Posts Tagged ‘BlackBerry’

Google braced for Brussels penalty over abuse of market dominance

June 7, 2018

EU expected to make regulatory intervention against Google’s business model

EU’s Vestager to escalate battle with tech group by ruling Android device maker terms illegal

Image may contain: one or more people and closeup

Rochelle Toplensky in Brussels

Brussels is preparing to hit Google next month for abusing its dominance through the Android mobile operating system, concluding the most important of a trio of EU antitrust investigations into the company.

Margrethe Vestager, the EU’s competition commissioner, is poised to announce the negative finding within weeks, according to people familiar with the case, marking the most significant regulatory intervention made against Google’s business model.

A penalty is expected in the Android case, but its size is unclear. The commission is empowered to impose fines of up to $11bn — which is 10 per cent of the global turnover of Google’s parent company Alphabet — but typically decisions are at the lower end of the range.

The decision will mark an escalation of the commission’s battle with Google, which began eight years ago with an investigation into comparison shopping, then only a narrow part of online commerce. Though that case concluded with a €2.4bn fine, it has not led to significant changes to Google’s business.

Image may contain: one or more people
A third investigation is under way into whether the company unfairly banned competitors from websites that used its search bar and adverts.

Android is the operating system used in more than 80 per cent of the world’s smartphones and is vital to the group’s future revenues as more users search on their mobile gadgets.

The European Commission investigation concluded that the US group imposed illegal terms on Android device makers, which harmed competition and cut consumer choice.

By contrast with the comparison shopping case, the Android case takes aim at a core part of Google’s strategy over the past decade: using its mobile operating system as a platform to push smartphone adoption of its search engine and smartphone app store.

Google denies wrongdoing but has seen no sign of the commission dropping its concerns or seeking a settlement to the case.

The Android case is the most commercially sensitive of all its battles with the commission, since it touches on business practices that have helped cement its position in the mobile search and advertising market.

When it unveiled its charge sheet against Google in 2016, the commission alleged that Google imposed licensing conditions for Android that favoured Google products and apps, such as Chrome and Google Play.

Phonemakers were also prevented from running competing operating systems based on the Android open-source code, and the company offered financial incentives for exclusively pre-installing Google Search on phones.

The commission argued the behaviour consolidated Google’s dominance in general search, hampered the ability of rival mobile browsers to compete with Chrome and hindered the development of other operating systems, which it worried would reduce consumer choice and stifle innovation.

When she announced the charges in 2016, Ms Vestager said: “We believe that Google’s behaviour denies consumers a wider choice of mobile apps and services and stands in the way of innovation by other players, in breach of EU antitrust rules.”

In November 2016, the company replied to the accusations and argued that Brussels had misunderstood the market when it did not include Apple as a rival to Android.

“The commission’s case is based on the idea that Android doesn’t compete with Apple’s iOS,” Google said in a statement by Kent Walker, its general counsel. “We don’t see it that way. We don’t think Apple does either. Or phonemakers. Or developers. Or users.”

EU enforcers excluded Apple as a competitor because its iOS operating system is not available to be licensed on rivals’ smartphones.

Google dismissed regulators’ concern that pre-installed and bundled Google apps — such as search and Chrome — lock out rivals, arguing that competition is only a download away. It also said it must control the software and provide basic apps to ensure Android works smoothly on different phones and tablets.

The company unveiled Android in 2007 as an open system to challenge closed systems including iPhone, BlackBerry and Nokia as a way to ensure Google’s services and ads did not lose out as internet use went mobile.

The European Commission and Google declined to comment.

Brussels is considering if the changes made to Google Shopping are sufficient to fix its concerns.

Additional reporting by Richard Waters


Go deeper: Inside Facebook’s newest data privacy black eye

June 5, 2018

Facebook faces a raft of new criticisms in the wake of a New York Times story about the social network’s program of sharing user data with smartphone makers.

Why it matters: Critics of the company in Congress and the media are piling on Facebook and framing this story as “Cambridge Analytica II.” But industry insiders are questioning the import of the new revelations, since device makers are a unique and trusted class of “third party” data users — and also since there’s no evidence of actual misuse of data this time around.


Image result for mark zuckerberg photos

Be smart: Interoperability is what makes tech products and apps work. Facebook argues that the data access it afforded hardware partners allowed them to “recreate Facebook-like experiences” on their devices. In other words: This was simple software integration, not nefarious data poaching.

Yes, but: Facebook is already winding down the partner programs under which these data integration efforts operated — so they couldn’t have been that essential.

The FTC angle:

  • The Times story also suggested that Facebook’s data sharing with device makers may have violated the company’s 2011 consent decree with the Federal Trade Commission.
  • Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ), ranking minority member of the House energy and commerce committee, has called on the FTC to review the question.
  • The agency is already reviewing Facebook’s actions in the Cambridge Analytica scandal after allegations that it violated the consent decree.

The bottom line: Everything Facebook does with data is now coming under a microscope, and instead of getting out ahead of this story, the company just allowed itself to take another black eye.


 (Did Zuckerberg Lie To Congress?) (New York Times)


Facebook: New Accusations of Lies About Data Sharing Prompt Corporate Push Back

June 4, 2018
Company defends data-sharing pacts with device makers including Apple and Samsung

Image may contain: one or more people and phone

Hannah Kuchler in San Francisco and Tim Bradshaw in Los Angeles

Facebook has denied there were any privacy problems with sharing user data with partners including Apple, Amazon and Samsung, responding to a report that it exposed users’ personal information to more than 60 device makers.
The world’s largest social media network sought to defend itself against another potential privacy scandal after The New York Times reported on Sunday that data of users and their friends could be accessed by makers of smartphones and tablets under longstanding data-sharing partnerships with Facebook. This included information on religious and political leanings and data from users who had asked not to have it shared with third parties.

Image may contain: 1 person, closeup

Facebook said it was unaware of any misuse of the data and that the vast majority was stored on people’s own phones, not on a company server. Ime Archibong, vice-president of product partnerships, said these partnerships were “very different” from the social media company’s relationships with third-party developers, where it has apologised for not properly policing how data were used.

He stressed that the data were used to help people access Facebook on their devices and that the company supervised the process. The partnerships were started in the days before the Facebook app was readily available on smartphones, when it was more difficult to access the social network on mobile devices.

“These partners signed agreements that prevented people’s Facebook information from being used for any other purpose than to recreate Facebook-like experiences. Partners could not integrate the user’s Facebook features with their devices without the user’s permission,” Mr Archibong said. “And our partnership and engineering teams approved the Facebook experiences these companies built.”

Sandy Parakilas, a former Facebook employee turned critic of the company, said on Twitter that the data partnerships appeared to directly contradict the testimony of Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, to Congress. Mr Zuckerberg had said that Facebook had stopped users being able to share their friends’ data in 2015, when it had stopped third-party developers from accessing data from users’ friends.

Facebook said the partnerships did not contradict Mr Zuckerberg’s testimony.

Image may contain: 8 people, crowd

Facebook’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, at a Senate hearing in April. The company gave at least 60 phone and other device makers access to large amounts of user data. Leah Millis/Reuters

The report could mark a setback for Facebook, which has been trying to prove itself a trustworthy custodian of user data since the revelations about a massive data leak to Cambridge Analytica. The data analytics group that worked for the Trump campaign was able to obtain data on up to 87m Facebook users from Aleksandr Kogan, a Cambridge professor, who collected it mainly from the friends of users who completed a survey.

Facebook is under scrutiny around the world. The US Federal Trade Commission is investigating whether the company has broken its privacy agreement with the regulator, and politicians including the UK parliament are pushing for the company to answer more questions on how it protects user data.

