Lamont camp cleared in hacking of Lieberman Web site

[oberliner]

The U.S. attorney's office and state attorney general have cleared former U.S. Senate candidate Ned Lamont and his supporters of any role in the crash of U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman's campaign Web site hours before last summer's Democratic primary.

"The investigation has revealed no evidence the problems the Web site experienced were the result of criminal conduct," said Tom Carson, spokesman for U.S. Attorney Kevin O'Connor.

State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal confirmed the joint investigation "found no evidence of tampering or sabotage warranting civil action by my office." Both men declined to provide additional information, such as what might have happened to the site.

Calls to Lieberman went unanswered yesterday.

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/local/scn-sa-hackers2dec20,0,2766414.story?track=rss

[Marnieworld]

1. And I am sure an apology from the Lieberman people is coming

:sarcasm:

[AX10]

2. Sure it is...

:eyes:

[neverforget]

6. Right after we win in Iraq

[underpants]

3. OLD NEWS we already knew this

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/underpants/58

[Kelvin Mace]

4. But they managed to brand Lamont a villian

which was the whole point of the charge.

[Taverner]

5. Ahhh Rove's work pops up again

[GreenTea]

7. Lieberman used Karl Rove's lies & tactics...why not since Rove helped fund Lieberman's campaign....

[MethuenProgressive]

8. Was the Lieberman camp been cleared of hacking Lieberman site?

Lieberman (R) CT and Rove make a good team.

[Tesha]

9. What a $*(&@#^ shock. Gee. (NT)

[gratuitous]

10. Major media outlets all over this . . .

Whoops, guess not.

When the sensational, lurid charges were made in the white-hot atmosphere of the Democratic primary, no allegation, however absurd, was too far out there for CNN, AP, and other major media outlets to repeat and ponder over at length. Four months later, when it is confirmed that the whole thing was indeed a desperate bid for attention from a losing campaign, all you can hear are the crickets chirping.

[Judi Lynn]

11. You'd expect most grown men to be above this underhanded behavior.

Claiming that Senate seat must be more important to Liberman than his honor.

He learned already which Democrat was the one his state's party members wanted to fill it. He enlisted the lowest and scummiest people in this country to help him keep it.

[BrotherBuzz]

12. Wasn't Lieberman's Web page hosted on a budget web site with severe bandwidth issues?

My understanding was the system crashed because to many people visited it. This tends to happen close to the election, no? You get what you pay for.... :shrug:

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

14. Some of what was up:

There are bot programs out there that will try to find exploitable holes in website security, to get their hands on membership files. These bots will hit a website like you wouldnot believe. Also, if there is a blog, they will try to spam the blog with their ads. These bots spam the site with multiple, IP-Shifting hits a second, literally. When I say "multiple", I mean literally hundreds.

The site was running Joomla. One of the components installed on the site was "Community Builder", which handles membership, blogging and a lot more. Right after the "attack" Joomlopolis, the developers of Community Builder went into Full Panic, All-Developers-on-Deck mode. They issued statements to not use CB until they issued the new bugfix.

What I think happened was a bot attack, to try and get email addresses and spam the blog. It swamped the server and knocked it offline. Dan Gerstein and the others decided to make some political hay which, back at that time, was an attack run by "The Bulgarian Brothers" and was purely commercial in nature.

Why do I know that? Well, I am the webmaster of "World News Trust". We run Joomla and CB. We were also being hit by these same attacks and I knew what was going on, because I know how to read logs.

Lamont had nothing to do with this.

[Jim Lane]

18. Yes, Lieberman was paying $15 a month for web hosting.

The Lamont campaign was paying $1500 a month.

[BrotherBuzz]

19. BINGO, that is exactly as I remember reading it at the time

Like I said, you get what you pay for...:rofl:

[Crunchy Frog]

13. Has Lieberman been cleared in making false accusations

against his opponent's campaign?

I wonder if Lamont could sue for slander?

[Dr Fate]

15. You mean Lieberman (R?) lied about us good Democrats again? Tell me no!!!

n/t

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

16. Lieberman needs to answer for his slander and his slush fund

He and his camp slandered Ned Lamont by OPENLY accusing him of election fraud for hacking their site.

I'm still waiting to hear why Lieberman had HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS in unaccounted for petty cash during the election .

[Zhade]

17. Yep - his campaign defied federal election law on that $380,000.

Some of us clearly haven't forgotten that he broke the law.

[against all enemies]

20. Who will make him answer?

I can't stand that jerk but the Democrats are afraid of him, so are the Republicans, the people of CT just reelected him and he could give a rats ass about them now. The fact that he doesn't have to answer to anyone (other than his contributors) makes me sick.

[Lurking Dem]

21. Whadda shock.

:sarcasm:

He needs to issue a public apology. Not that I'll hold my breath.

[Cha]

22. What a toad lieman

is with his perpetual whining.