Really? TBH I can't say I know about other Secretaries of State. A quick Google search brought up Colin Powell doing the same.

At least from what I know about computers, having a team of security specialists securing a network is much safer than having like, a small handful of people manage it (and probably only that one particular employee using the network). Most people, government officials included, usually aren't as informed or as diligent with computers as comp-sci majors, anyway.

But with Clinton at least, even if there wasn't classified information, she ran afoul of government transparency regulations. Her private server means that a lot of those emails probably weren't archived. While it will ultimately not cause much legal trouble for her, it's at least a distraction for essentially betraying the public's trust. And she's handled the situation horrifically poorly.

That's how I understand it, anyway.

Somebody is going to get their arse kicked

How are they not recoverable. Pnce sent online they can be recovered, even your hard disk has remains of info that you deleted.

How are they not recoverable. Pnce sent online they can be recovered, even your hard disk has remains of info that you deleted.

It's not like she was using friggin' Gmail. >.> But yeah, I elaborated in the OP how they're very likely to be recoverable.

Quote from: Fagcicle on September 13, 2015, 01:29:10 PM

Quote

It also needs to be stated that, according to other Government agencies outside of the state department, some of the information sent through the emails was not deemed classified at the time that it was sent - it's classification as such came later in her tenure, or even after the fact.

This really excuses nothing; if anything, it highlights why it's important to follow security protocols. If any other servicemember had done something similar (classified material via personal accounts or unauthorized means) they'd be in prison. And another huge concern is that she's been meticulously grooming her appearance and reputation for a presidential bid; deleting a swath of emails after a large controversy largely centered around her lies to the public was a strategic move to avoid further embarrassment.

The only problem is that if they weren't classified at the time, she technically didn't do anything wrong with them. Here in the US, I can't think of any legal cases where someone was retroactively punished for violating a future rule.

Not that I'm disagreeing with you, though.

The only problem is that if they weren't classified at the time, she technically didn't do anything wrong with them. Here in the US, I can't think of any legal cases where someone was retroactively punished for violating a future rule.

Not that I'm disagreeing with you, though.

I'm thinking anything she sends via official channels is at least considered privileged, which is an actual form of classification but is not under the 'classified' umbrella. Either way, the entire purpose of using a secure server and email service is to protect all information, especially when that information is subject to classification at a later date.

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on September 13, 2015, 04:04:47 PM

Quote from: Kupo on September 13, 2015, 03:55:41 PM

The only problem is that if they weren't classified at the time, she technically didn't do anything wrong with them. Here in the US, I can't think of any legal cases where someone was retroactively punished for violating a future rule.

Not that I'm disagreeing with you, though.

I'm thinking anything she sends via official channels is at least considered privileged, which is an actual form of classification but is not under the 'classified' umbrella.

That comes down to political jargon and what you want to consider any email sent by government officials.

It's really not; it's a universal system used throughout the government.

However, the fact is that people spouting out "She sent out classified info, send her to jail!" is just screaming rhetoric and has no idea about the entire process involving how our government works with classified material.

I really don't think anyone's calling for jail time, though it is a serious crime to have classified material on an unclassified or private network/server, and I actually do know how classified and privileged material works. The problem is that the Secretary of State is accountable to the public, and by using a private server she denied the public their right to a transparent government; she controlled what information she would or wouldn't release to the public when ordered to do so, ostensibly to avoid tarnishing her record while running for president.

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on September 13, 2015, 04:12:29 PM

I really don't think anyone's calling for jail time,

Here
Got 20k Here
And another
More

Oh. I kind of meant people that matter, like respected politicians or other secretaries. Right-wing nutjob sites aside, I suppose.

According to Clinton and the State Department, the latter has ever email that was turned over and are working to release them. And apparently, the emails that were 'wiped' can potentially still be retrieved.

Well if she deleted a bunch of emails, then the state department certainly doesn't have all of them, do they?

Yes, Clinton should not have used a private server. The bigger problem that this shows, aside from that, is the continued problem the government has regarding technology and the job they do with it. The fact that we continue to use email to share confidential information, despite continued worries over cyber attacks, is beyond stupid - and runs the risk of emails that are important never showing up (See: Powell)

I agree. The way we deal with classified information is archaic, but the increasing threat of cyber attacks really just reinforces the need for either more robust systems or low-tech alternatives.