Facebook said it began shutting down the data-sharing partnerships in April, the month after the Cambridge Analytica revelations, as it reassessed how it was sharing user data across the board. But it said few people were making use of the feature because it is now so easy to access Facebook via an app from an Apple or Android app store. Some 22 of the 60 partnerships have been ended so far.

Apple said the data sharing was focused on items that users intended to post, such as a picture, and only after they gave their express consent. Apple added that Facebook was not able to download any data in bulk or beyond what the user gave permission for.

Amazon, Blackberry and Samsung did not respond to requests for comment.

The New York Times Broke the Story:

 (Did Zuckerberg Lie To Congress?)



Facebook Gave Device Makers Deep Access to Data on Users and Friends

June 4, 2018

Facebook may have lied to Congress about data sharing…

The company formed data-sharing partnerships with Apple, Samsung and dozens of other device makers, raising new concerns about its privacy protections.


Image may contain: 1 person, closeup

As Facebook sought to become the world’s dominant social media service, it struck agreements allowing phone and other device makers access to vast amounts of its users’ personal information.

Facebook has reached data-sharing partnerships with at least 60 device makers — including Apple, Amazon, BlackBerry, Microsoft and Samsung — over the last decade, starting before Facebook apps were widely available on smartphones, company officials said. The deals allowed Facebook to expand its reach and let device makers offer customers popular features of the social network, such as messaging, “like” buttons and address books.

But the partnerships, whose scope has not previously been reported, raise concerns about the company’s privacy protections and compliance with a 2011 consent decree with the Federal Trade Commission. Facebook allowed the device companies access to the data of users’ friends without their explicit consent, even after declaring that it would no longer share such information with outsiders. Some device makers could retrieve personal information even from users’ friends who believed they had barred any sharing, The New York Times found.

Most of the partnerships remain in effect, though Facebook began winding them down in April. The company came under intensifying scrutiny by lawmakers and regulators after news reports in March that a political consulting firm, Cambridge Analytica, misused the private information of tens of millions of Facebook users.

In the furor that followed, Facebook’s leaders said that the kind of access exploited by Cambridge in 2014 was cut off by the next year, when Facebook prohibited developers from collecting information from users’ friends. But the company officials did not disclose that Facebook had exempted the makers of cellphones, tablets and other hardware from such restrictions.

“You might think that Facebook or the device manufacturer is trustworthy,” said Serge Egelman, a privacy researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, who studies the security of mobile apps. “But the problem is that as more and more data is collected on the device — and if it can be accessed by apps on the device — it creates serious privacy and security risks.”

In interviews, Facebook officials defended the data sharing as consistent with its privacy policies, the F.T.C. agreement and pledges to users. They said its partnerships were governed by contracts that strictly limited use of the data, including any stored on partners’ servers. The officials added that they knew of no cases where the information had been misused.

The company views its device partners as extensions of Facebook, serving its more than two billion users, the officials said.

“These partnerships work very differently from the way in which app developers use our platform,” said Ime Archibong, a Facebook vice president. Unlike developers that provide games and services to Facebook users, the device partners can use Facebook data only to provide versions of “the Facebook experience,” the officials said.

Some device partners can retrieve Facebook users’ relationship status, religion, political leaning and upcoming events, among other data. Tests by The Times showed that the partners requested and received data in the same way other third parties did.

Facebook’s view that the device makers are not outsiders lets the partners go even further, The Times found: They can obtain data about a user’s Facebook friends, even those who have denied Facebook permission to share information with any third parties.

In interviews, several former Facebook software engineers and security experts said they were surprised at the ability to override sharing restrictions.

“It’s like having door locks installed, only to find out that the locksmith also gave keys to all of his friends so they can come in and rifle through your stuff without having to ask you for permission,” said Ashkan Soltani, a research and privacy consultant who formerly served as the F.T.C.’s chief technologist.

Read the rest:


After Disgusting Remarks About Women From Donald Trump Are Revealed, WikiLeaks Makes Public Hillary Clinton Hacked Emails That Reveal Her Inner Thoughts, Views on Wall Street, Goldman Sachs, Middle Class, Poverty

October 8, 2016

BBC News

US election: Donald Trump sorry for obscene remarks on women

Media captionTrump apologises for lewd comments and vows to be a “better man”

US presidential candidate Donald Trump has apologised for obscene comments about women he made in a newly released videotape from 2005.

Mr Trump said that “these words don’t reflect who I am… I apologise”.

In the video, Mr Trump says “you can do anything” to women “when you’re a star” and brags about trying to grope and kiss women.

Top Republicans condemned the comments. His election rival Hillary Clinton called them “horrific”.

“We cannot allow this man to become president,” sheposted on Twitter.

Mr Trump’s 90-second statement on Saturday morning appeared to be his first full apology in a campaign laced with controversial remarks.

“I’ve said and done things I regret,” he said. “Anyone who knows me knows these words don’t reflect who I am. I said it, I was wrong, and I apologise.

“I’ve never said I’m a perfect person nor pretended to be someone I’m not. I pledge to be a better man tomorrow.”

However, he also tried to deflect the impact by attacking former President Bill Clinton.

Analysis – BBC North America reporter Anthony Zurcher

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks at a town hall-style forum in Sandown, New Hampshire.

Image copyright AP

Donald Trump has often found himself in hot water for public comments he’s made about women over the years. It turns out he’s said lewd and disparaging things in private as well. Go figure.

The videotape release comes at a most inopportune time for the Republican nominee, who was trying to use his running mate’s well-received debate performance on Tuesday to reboot his campaign after a week of distractions and controversy. On Wednesday he told a local news interviewer that his previous offensive comments about women – which have dogged his campaign since the first Republican primary debate last August – were made for the “purpose of entertainment”.

That explanation doesn’t fit with the boorish, newly married Trump shown on the video privately boasting about his efforts to seduce a married woman and have his way with whomever he pleases.

Now Mr Trump will enter Sunday’s debate with a new cloud hanging over his candidacy. It’s almost certain that one of the town hall participants will ask him about it. There may be no easy way to respond – but Mr Trump will have to find an acceptable answer. If he bungles it, nothing else he says during the 90-minute debate will matter.

“Bill Clinton has actually abused women, and Hillary has bullied, attacked and shamed his victims.

“We’ll discuss this in the coming days,” he said. “See you at the debate on Sunday.”

The second TV debate between Mr Trump and Mrs Clinton will take place on Sunday evening in St Louis.

Mr Trump recently said he would not bring up stories about Bill Clinton’s infidelities in the debate, after previously threatening to do so.

The latest opinion polls suggest Mrs Clinton is pulling ahead in key battleground states and Mr Trump will need a good performance at the debate to slow the trend.

‘I moved on her’

In the video, posted by the Washington Post, Mr Trump is heard bragging to TV host Billy Bush about trying to have sex with a married woman as well as kissing and groping others.

The clip was part of unaired footage of an Access Hollywood segment ahead of Mr Trump’s appearance on the soap opera Days of Our Lives.

“I moved on her and I failed. I’ll admit it,” Mr Trump is heard saying. “She was married. And I moved on her very heavily.

“I moved on her like a bitch, but I couldn’t get there. And she was married. Then all of a sudden I see her, she’s now got the big phony tits and everything. She’s totally changed her look.”

Paul Ryan

Paul Ryan withdrew an invitation for Mr Trump to attend a Republican event

Later in the conversation, he told Mr Bush he was “automatically attracted to beautiful” women and often tried to kiss them.

“I just start kissing them,” he said. “I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.”

Top Republicans have been incensed by the comments.

House Speaker Paul Ryan said he was “sickened by what I heard today” and rescinded his invitation to Mr Trump to attend the Republican Fall Fest in his home state of Wisconsin this weekend.

Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell said the comments were “repugnant,” adding that Mr Trump “needs to apologise directly to women and girls everywhere”.

