Lieberman's campaign to blame for website crash
Technical mistakes by Senator Joe Lieberman's re-election campaign team - not an attack by opponents - were responsible for the crash of his website on the eve of the August 2006 Connecticut primary election, federal investigators discovered. Lieberman's team implied supporters of Democrat challenger Ned Lamont might be …
This topic is closed for new posts.
Terminology Redefined
An alternative mean of "joe job", perhaps?
Mine's the one where the sleeves are too narrow.
There is a lesson for company and its IT here..
Stop blaming IT for everything ever!
Mines the one with "Bad Day" on it.
Al Qaeda R IN UR httpd.conf files!
Where's Rita Katz when you need her to save us!? My god, Al Qaeda were able to misconfigure Liebermans httpd.conf's file! If only Chertoff had been in control sooner, he could recruit engineers to defend against such cyber attacks.
(P.S. Is Wikipedia correct and Michael Chertoff the son of a Mossad agent?, or do we blame terrorists for that too? )
wrong direction of spin
I'd have thought it would have been more effective and potentially less damaging to claim that "Lieberman is so popular that the web-servers can't handle the load"
;)
Oh dear
More anti-semitism. Gets everywhere doesn't it, even down the tubes.
RE:Al Qaeda R IN UR httpd.conf files
"P.S. Is Wikipedia correct and Michael Chertoff the son of a Mossad agent?, or do we blame terrorists for that too? "
You owe me one new keyborde, as mine is now ruined when I spat coffee all over it.
"Is Wikipedia correct.." funnyest thing I have heard all week.
"or do we blame terrorists for that too" Na. Just hive mind incompitancy.
I'd like to see...
... this so-called "clear evidence" in the affidavit. It might shed light on the technical competence of the administrator to make such claims.
honest mistake
"We were told by our website administrator that there was clear evidence of an outside effort to disrupt our site"
I can certainly understand mistaking interest in your website for a denial of service attack.
Lamont was a douche, so if this "honest mistake" had any effect in the outcome of the election, it was clearly a positive one.
"honest mistake"?
Classic.
"clear evidence" when an investigation found none = sysadmin w/no shame
Clearly the sysadmin (probably jobless, by now) was the most savvy of the bunch ... and apparently that's none too savvy.
Can a politician of Likudman's "quality" make an "honest mistake"?
Didn't think so. And I'm not hiding behind an AC.
Mine's the one with the "No Fox News Guarding the Henhouse" button.
This topic is closed for new posts.
