Interesting possibility.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Problems on Obamacare site look like the work of hackers: Letter
- Thread starter Crabtownboy
- Start date
thisnumbersdisconnected
New Member
Actually there is a sheriff someplace that thinks it is republicans just going to the site by the thousands trying to flood it.
Also, Syrians have hacked Obama's facebook, twitter and numerous email accounts telling him if he can spy on everybody, maybe they should spy on him
Also, Syrians have hacked Obama's facebook, twitter and numerous email accounts telling him if he can spy on everybody, maybe they should spy on him
It has already been testified before congress that the site has its own problems without any hackers at all. Boy this admin and its media minions will go to any length to avoid blame. How pathetic.
Actually there is a sheriff someplace that thinks it is republicans just going to the site by the thousands trying to flood it.
Also, Syrians have hacked Obama's facebook, twitter and numerous email accounts telling him if he can spy on everybody, maybe they should spy on him
Libyans must have hacked the President keeping him from sending anyone to go get our ambassador and the others while he slept in bed.
CTB - there are major problems with the three stories you posted links to. First, it's apparent none of them are written by people who know anything about web sites.
Second, none of them reference any technical experts; they only offer their own opinions on things.
For example, the first story from Fox - a web site counter counts how many times a web page has been visited. That means if you visit the site five times in one day trying to log on or create an account, the web site counter increases by 5. Remember how many people said they were having connection problems? How many times did they try to log into the site? Additionally, if there's a counter for each page of the site, you could visit 15 different pages while wading through the enrollment process, and the site would register 15 visits. Alternatively, if the web site counter isn't programmed correctly, it could be incorrectly counting the number of visits. Finally, the author is trying to make a link between number of visits and a "denial of service attack" -- and shows his ignorance in doing so. A denial of service attack is an automated feature using the "ping" command (that anyone can use from their personal computer) that keeps checking to see if a website is available until you stop the process; get enough people to "ping" a site, and you prevent others from being able to access it.
So there are plenty of answers as to the 10 million views, not necessarily hacking.
The second article claims to have been written by an "internet security consultant" -- but suspiciously missing is any evidence that hacking has occurred. This "internet security consultant" makes the case that because the Marine Corps website was hacked by the Syrian Electronic Army, and that Iran has been accused of hacking into the Navy computer (which, by the way, is another indication that this so-called "internet security consultant" isn't worth the money someone's paying him, because the Navy doesn't have a "computer"; they have "computers"--plural. There is no single Navy computer), well, then, someone must be hacking the Healthcare website.
The third article is closer; but still fails the test of proof. Because one website has proof of being hacked, doesn't necessarily mean another website is being hacked--especially when the second website isn't showing any signs of hacking, just signs of poor design and implementation--including security.
I'm not denying that it's possible that the site has been, or currently is being hacked. I'm denying these reports because they are opinion only, without evidence, and therefore are really nothing more than speculation designed to provide excuses for the failure of the Healthcare website.
Second, none of them reference any technical experts; they only offer their own opinions on things.
For example, the first story from Fox - a web site counter counts how many times a web page has been visited. That means if you visit the site five times in one day trying to log on or create an account, the web site counter increases by 5. Remember how many people said they were having connection problems? How many times did they try to log into the site? Additionally, if there's a counter for each page of the site, you could visit 15 different pages while wading through the enrollment process, and the site would register 15 visits. Alternatively, if the web site counter isn't programmed correctly, it could be incorrectly counting the number of visits. Finally, the author is trying to make a link between number of visits and a "denial of service attack" -- and shows his ignorance in doing so. A denial of service attack is an automated feature using the "ping" command (that anyone can use from their personal computer) that keeps checking to see if a website is available until you stop the process; get enough people to "ping" a site, and you prevent others from being able to access it.
So there are plenty of answers as to the 10 million views, not necessarily hacking.
The second article claims to have been written by an "internet security consultant" -- but suspiciously missing is any evidence that hacking has occurred. This "internet security consultant" makes the case that because the Marine Corps website was hacked by the Syrian Electronic Army, and that Iran has been accused of hacking into the Navy computer (which, by the way, is another indication that this so-called "internet security consultant" isn't worth the money someone's paying him, because the Navy doesn't have a "computer"; they have "computers"--plural. There is no single Navy computer), well, then, someone must be hacking the Healthcare website.
The third article is closer; but still fails the test of proof. Because one website has proof of being hacked, doesn't necessarily mean another website is being hacked--especially when the second website isn't showing any signs of hacking, just signs of poor design and implementation--including security.
I'm not denying that it's possible that the site has been, or currently is being hacked. I'm denying these reports because they are opinion only, without evidence, and therefore are really nothing more than speculation designed to provide excuses for the failure of the Healthcare website.
If the obamacare sight had actually been hacked that is a whole other indictment considering one must put very private medical info on there.
The presidents twitter account was hacked. Nothing to do with obamacare.
The presidents twitter account was hacked. Nothing to do with obamacare.
This is a very good point.
As to the New York state's site being hacked, maybe it has but it is not healthcare.gov site. New York has their own state run website. In fact, most state run sites are humming along just fine, it's the federally run ones that are defective.
I was going to post something similar to this. If the liberals are going to explain away the healthcare.gov web site problems as being hackers, that is not going to instill confidence in people wanting to sign upa nd post their personal information on there as well as their private health problems.
Actually Bush is doing it.
if it had been hacked that would have been the first excuse they would have pointed to.
"Libyans must have hacked the President keeping him from sending anyone to go get our ambassador and the others while he slept in bed."
Don't know, how do you hack a hack?
if it had been hacked that would have been the first excuse they would have pointed to."Libyans must have hacked the President keeping him from sending anyone to go get our ambassador and the others while he slept in bed."
Don't know, how do you hack a hack?
Good clarification; I mixed the two in my response to CTB.
-----
Anyone else remember when "hacks" drove yellow cars?