Another senior Republican, John McCain, said there were “no excuses for Donald Trump’s offensive and demeaning comments”.

For his part, Billy Bush said he was “embarrassed” by and “ashamed” of the contents of the video.

“It’s no excuse, but this happened 11 years ago. I was younger, less mature, and acted foolishly in playing along. I’m very sorry.”

Mr Trump has said the latest remarks are “nothing more than a distraction” and “locker-room banter”.

He once famously said at a campaign rally in January: “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.”

He will be hoping his latest comments follow that trend.



Clinton’s paid speeches to Goldman Sachs and other financial firms were a point of contention during this year’s primary. A hacked email to campaign chairman John Podesta, made public Friday, appears to show excerpts Clinton’s research team flagged internally, including remarks she made about Wall Street and trade policy.

“I’m kind of far removed” from the Middle Class, Hillary says…..

*Hillary Clinton: “I’m Kind Of Far Removed” From The Struggles Of The Middle Class “Because The Life I’ve Lived And The Economic, You Know, Fortunes That My Husband And I Now Enjoy.”*

Brendan Smialowski / AFP / Getty Images


Excerpts from Hillary Clinton’s closed-door paid speeches, including to financial firms, appeared to be made public for the first time on Friday when WikiLeaks published hundreds of hacked emails from her campaign chairman.

The speech transcripts, a major subject of contention during the Democratic primary, include quotes from Clinton about her distance from middle-class life (“I’m kind of far removed”); her vision of strategic governing (“you need both a public and a private position”); and her views on trade, health care, and Wall Street (“even if it may not be 100 percent true, if the perception is that somehow the game is rigged.”)

John Podesta, the Clinton campaign chairman, was the latest victim in a wave of hacks on key figures in Democratic politics and the political establishment in what administration officials say is an effort by Russia to undermine the election.

Clinton research director Tony Carrk sent the excerpts in an email to Podesta and other senior aides, sourcing the “the flags from HRC’s paid speeches” to the Harry Walker Agency, the firm that represented Clinton and arranged her dozens of public and private paid speech deals after she left the State Department in early 2013.

The email is dated Jan. 25, 2016, with the subject line, “HRC Paid Speeches.”

Carrk identified and sent the “highlights” in the email, telling Podesta and Clinton’s communications director, Jennifer Palmieri, that there were “a lot of policy positions that we should give an extra scrub” with the campaign’s policy department.

Clinton spokesman Glen Caplin said the campaign would not be confirming the authenticity of any of the emails made public on Friday. But administration officials, he said, have “removed any reasonable doubt that the Kremlin has weaponized WikiLeaks to meddle in our election and benefit Donald Trump’s candidacy.”

U.S. officials have also warned that Russia could be “doctoring” hacked emails, including those stolen this summer from the Democratic National Committee.

During this year’s long-fought Democratic primary, Sen. Bernie Sanders repeatedly pressed Clinton to release the transcripts of the speeches, which were delivered to a variety of groups, including major firms like Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank.

Late last year, Clinton said she would “look into” releasing the transcripts. She never did, arguing that Republicans and others should also release theirs. “Let everybody who’s ever given a speech to any private group under any circumstances release them,” she told ABC this February. “We’ll all release them at the same time.”

Late into the primary, Sanders argued that the American people had a right to know what Clinton told well-heeled audiences on Wall Street about her economic policy.

“We all rely on the market’s transparency and integrity. So even if it may not be 100 percent true, if the perception is that somehow the game is rigged, that should be a problem for all of us, and we have to be willing to make that absolutely clear,” Clinton said in one apparent excerpt, softening an assertion she has made frequently on the trail, that “the economy is rigged in favor of those at the top.”

In the same remarks, attributed to a 2014 speech to Deutsche Bank, Clinton also said that much of financial reform “really has to come from the industry itself.”

The flagged excerpts don’t provide context for Clinton’s remarks, but include several comments in which she appears to express strong pro-trade sentiments.

“My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders,” Clinton is quoted as telling a Brazilian bank in 2013. “We have to resist, protectionism, other kinds of barriers to market access and to trade.”

Clinton opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership, but has faced criticism from both Sanders and Trump for adopting what they charge is a politically convenient stance.

The apparent speech transcripts have spilled out into the public as young voters and progressives, including those who flocked to Sanders’ campaign, still have questions about Clinton and may turn to a third-party candidate in the fall.

In one excerpt identified as part of a speech to the Xerox company in March 2014, Clinton talked about the need for “two sensible, moderate, pragmatic parties.”

Read the full email below:

From: Tony Carrk
To: Jennifer Palmieri, John Podesta, [Chief of Staff to the Chairman] Sara Latham, [Deputy Communications Director] Kristina Schake, [Deputy Communications Director] Christina Reynolds, [National Press Secretary] Brian Fallon

Date: Jan. 25, 2016
Subject: HRC Paid Speeches


Attached are the flags from HRC’s paid speeches we have from HWA. I put some highlights below. There is a lot of policy positions that we should give an extra scrub with Policy.

In terms of what was opened to the press and what was not, the Washington Examiner got a hold of one of the private speech contracts (her speeches to universities were typically open press), so this is worth a read


*Hillary Clinton: “I’m Kind Of Far Removed” From The Struggles Of The Middle Class “Because The Life I’ve Lived And The Economic, You Know, Fortunes That My Husband And I Now Enjoy.”*

“And I am not taking a position on any policy, but I do think there is a growing sense of anxiety and even anger in the country over the feeling that the game is rigged. And I never had that feeling when I was growing up. Never. I mean, were there really rich people, of course there were. My father loved to complain about big business and big government, but we had a solid middle class upbringing. We had good public schools. We had accessible health care. We had our little, you know, one-family house that, you know, he saved up his money, didn’t believe in mortgages. So I lived that. And now, obviously, I’m kind of far removed because the life I’ve lived and the economic, you know, fortunes that my husband and I now enjoy, but I haven’t forgotten it.” [Hillary Clinton Remarks at Goldman-Black Rock, 2/4/14]


*Clinton: “But If Everybody’s Watching, You Know, All Of The Back Room Discussions And The Deals, You Know, Then People Get A Little Nervous, To Say The Least. So, You Need Both A Public And A Private Position.”*

CLINTON: You just have to sort of figure out how to — getting back to that word, “balance” — how to balance the public and the private efforts that are necessary to be successful, politically, and that’s not just a comment about today. That, I think, has probably been true for all of our history, and if you saw the Spielberg movie, Lincoln, and how he was maneuvering and working to get the 13th Amendment passed, and he called one of my favorite predecessors, Secretary Seward, who had been the governor and senator from New York, ran against Lincoln for president, and he told Seward, I need your help to get this done. And Seward called some of his lobbyist friends who knew how to make a deal, and they just kept going at it. I mean, politics is like sausage being made. It is unsavory, and it always has been that way, but we usually end up where we need to be. But if everybody’s watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position. And finally, I think — I believe in evidence-based decision making. I want to know what the facts are. I mean, it’s like when you guys go into some kind of a deal, you know, are you going to do that development or not, are you going to do that renovation or not, you know, you look at the numbers. You try to figure out what’s going to work and what’s not going to work. [Clinton Speech For National Multi-Housing Council, 4/24/13]


*Clinton Said That The Blame Placed On The United States Banking System For The Crisis “Could Have Been Avoided In Terms Of Both Misunderstanding And Really Politicizing What Happened.”*

