National's Budget leak documents 2019

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › National's Budget leak documents 2019

1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2248246 30-May-2019 10:09

GV27:

It. Wasn't. The. Budget. He wasn't given embargoed information with a clear embargo. Ask a PR person or journalist how embargoes work.

Treasury are the ones who made it publicly available, not Bridges.

Are you saying that as there was an exploit that left it open to the public, the 2019 Budget was therefore not embargoed?

GV27

5897 posts

Uber Geek

#2248253 30-May-2019 10:17

tdgeek:

Are you saying that as there was an exploit that left it open to the public, the 2019 Budget was therefore not embargoed?

"The Budget" itself that is being presented is a particular document. That isn't what National accessed and it's not being released until

These were documents that related to it, but did not form part of the formal 'Budget' that you see rolling off the printer (as is my understanding).

And then there's the issue of whether searching a website counts as using an 'exploit'.

I've just had a minor panic attack, given Treasury named a provider my office uses as being a source of suspicious queries. But it looks I checked from home as I have no history of going to the Treasury website.

The only reason I looked because I had a "Surely not" moment where I didn't believe it would be something so simple as a search on their own website. Nothing came up so I assumed that wasn't it!

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2248303 30-May-2019 10:30

GV27:

tdgeek:

Are you saying that as there was an exploit that left it open to the public, the 2019 Budget was therefore not embargoed?

"The Budget" itself that is being presented is a particular document. That isn't what National accessed and it's not being released until

These were documents that related to it, but did not form part of the formal 'Budget' that you see rolling off the printer (as is my understanding).

And then there's the issue of whether searching a website counts as using an 'exploit'.

I've just had a minor panic attack, given Treasury named a provider my office uses as being a source of suspicious queries. But it looks I checked from home as I have no history of going to the Treasury website.

The only reason I looked because I had a "Surely not" moment where I didn't believe it would be something so simple as a search on their own website. Nothing came up so I assumed that wasn't it!

Ok, I take the 2019 Budget and anything that relates to that as embargoed. Thats data is secret until its release on Budget Day by the M of F If its got stolen, lost, found, no matter how, its still secret and if it has been exposed, thats illicit. Otherwise how could they go after Assange, if the data he leaked is now not classified or secret anymore? And how he got it, is not his fault its securities fault. Stretch it more, if I burgled your house, its not my fault as the house wasnt secure, its your fault.

GV27

5897 posts

Uber Geek

#2248307 30-May-2019 10:34

tdgeek:

Ok, I take the 2019 Budget and anything that relates to that as embargoed. Thats data is secret until its release on Budget Day by the M of F If its got stolen, lost, found, no matter how, its still secret and if it has been exposed, thats illicit. Otherwise how could they go after Assange, if the data he leaked is now not classified or secret anymore? And how he got it, is not his fault its securities fault. Stretch it more, if I burgled your house, its not my fault as the house wasnt secure, its your fault.

Are you implying information available in a website search engine is somehow equivalent to something kept under lock and key?

Assange got classified information because someone inside gave it to him. He didn't hop on the CIA website and search for 'videos of extra-judicial killings'.

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2248311 30-May-2019 10:42

GV27:

tdgeek:

Ok, I take the 2019 Budget and anything that relates to that as embargoed. Thats data is secret until its release on Budget Day by the M of F If its got stolen, lost, found, no matter how, its still secret and if it has been exposed, thats illicit. Otherwise how could they go after Assange, if the data he leaked is now not classified or secret anymore? And how he got it, is not his fault its securities fault. Stretch it more, if I burgled your house, its not my fault as the house wasnt secure, its your fault.

Are you implying information available in a website search engine is somehow equivalent to something kept under lock and key?

Assange got classified information because someone inside gave it to him. He didn't hop on the CIA website and search for 'videos of extra-judicial killings'.

I'm implying that if a document is secret, its secret. If that document is acquired, its still secret. If a bug allows the data to be found its still secret. If a mistake is made allowing the data to be found its still secret.

GV27

5897 posts

Uber Geek

#2248313 30-May-2019 10:46

tdgeek:

I'm implying that if a document is secret, its secret. If that document is acquired, its still secret. If a bug allows the data to be found its still secret. If a mistake is made allowing the data to be found its still secret.

