Re: OT US Politics Again.

The Horny Goat  <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:12:15 -0700, Paul S Person
<psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>

Still probably a bad decision, though. But then, so was the private
server itself. When working for the gummint on gummint time one really
should use the gummint server. It might even be harder to hack than a
private server, who can say?

>
Perhaps, but Washington has the right to access a server they own at
any time they choose without a warrant.

This is true, but government-owned mail servers have a whole host of
requirements that come down from the DHS, from two-factor authentication
on down to particular header formats.  It's a major pain in the neck
(and it's why small governmental organizations will try and use
unauthorized mail servers whenever they possibly can).

One of the big deals is that email is considered a public record and
consequently needs to be archived.  Its not just that it can be accessed
by some other governmental organization, it all needs to be archived
in specific ways.  This is also a pain, but in the case of something
like the Clinton server in question it's also very important for
historical reference.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."