“That was one of the reasons that I started traveling in February of ‘09, so people could, you know, literally yell at me for the United States and our banking system causing this everywhere. Now, that’s an oversimplification we know, but it was the conventional wisdom. And I think that there’s a lot that could have been avoided in terms of both misunderstanding and really politicizing what happened with greater transparency, with greater openness on all sides, you know, what happened, how did it happen, how do we prevent it from happening? You guys help us figure it out and let’s make sure that we do it right this time. And I think that everybody was desperately trying to fend off the worst effects institutionally, governmentally, and there just wasn’t that opportunity to try to sort this out, and that came later.” [Goldman Sachs AIMS Alternative Investments Symposium, 10/24/13]

*Clinton: “Even If It May Not Be 100 Percent True, If The Perception Is That Somehow The Game Is Rigged, That Should Be A Problem For All Of Us.” *

“Now, it’s important to recognize the vital role that the financial markets play in our economy and that so many of you are contributing to. To function effectively those markets and the men and women who shape them have to command trust and confidence, because we all rely on the market’s transparency and integrity. So even if it may not be 100 percent true, if the perception is that somehow the game is rigged, that should be a problem for all of us, and we have to be willing to make that absolutely clear. And if there are issues, if there’s wrongdoing, people have to be held accountable and we have to try to deter future bad behavior, because the public trust is at the core of both a free market economy and a democracy.” [Clinton Remarks to Deutsche Bank, 10/7/14]


*Clinton Said Financial Reform “Really Has To Come From The Industry Itself.” *

“Remember what Teddy Roosevelt did. Yes, he took on what he saw as the excesses in the economy, but he also stood against the excesses in politics. He didn’t want to unleash a lot of nationalist, populistic reaction. He wanted to try to figure out how to get back into that balance that has served America so well over our entire nationhood. Today, there’s more that can and should be done that really has to come from the industry itself, and how we can strengthen our economy, create more jobs at a time where that’s increasingly challenging, to get back to Teddy Roosevelt’s square deal. And I really believe that our country and all of you are up to that job.” [Clinton Remarks to Deutsche Bank, 10/7/14]

*Speaking About The Importance Of Proper Regulation, Clinton Said “The People That Know The Industry Better Than Anybody Are The People Who Work In The Industry.”*

“I mean, it’s still happening, as you know. People are looking back and trying to, you know, get compensation for bad mortgages and all the rest of it in some of the agreements that are being reached. There’s nothing magic about regulations, too much is bad, too little is bad. How do you get to the golden key, how do we figure out what works? And the people that know the industry better than anybody are the people who work in the industry. And I think there has to be a recognition that, you know, there’s so much at stake now, I mean, the business has changed so much and decisions are made so quickly, in nano seconds basically. We spend trillions of dollars to travel around the world, but it’s in everybody’s interest that we have a better framework, and not just for the United States but for the entire world, in which to operate and trade.” [Goldman Sachs AIMS Alternative Investments Symposium, 10/24/13]


Goldman Sachs has had a long alliance with Democrat Hillary Clinton dating back to her Senate days. She is pictured here with Lloyd Blankfein, Chairman & CEO, Goldman Sachs, in 2014. | Getty


*Clinton Said That Because Candidates Needed Money From Wall Street To Run For Office, People In New York Needed To Ask Tough Questions About The Economy Before Handing Over Campaign Contributions. *

“Secondly, running for office in our country takes a lot of money, and candidates have to go out and raise it. New York is probably the leading site for contributions for fundraising for candidates on both sides of the aisle, and it’s also our economic center. And there are a lot of people here who should ask some tough questions before handing over campaign contributions to people who were really playing chicken with our whole economy.” [Goldman Sachs AIMS Alternative Investments Symposium, 10/24/13]

*Clinton: “It Would Be Very Difficult To Run For President Without Raising A Huge Amount Of Money And Without Having Other People Supporting You Because Your Opponent Will Have Their Supporters.”*

“So our system is, in many ways, more difficult, certainly far more expensive and much longer than a parliamentary system, and I really admire the people who subject themselves to it. Even when I, you know, think they should not be elected president, I still think, well, you know, good for you I guess, you’re out there promoting democracy and those crazy ideas of yours. So I think that it’s something — I would like — you know, obviously as somebody who has been through it, I would like it not to last as long because I think it’s very distracting from what we should be doing every day in our public business.

I would like it not to be so expensive. I have no idea how you do that. I mean, in my campaign — I lose track, but I think I raised $250 million or some such enormous amount, and in the last campaign President Obama raised 1.1 billion, and that was before the Super PACs and all of this other money just rushing in, and it’s so ridiculous that we have this kind of free for all with all of this financial interest at stake, but, you know, the Supreme Court said that’s basically what we’re in for. So we’re kind of in the wild west, and, you know, it would be very difficult to run for president without raising a huge amount of money and without having other people supporting you because your opponent will have their supporters. So I think as hard as it was when I ran, I think it’s even harder now.” [Clinton Speech For General Electric’s Global Leadership Meeting – Boca Raton, FL, 1/6/14]


*Clinton: As Senator, “I Represented And Worked With” So Many On Wall Street And “Did All I Could To Make Sure They Continued To Prosper” But Still Called For Closing Carried Interest Loophole.*

In remarks at Robbins, Gellar, Rudman & Dowd in San Diego, Hillary Clinton said, “When I was a Senator from New York, I represented and worked with so many talented principled people who made their living in finance. But even thought I represented them and did all I could to make sure they continued to prosper, I called for closing the carried interest loophole and addressing skyrocketing CEO pay. I also was calling in ‘06, ‘07 for doing something about the mortgage crisis, because I saw every day from Wall Street literally to main streets across New York how a well-functioning financial system is essential. So when I raised early warnings about early warnings about subprime mortgages and called for regulating derivatives and over complex financial products, I didn’t get some big arguments, because people sort of said, no, that makes sense. But boy, have we had fights about it ever since.” [Hillary Clinton’s Remarks at Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd in San Diego, 9/04/14]

*Clinton On Wall Street: “I Had Great Relations And Worked So Close Together After 9/11 To Rebuild Downtown, And A Lot Of Respect For The Work You Do And The People Who Do It.”

*“Now, without going over how we got to where we are right now, what would be your advice to the Wall Street community and the big banks as to the way forward with those two important decisions? SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I represented all of you for eight years. I had great relations and worked so close together after 9/11 to rebuild downtown, and a lot of respect for the work you do and the people who do it, but I do — I think that when we talk about the regulators and the politicians, the economic consequences of bad decisions back in ‘08, you know, were devastating, and they had repercussions throughout the world.” [Goldman Sachs AIMS Alternative Investments Symposium, 10/24/13]


*Hillary Clinton Said There Was “A Bias Against People Who Have Led Successful And/Or Complicated Lives,” Citing The Need To Divese Of Assets, Positions, And Stocks.*

“SECRETARY CLINTON: Yeah. Well, you know what Bob Rubin said about that. He said, you know, when he came to Washington, he had a fortune. And when he left Washington, he had a small —

MR. BLANKFEIN: That’s how you have a small fortune, is you go to Washington.

SECRETARY CLINTON: You go to Washington. Right. But, you know, part of the problem with the political situation, too, is that there is such a bias against people who have led successful and/or complicated lives. You know, the divestment of assets, the stripping of all kinds of positions, the sale of stocks. It just becomes very onerous and unnecessary.” [Goldman Sachs Builders And Innovators Summit, 10/29/13]


*Clinton Said That Both The Democratic And Republican Parties Should Be “Moderate.” *

“URSULA BURNS: Interesting. Democrats?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, long, definitely.

URSULA BURNS: Republicans?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Unfortunately, at the time, short.

URSULA BURNS: Okay. We’ll go back to questions.

SECRETARY CLINTON: We need two parties.