Yes, there is no getting around that at a plain and simple level. But people were quite happy to hold Bridges' leaked travel information against him when it suited.

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2248318 30-May-2019 11:01

GV27:

tdgeek:

I'm implying that if a document is secret, its secret. If that document is acquired, its still secret. If a bug allows the data to be found its still secret. If a mistake is made allowing the data to be found its still secret.

Yes, there is no getting around that at a plain and simple level. But people were quite happy to hold Bridges' leaked travel information against him when it suited.

I agree, dirty politics. On that issue I supported him, if he wants to travel around to build his party thats what he should do. I feel that if confidentiality is based on an IT function never failing that's a slippery slope IMO. The website misstep is just a simpler version of other accesses that just need a higher level of expertise, they are both holes, and IT by virtue of its complexity will always have holes, bugs, updates and so on

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

GV27

5897 posts

Uber Geek

#2248330 30-May-2019 11:18

tdgeek:

I agree, dirty politics. On that issue I supported him, if he wants to travel around to build his party thats what he should do. I feel that if confidentiality is based on an IT function never failing that's a slippery slope IMO. The website misstep is just a simpler version of other accesses that just need a higher level of expertise, they are both holes, and IT by virtue of its complexity will always have holes, bugs, updates and so on

That's true, but that's becomes an issue when the same people overseeing those sort of issues appear to be prepared to run to the police when they get caught on the hop instead of accepting that they might have to face the music.

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2248341 30-May-2019 11:33

GV27:

tdgeek:

I agree, dirty politics. On that issue I supported him, if he wants to travel around to build his party thats what he should do. I feel that if confidentiality is based on an IT function never failing that's a slippery slope IMO. The website misstep is just a simpler version of other accesses that just need a higher level of expertise, they are both holes, and IT by virtue of its complexity will always have holes, bugs, updates and so on

That's true, but that's becomes an issue when the same people overseeing those sort of issues appear to be prepared to run to the police when they get caught on the hop instead of accepting that they might have to face the music.

Fully agree on that. Fess up, minor issue, we move on with a minimum of ticking off, sh$t happens. Lie and BS will blow it out of the water. GR has asked for an enquiry, the one who decided lets BS and lie must be sacked

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2248344 30-May-2019 11:36

Treasury has accidentally (??) handed the Budget to reporters they thought were in the Treasury. Are Treasury employees permanent or are they all or mainly partisan employees? I wonder the real reason they handed them to reporters, conspiracy theory!

GV27

5897 posts

Uber Geek

#2248345 30-May-2019 11:38

tdgeek:

Fully agree on that. Fess up, minor issue, we move on with a minimum of ticking off, sh$t happens. Lie and BS will blow it out of the water. GR has asked for an enquiry, the one who decided lets BS and lie must be sacked

I'm not sure GR asking for an enquiry really cuts it here - there's significant questions over what he knew and what he was told when he issued his statement which strongly linked National to a criminal activity.

It feels like a conflict of interest but I don't know enough about governance to know whether he would be doing so to exonerate himself or it's just a can-kicking exercise and there is a more correct, better suited action.

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2248346 30-May-2019 11:41

I expect that ALL are involved in the enquiry, that includes the Givernment

It is apparently illegal and Simon was advised so

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/113111605/nationals-budget-leaks-go-against-security-agencys-advice-and-treasury-breach-was-unlawful-lawyers-say

Bluntj

556 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2248347 30-May-2019 11:41

Labour are so slippery nothing will stick. Amazing. On top of that Peters should be apologising or resigning or both.

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2248360 30-May-2019 11:45

Bluntj:

Labour are so slippery nothing will stick. Amazing. On top of that Peters should be apologising or resigning or both.

Yep, lawbreakers too

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/113111605/nationals-budget-leaks-go-against-security-agencys-advice-and-treasury-breach-was-unlawful-lawyers-say

There are three facets to this drama, just updating you

vexxxboy

4244 posts

Uber Geek

#2248362 30-May-2019 11:47

apparently, according to police , Treasury uploaded the leaked details to a clone website which could be accessed by anyone looking and up to 2000 hits occured of people looking at it . So there was no hack just stupidity by treasury staff and not knowing what they were doing.

Common sense is not as common as you think.

1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11