Donald Trump Is Running Some Really Insecure Email Servers
motherboard.vice.com
motherboard.vice.com
Hillary and every other politician, CEO, etc: "Can I get email at home?"
IT guy: "well, from a security stand point...(they hear blah, blah blah)...."
Them: "So, was that a yes? or should I find someone else that can?"
None of them give two shits how any of that stuff works including trump.
She knows that her personal server is insecure, and doesn't need to know how it works to understand that.
The point is that you don't send classified information over an insecure channel, allow non-cleared people access to a system/device that contains confidential information, and when found out, you most certainly go to extreme lengths to try and delete and cover up what you did.
Read the recent FBI documents that were released. She repeatedly ignored security protocol and forced those people around her to allow her to do so.
Whether or not she understands how Microsoft Exchange works is completely irrelevant.
Mind you, I'm not taking a position here on what Manning did, but rather on State's information systems management both before and particularly after Manning's data came out.
In the case of Clinton's email server, she appears to have taken no involvement (I debate whether to use the word "interest") to make sure it was "done right". Not understanding the technical details, perhaps, but making sure the people she hired did and did a correct job. I.e. running a proper organization.
She was not responsible for State's system being what it was when Manning did her thing (for her, inherited technical debt or whatever you want to call it), but she was the head of State for years afterward. Last I recall hearing/reading about those systems at State, a year or two ago, they were still a mess. Maybe I'm misinformed and/or out-of-date in this.
But these days, you can't say "I don't want to know the details" about your information systems and data management infrastructure. At a minimum, as an organizational head you need to ensure that they are being managed properly and securely.
And willful ignorance and rubber hosing suspects (figuratively, in prosecutions and the media; perhaps also otherwise) are not effective infosec.
The correct answer in this case would be "I guess you'll have to find someone else".
"Just following orders" is not an excuse, certainly not when national security is at stake.
That kind of reads like a wink and a nod, and a "Hey guys... fresh meat!" Don't get me wrong, it couldn't happen to a nicer person, but beyond that I'm not sure that I see the point of the article. They claim to be amazed, but surely if we've learned anything over this election cycle, it's that the worst systems you'll ever find are systems in use by people in government. AOL email (if you're lucky), and other issues have loomed large. Surely we still remember the state of the VA records system?
These are email servers mostly for Trump's private business.