URSULA BURNS: Yeah, we do need two parties.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Two sensible, moderate, pragmatic parties.” [Hillary Clinton Remarks, Remarks at Xerox, 3/18/14]

*Clinton: “Simpson-Bowles… Put Forth The Right Framework. Namely, We Have To Restrain Spending, We Have To Have Adequate Revenues, And We Have To Incentivize Growth. It’s A Three-Part Formula… And They Reached An Agreement. But What Is Very Hard To Do Is To Then Take That Agreement If You Don’t Believe That You’re Going To Be Able To Move The Other Side.”*

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, this may be borne more out of hope than experience in the last few years. But Simpson-Bowles — and I know you heard from Erskine earlier today — put forth the right framework. Namely, we have to restrain spending, we have to have adequate revenues, and we have to incentivize growth. It’s a three-part formula. The specifics can be negotiated depending upon whether we’re acting in good faith or not. And what Senator Simpson and Erskine did was to bring Republicans and Democrats alike to the table, and you had the full range of ideological views from I think Tom Coburn to Dick Durbin. And they reached an agreement. But what is very hard to do is to then take that agreement if you don’t believe that you’re going to be able to move the other side. And where we are now is in this gridlocked dysfunction. So you’ve got Democrats saying that, you know, you have to have more revenues; that’s the sine qua non of any kind of agreement.

You have Republicans saying no, no, no on revenues; you have to cut much more deeply into spending. Well, looks what’s happened. We are slowly returning to growth. It’s not as much or as fast as many of us would like to see, but, you know, we’re certainly better off than our European friends, and we’re beginning to, I believe, kind of come out of the long aftermath of the ‘08 crisis. [Clinton Speech For Morgan Stanley, 4/18/13]

*Clinton: “The Simpson-Bowles Framework And The Big Elements Of It Were Right… You Have To Restrain Spending, You Have To Have Adequate Revenues, And You Have To Have Growth.”*

CLINTON: So, you know, the Simpson-Bowles framework and the big elements of it were right. The specifics can be negotiated and argued over. But you got to do all three. You have to restrain spending, you have to have adequate revenues, and you have to have growth. And I think we are smart enough to figure out how to do that. [Clinton Speech For Morgan Stanley, 4/18/13]


*Clinton: “At The State Department We Were Attacked Every Hour, More Than Once An Hour By Incoming Efforts To Penetrate Everything We Had. And That Was True Across The U.S. Government.”*

CLINTON: But, at the State Department we were attacked every hour, more than once an hour by incoming efforts to penetrate everything we had. And that was true across the U.S. government. And we knew it was going on when I would go to China, or I would go to Russia, we would leave all of our electronic equipment on the plane, with the batteries out, because this is a new frontier. And they’re trying to find out not just about what we do in our government. They’re trying to find out about what a lot of companies do and they were going after the personal emails of people who worked in the State Department. So it’s not like the only government in the world that is doing anything is the United States.

But, the United States compared to a number of our competitors is the only government in the world with any kind of safeguards, any kind of checks and balances. They may in many respects need to be strengthened and people need to be reassured, and they need to have their protections embodied in law. But, I think turning over a lot of that material intentionally or unintentionally, because of the way it can be drained, gave all kinds of information not only to big countries, but to networks and terrorist groups, and the like. So I have a hard time thinking that somebody who is a champion of privacy and liberty has taken refuge in Russia under Putin’s authority. And then he calls into a Putin talk show and says, President Putin, do you spy on people? And President Putin says, well, from one intelligence professional to another, of course not. Oh, thank you so much. I mean, really, I don’t know. I have a hard time following it. [Clinton Speech At UConn, 4/23/14]

*Hillary Clinton: “When I Got To The State Department, It Was Still Against The Rules To Let Most — Or Let All Foreign Service Officers Have Access To A Blackberry.” *

“I mean, let’s face it, our government is woefully, woefully behind in all of its policies that affect the use of technology. When I got to the State Department, it was still against the rules to let most — or let all Foreign Service Officers have access to a Blackberry. You couldn’t have desktop computers when Colin Powell was there. Everything that you are taking advantage of, inventing and using, is still a generation or two behind when it comes to our government.” [Hillary Clinton Remarks at Nexenta, 8/28/14]

*Hillary Clinton: “We Couldn’t Take Our Computers, We Couldn’t Take Our Personal Devices” Off The Plane In China And Russia. *

“I mean, probably the most frustrating part of this whole debate are countries acting like we’re the only people in the world trying to figure out what’s going on. I mean, every time I went to countries like China or Russia, I mean, we couldn’t take our computers, we couldn’t take our personal devices, we couldn’t take anything off the plane because they’re so good, they would penetrate them in a minute, less, a nanosecond. So we would take the batteries out, we’d leave them on the plane.” [Hillary Clinton Remarks at Nexenta, 8/28/14]

*Clinton Said When She Got To State, Employees “Were Not Mostly Permitted To Have Handheld Devices.”*

“You know, when Colin Powell showed up as Secretary of State in 2001, most State Department employees still didn’t even have computers on their desks. When I got there they were not mostly permitted to have handheld devices. I mean, so you’re thinking how do we operate in this new environment dominated by technology, globalizing forces? We have to change, and I can’t expect people to change if I don’t try to model it and lead it.” [Clinton Speech For General Electric’s Global Leadership Meeting – Boca Raton, FL, 1/6/14]

*Hillary Clinton Said You Know You Can’t Bring Your Phone And Computer When Traveling To China And Russia And She Had To Take Her Batteries Out And Put them In A Special Box. *

“And anybody who has ever traveled in other countries, some of which shall remain nameless, except for Russia and China, you know that you can’t bring your phones and your computers. And if you do, good luck. I mean, we would not only take the batteries out, we would leave the batteries and the devices on the plane in special boxes. Now, we didn’t do that because we thought it would be fun to tell somebody about. We did it because we knew that we were all targets and that we would be totally vulnerable. So it’s not only what others do to us and what we do to them and how many people are involved in it. It’s what’s the purpose of it, what is being collected, and how can it be used. And there are clearly people in this room who know a lot about this, and some of you could be very useful contributors to that conversation because you’re sophisticated enough to know that it’s not just, do it, don’t do it. We have to have a way of doing it, and then we have to have a way of analyzing it, and then we have to have a way of sharing it.” [Goldman Sachs Builders And Innovators Summit, 10/29/13]

*Hillary Clinton Lamented How Far Behind The State Department Was In Technology, Saying “People Were Not Even Allowed To Use Mobile Devices Because Of Security Issues.” *

“Personally, having, you know, lived and worked in the White House, having been a senator, having been Secretary of State, there has traditionally been a great pool of very talented, hard-working people. And just as I was saying about the credit market, our personnel policies haven’t kept up with the changes necessary in government. We have a lot of difficulties in getting—when I got to the State Department, we were so far behind in technology, it was embarrassing. And, you know, people were not even allowed to use mobile devices because of security issues and cost issues, and we really had to try to push into the last part of the 20th Century in order to get people functioning in 2009 and ‘10.” [Goldman Sachs Builders And Innovators Summit, 10/29/13]


*Clinton: “So I Think That Keystone Is A Contentious Issue, And Of Course It Is Important On Both Sides Of The Border For Different And Sometimes Opposing Reasons…” *

“So I think that Keystone is a contentious issue, and of course it is important on both sides of the border for different and sometimes opposing reasons, but that is not our relationship. And I think our relationship will get deeper and stronger and put us in a position to really be global leaders in energy and climate change if we worked more closely together. And that’s what I would like to see us do.” [Remarks at tinePublic, 6/18/14]

*Hillary Clinton Said Her Dream Is A Hemispheric Common Market, With Open Trade And Open Markets. *

“My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere.” [05162013 Remarks to Banco Itau.doc, p. 28]

*Hillary Clinton Said We Have To Have A Concerted Plan To Increase Trade; We Have To Resist Protectionism And Other Kinds Of Barriers To Trade.

*“Secondly, I think we have to have a concerted plan to increase trade already under the current circumstances, you know, that Inter-American Development Bank figure is pretty surprising. There is so much more we can do, there is a lot of low hanging fruit but businesses on both sides have to make it a priority and it’s not for governments to do but governments can either make it easy or make it hard and we have to resist, protectionism, other kinds of barriers to market access and to trade and I would like to see this get much more attention and be not just a policy for a year under president X or president Y but a consistent one.” [05162013 Remarks to Banco Itau.doc, p. 32]


*Clinton Said Single-Payer Health Care Systems “Can Get Costs Down,” And “Is As Good Or Better On Primary Care,” But “They Do Impose Things Like Waiting Times.” *

“If you look at countries that are comparable, like Switzerland or Germany, for example, they have mixed systems. They don’t have just a single-payer system, but they have very clear controls over budgeting and accountability. If you look at the single-payer systems, like Scandinavia, Canada, and elsewhere, they can get costs down because, you know, although their care, according to statistics, overall is as good or better on primary care, in particular, they do impose things like waiting times, you know. It takes longer to get like a hip replacement than it might take here.” [Hillary Clinton remarks to ECGR Grand Rapids, 6/17/13]

*Clinton Cited President Johnson’s Success In Establishing Medicare And Medicaid And Said She Wanted To See The U.S. Have Universal Health Care Like In Canada.*

“You know, on healthcare we are the prisoner of our past. The way we got to develop any kind of medical insurance program was during World War II when companies facing shortages of workers began to offer healthcare benefits as an inducement for employment. So from the early 1940s healthcare was seen as a privilege connected to employment. And after the war when soldiers came back and went back into the market there was a lot of competition, because the economy was so heated up. So that model continued. And then of course our large labor unions bargained for healthcare with the employers that their members worked for. So from the early 1940s until the early 1960s we did not have any Medicare, or our program for the poor called Medicaid until President Johnson was able to get both passed in 1965. So the employer model continued as the primary means by which working people got health insurance.

People over 65 were eligible for Medicare. Medicaid, which was a partnership, a funding partnership between the federal government and state governments, provided some, but by no means all poor people with access to healthcare. So what we’ve been struggling with certainly Harry Truman, then Johnson was successful on Medicare and Medicaid, but didn’t touch the employer based system, then actually Richard Nixon made a proposal that didn’t go anywhere, but was quite far reaching. Then with my husband’s administration we worked very hard to come up with a system, but we were very much constricted by the political realities that if you had your insurance from your employer you were reluctant to try anything else. And so we were trying to build a universal system around the employer-based system.

And indeed now with President Obama’s legislative success in getting the Affordable Care Act passed that is what we’ve done. We still have primarily an employer-based system, but we now have people able to get subsidized insurance. So we have health insurance companies playing a major role in the provision of healthcare, both to the employed whose employers provide health insurance, and to those who are working but on their own are not able to afford it and their employers either don’t provide it, or don’t provide it at an affordable price. We are still struggling. We’ve made a lot of progress. Ten million Americans now have insurance who didn’t have it before the Affordable Care Act, and that is a great step forward. (Applause.) And what we’re going to have to continue to do is monitor what the costs are and watch closely to see whether employers drop more people from insurance so that they go into what we call the health exchange system. So we’re really just at the beginning. But we do have Medicare for people over 65. And you couldn’t, I don’t think, take it away if you tried, because people are very satisfied with it, but we also have a lot of political and financial resistance to expanding that system to more people. So we’re in a learning period as we move forward with the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. And I’m hoping that whatever the shortfalls or the glitches have been, which in a big piece of legislation you’re going to have, those will be remedied and we can really take a hard look at what’s succeeding, fix what isn’t, and keep moving forward to get to affordable universal healthcare coverage like you have here in Canada. [Clinton Speech For tinePublic – Saskatoon, CA, 1/21/15]

Ruby Cramer is a political reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in New York.
Contact Ruby Cramer at

FBI identifies 13 mobile devices Clinton potentially used to send emails (but most of them have disappeared) — Concussion causing her to forget things….

September 2, 2016

By Jessie Hellmann

Hillary Clinton may have sent emails from her personal email address using 13 different devices, according to an FBI report released Friday.
The FBI released a detailed report of its investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of State, including the summary of its three-hour interview with her in July.
The report indicates the FBI investigation found 13 total mobile devices associated with her two known phone numbers that were potentially used to send emails via

The report does not say that she used more than one device at a time during her years at State.

“Investigation determined Clinton used in succession 11 e-mail capable BlackBerry mobile devices … eight of which she used during her tenure as Secretary of State,” the report reads.

It says she used two mobile devices after she left office.

The FBI was unable to recover any of the devices.

Top Clinton aide Huma Abedin told the FBI it was not uncommon for Clinton to use a new BlackBerry for a short time before switching back to an older model with which she was more familiar. She also said out-of-use phones would often become lost. The man who helped set up Clinton’s server said he recalled two instances in which he destroyed old devices by breaking them or smashing them with a hammer; Clinton said aides also disposed of old SIM cards after switching devices.

Clinton, now the Democratic presidential nominee, said in March of 2015 that she never carried more than one device, using her mobile for both work and personal emails.

“I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails, instead of two.”

“Looking back, it would have been better if I’d simply used a second account and carried a second phone.”


Drivers are stunned that they never knew this. If you drive less than 50 mi/day, you better read this Read More
The FBI report totals 58 pages, but large sections have been redacted.

In July, FBI Director James Comey announced that he did not recommend charging Clinton with willfully mishandling classified information.

While Comey called the former secretary of State “extremely careless” for using the server, he said “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”

TAGS:Hillary Clinton


Hillary Clinton ‘couldn’t recall’ answers to FBI questions about secret server because of CONCUSSION – and didn’t know what ‘classified’ markings were, agency reveals

  • Clinton was interviewed by the FBI on July 2 but the meeting wasn’t tape recorded or conducted under oath
  • The only surviving account of the grilling was released Friday by the FBI
  • It shows that the former secretary of state claimed she didn’t recall ever being trained on how to handle classified information
  • She also said she couldn’t recall receiving any emails that she thought didn’t belong on an unclassified system
  • Said she was concussed in 2012 when she was receiving guidance so couldn’t remember 
  • Only worked a ‘few hours a day’ after head injury 
  • Also revealed Colin Powell warned her not to let her emails get in to public records 
  • She used 13 mobile devices – but the FBI wasn’t able to acquire ANY 
  • Stated she didn’t know that (C) stood for ‘CONFIDENTIAL’
  • Trump says statements ‘defy belief’ 
  • Speaker Paul Ryan calls her handling of secrets ‘downright dangerous’
  • Agency recovered 17,448 emails from her server and other sources – none of which she had turned over in the first place 
  • FBI release the files hours before the Labor Day weekend begins 

Hillary Clinton told the FBI she could not recall answers to some of their questions about her secret server scandal because she had been concussed in 2012.

The extraordinary disclosure was made as the FBI published details of its agents’ interview with the former secretary of state which was conducted days before the agency’s director ruled out any charges against her.

Agents noted that Clinton could not recall being trained to handle classified materials as secretary of state, and had no memory of anyone raising concerns about the sensitive information she received at her private address.

The Democratic presidential nominee also ‘did not recall receiving any emails she thought should not be on an unclassified system,’ the FBI’s report declared.

She did not recall all of the briefings she received on handling sensitive information as she made the transition from her post as secretary of state, due to a concussion she suffered in 2012.


'CANNOT RECALL': Hillary Clinton appears to have repeatedly deployed a bewildering answer to the FBI's questions in an interview that was not recorded or conducted under  oath

‘CANNOT RECALL’: Hillary Clinton appears to have repeatedly deployed a bewildering answer to the FBI’s questions in an interview that was not recorded or conducted under  oath

Read more:
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The claim will only fuel questions over her underlying health. 

The extraordinary defense was revealed in the FBI’s account of agents’ interview with the Democratic presidential candidate.

‘Clinton said she received no instructions or direction regarding the preservation or production of records from (the) State (Department) during the transition out of her role as Secretary of State in 2013,’ the FBI files say.

‘However, in December of 2012, Clinton suffered a concussion and then around the New Year had a blood clot (in her head).

Clinton leaves New York Presbyterian Hospital accompanied by husband Bill and daughter Chelsea in January 2, 2013. She hadn't been seen in public since Dec. 7 and was receiving treatment  for a blood clot

Clinton leaves New York Presbyterian Hospital accompanied by husband Bill and daughter Chelsea in January 2, 2013. She hadn’t been seen in public since Dec. 7 and was receiving treatment for a blood clot

‘Based on her doctor’s advice, she could only work at State for a few hours a day and could not recall every briefing she received,’ the report said.

According to the report, Clinton told the FBI that she did not set up a private email server to sidestep the law requiring her to keep her business communications a matter of public record.

Clinton has claimed it was public knowledge to many State Department employees that she was using a private server because they received emails from her email domain.

But State Department employees interviewed by the FBI said many emails from Clinton appeared to be from ‘H’ and did not show her private email domain.

The documents also show that Clinton contacted former Secretary of State Colin Powell in 2009 to ask about his use of a personal BlackBerry phone.

In his reply to Clinton via email, Powell told Clinton to ‘be very careful’ because the work-related emails she sent on her BlackBerry could become public record.

‘I got around it all by not saying much and not using systems that captured the data,’ Powell said.

And the FBI files also showed how she passed the buck to her former State Department underlings, saying she relied on their judgment when deciding what was and wasn’t appropriate to send through her homebrew private email server while she was America’s top diplomat.

‘She relied on State [Department] officials to use their judgment when emailing her and could not recall anyone raising concerns with her regarding the sensitivity of the information she received at her email address,’ the FBI’s account reads.

Key verdict: James Comey, the FBI director, ruled that Clinton should not be charged

Key verdict: James Comey, the FBI director, ruled that Clinton should not be charged


Keep it out of public records: Powell told Clinton to 'be very careful' because the work-related emails she sent on her BlackBerry could become public record, she revealed

Keep it out of public records: Powell told Clinton to ‘be very careful’ because the work-related emails she sent on her BlackBerry could become public record, she revealed

Clinton told investigators she was unfamiliar even with basic markings of confidential materials, such as the (C) markings that denote confidential material portions of emails.

Read more:
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Clinton ‘stated she did not know what the (C) meant at the beginnings of the paragraphs and speculated it was referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order,’ according to the documents.

The FBI documents state that on February 9, 2016, the Justice Department asked Clinton’s lawyers at Williams & Connelly to turn over the 13 mobile devices she used over the time period.

The lawyers couldn’t locate any of them, and the FBI was ‘unable to acquire or forensically examine any of these 13 mobile devices.’

The agency also recounts the improvised way Clinton’s private email server came into creation.

Initially, aide Justin Cooper contacted Apple and had a company tech install a server in the basement of the Clinton’s Chappaqua home in 2008. The FBI wasn’t able to obtain records of the installation from either party.

By 2009, a decision was made to switch to another server because the first was ‘antiquated.’ Campaign aide Brian Pagliano was brought in for upgrades using leftover equipment from Clinton’s presidential campaign.

The original Apple server ‘was repurposed to serve as a personal computer for household staff.’

'IS THIS REALLY FROM YOU?' Clinton feared a potential email scam when a known associate sent a link to a web site with porn material, according to the FBI report

‘IS THIS REALLY FROM YOU?’ Clinton feared a potential email scam when a known associate sent a link to a web site with porn material, according to the FBI report

Clinton could only work at State for 'a few hours a day' after hitting her head and suffering a concussion during a fall. She 'could not recall every briefing she received'

Clinton could only work at State for ‘a few hours a day’ after hitting her head and suffering a concussion during a fall. She ‘could not recall every briefing she received’

LETTER OF THE LAW: Clinton stated that she 'did not know' that '(C)' stood for 'CONFIDENTIAL' in classification markings

LETTER OF THE LAW: Clinton stated that she ‘did not know’ that ‘(C)’ stood for ‘CONFIDENTIAL’ in classification markings

Eventually a third party, Platte River Networks of Denver, was brought in to manage a third server.

The decision to release the information was made earlier this week in response to several Freedom of Information act requests, and amid mounting pressure to explain the decision not to charge Clinton with a crime related to her mishandling of classified documents.

A written account of the interview, which was neither tape recorded or conducted under oath, was made by agents afterwards and informed FBI Director James Comey’s decision not to recommend a Department of Justice prosecution.

The FBI said in a statement Friday that it edited portions of it in accordance with FOIA laws.

‘Appropriate redactions have been made for classified information or other material exempt from disclosure,’ the agency said.

The FBI provided some portions of its investigative file to members of Congress in August.

The FBI notes disclose: ‘Clinton did not recall receiving any emails she thought she should not be on an unclassified system.

‘She relied on State official to use their judgment when emailing her and could not recall anyone raising concerns with her regarding the sensitivity of the information she received at her email address.’

The notes also revealed how Clinton said that she simply did not know what markings which told her material was classified were.

The (C) markings were found in several emails on her secret server after an FBI forensic search.

‘Clinton stated she did not know and could only speculate it was referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order,’ the FBI notes said.

Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan issued a statement saying the documents show Clinton’s ‘reckless and downright dangerous handling of classified information.’

 ‘They also cast further doubt on the Justice Department’s decision to avoid prosecuting what is a clear violation of the law,’ Ryan said. ‘This is exactly why I have called for her to be denied access to classified information.’

Clinton told investigators that she directed her aides in early 2009 to create a private email account and that it was ‘a matter of convenience’ for it to be moved onto a system maintained by her husband’s staff.

She told investigators that ‘everyone at State knew she had a private email address because it was displayed to anyone with whom she exchanged emails,’ according to a summary of the July 2 interview released Friday.

Clinton said that when top staff received an email, the recipient would evaluate whether the information should be forwarded to her, but that no one at the State Department raised concerns about her using a private email account or server and said no one on her staff ‘ever expressed a concern regarding the sensitivity of the content of these emails.’

Another passage states that the FBI ‘found that 17,448 emails were not included in the State Department’s release of emails’ – meaning they didn’t get turned over for review.

20-20 HINDSIGHT: Clinton has expressed regret for her private email server in interviews. But when she spoke to the FBI, she said there were multiple aspects of the email setup she could not recall

20-20 HINDSIGHT: Clinton has expressed regret for her private email server in interviews. But when she spoke to the FBI, she said there were multiple aspects of the email setup she could not recall

Clinton wasn’t completely oblivious to computer security. At one point, she received an email from a State employee containing a link with potentially malicious software, according to the FBI. Clinton responded: ‘Is this really from you? I was worried about opening it!’

According to the FBI, an aide identified as Abedin – no doubt longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin – sent an email to an unidentified official stating that Clinton was worried that someone was hacking inter her email.

The email was from a known [blank] associate ‘containing a link to a website with pornographic material.’ In fact, clicking on the link would have sent information to three computers, including one in Russia, according to the documents.

Clinton’s GOP rival Donald Trump – who has gone after ‘Crooked Hillary’ for corruption while also questioning her ‘stamina,’ released a statement Friday afternoon saying her statements ‘defy belief.’

‘I was absolutely shocked to see that her answers to the FBI stood in direct contradiction to what she told the American people. After reading these documents, I really don’t understand how she was able to get away from prosecution,’ said Trump.

‘While her use of a single email account was clearly a mistake and she has taken responsibility for it, these materials make clear why the Justice Department believed there was no basis to move forward with this case,’ said Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon.

‘Clinton’s answers either show she is completely incompetent or blatantly lied to the FBI or the public,’ said Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus. ‘Either way it’s clear that, through her own actions, she has disqualified herself from the presidency.’

Clinton didn’t have a computer on her desk on the 7th floor of the State Department. She did, according to the FBI, sometimes bring her Blackberry or ipad into a secure area of State’s ‘Mahogany Row’ where such devices are prohibited. Three diplomatic security agents told the FBI that Clinton stored her Blackberry in a desk drawer inside the secure area.

The documents state that Abedin stated that Clinton left the secure area to check her email, sometimes doing so on the agency’s 8th floor balcony – which has a sweeping view of the Lincoln Memorial.


Questions and conspiracy theories surrounding Hillary Clinton’s health that have circulated for years were again raised last month.

In early August, a number of right-wing websites shared an old picture of Clinton slipping while walking up a flight of stairs.

The photograph, which was taken of Clinton as she slipped at the top of a staircase in South Carolina on February 24, was falsely being presented as proof the 68-year-old is in poor health.

After the photo surfaced, other ‘incidents’ from the past were brought to the table, including the time she tripped while getting on a plane in 2012, when she fractured her elbow after slipping over in the White House in 2009, and when she was treated for blood clots in 2012 and 2013.

Clinton also suffered a concussion in 2012 after becoming dehydrated and fainting.

At the time of the incident, a statement from Philippe Reines, deputy assistant secretary of state, said that Clinton had a stomach virus, according to CNN.

Following the concussion, Clinton announced that the would not testify that week before the House of Foreign Affairs Committee on the deadly attack on Benghazi.

While she was not hospitalized for the incident, Clinton was monitored by doctors and worked from home during the week after.

 Disclosure: Bill Clinton said in 2014 that his wife's injury 'required six months of very serious work to get over'

 Disclosure: Bill Clinton said in 2014 that his wife’s injury ‘required six months of very serious work to get over’

A senior State Department official said added that the concussion was ‘not severe’.

Bill Clinton, however, said in 2014 that his wife’s injury ‘required six months of very serious work to get over’, according to ABC News.

‘They went to all this trouble to say she had staged what was a terrible concussion that required six months of very serious work to get over,’ he said, after GOP strategist Karl Rove claimed she never experienced brain damage.

‘It’s something she never low-balled with the American people, never tired to pretend it didn’t happen,’ he added.

 The truth is that Clinton is on long-term medication for a medical condition.

Clinton revealed last year that she has allergies and hypothyroidism – disorder in which she has an under-active thyroid, and the glad does not produce enough hormones.

As of last year, she was taking antihistamines, vitamin B12 and Coumadin, a blood thinner that controls how blood clots within blood vessels.

She is also currently taking Armour Thyroid to treat her hypothyroidism.

Armour Thyroid is the brand name of a hormone used to treat hypothyroidism as well as prevent types of enlarged thyroid glands and to manage thyroid cancer.

It works by replacing thyroid hormone when one’s body doesn’t produce enough on its own, according to Everyday Health. It is a natural product made from animal thyroid glands.

Clinton has long insisted she is in good health in an attempt to put an end to the conspiracy theories, and in September 2015 she took the step of releasing a letter from her doctor proving her fitness.

Doctor Lisa Bardack, from New York, detailed the candidate’s health history, including previous treatments for concussion, complete family history of heart disease, an analysis of blood clots, and a thyroid gland examination, according to the New York Post.

Doctor Bardack found Clinton’s cancer screening tests were normal, as were her electrocardiogram and her blood lipids.

Read more:
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The National Security Agency Wants To Talk To Hillary Clinton

March 18, 2016

The FBI has been investigating Clinton for months—but an even more secretive Federal agency has its own important beef with her

FBI Encourages Tech Companies To Win The War on Terror Encryption and Decryption

December 29, 2015

Comey pressures tech CEOs to change their business models so private communications can be reviewed during terror probes

FBI Director James Comey is trying a new approach in pushing executives to move away from a policy they say values customers’ privacy over public safety.
FBI Director James Comey is trying a new approach in pushing executives to move away from a policy they say values customers’ privacy over public safety. Photo: Carolyn Kaster/Associated Press

WASHINGTON—The Federal Bureau of Investigation is issuing a more direct challenge to technology companies in the wake of terror attacks in Paris and California, urging them in blunter terms to allow investigators to decrypt private communications during terror probes.

Hoping to escape a continuing debate over the technical feasibility of decryption, which they fear plays into Silicon Valley’s hands, FBI Director James Comey and others are pushing executives to move away from a policy they say values customers’ privacy over public safety.

“It is a business-model question,” Mr. Comey said at a recent congressional hearing, adding that executives “have designed their systems and their devices so that judges’ orders cannot be complied with…Should they change their business model? That is a very, very hard question.”

Challenging tech CEOs like Apple Inc. AAPL 1.98 % ’s Tim Cook directly suggests that Mr. Comey could be laying the groundwork for a push in Congress for legislation that would force the companies to change their products.

So far, however, there is no indication the tech industry is retreating from its argument that strong encryption is necessary to protect users’ information, and that providing a technological “key” or “backdoor” for law enforcement would simply make the information more vulnerable to hackers of all kinds.

Apple, in response to questions for this article, said this isn’t a new issue, since the company has used encryption for well over a decade as a vital way to protect customers’ personal information.

“As hacking schemes and cybercrimes against individuals, companies and governments have become daily occurrences, we have worked hard to keep pace,” Apple said in a statement. “We know that criminals will seek out encryption techniques or develop their own, so weakening encryption in consumer devices will only hurt law-abiding citizens who rely on it to protect their data.”

Still, not all tech companies are equally firm. John Chen, CEO of cellphone maker BlackBerry Ltd. BBRY -1.00 % , has declared the company will work with the government to be responsive to court orders, saying, “Our privacy commitment does not extend to criminals.”

In the wake of the recent mass killings, advocates on both sides are watching closely for a shift in public sentiment that might put more pressure on tech companies to allow law enforcement access to encrypted information if they have a court order.

Some members of Congress are highlighting the terror attacks and threatening legislation in an attempt to pressure companies to make changes. Others have urged the creation of a blue-ribbon panel to study the issue and offer recommendations.

A Samsung Electronics Co. Galaxy Note Edge smartphone running the Android mobile operating system displays the Google Inc. Hangouts app.
A Samsung Electronics Co. Galaxy Note Edge smartphone running the Android mobile operating system displays the Google Inc. Hangouts app. Photo: Chris Goodney/Bloomberg News

The FBI’s current reframing of the issue is a shift from past appeals for software designers to find technical solutions. At the same time, law-enforcement officials are citing the menace of terror attacks rather than emphasizing crimes like child abductions, as they’ve done previously.

Cindy Cohn, executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a privacy group, said the FBI’s shift “means they realize their first strategy wasn’t working.” She added, “By shifting the conversation to a ‘business model,’ they may think they have more leverage against those people.”

When the U.K. recently proposed giving officials more power to monitor communications, Apple fired back with a lengthy response saying the plan would threaten the security of millions of people’s data.

Mr. Comey isn’t the only law enforcement leader seeking to re-energize the effort to allow investigators pierce encryption in the wake of the terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, Calif.

In a lengthy report on the issue in November, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. argued, “Apple and Google are not responsible for keeping the public safe. That is the job of law enforcement. But the consequences of these companies’ actions on the public safety are severe.’’

Officials at Google didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

A year ago, senior Justice Department officials met with Apple lawyers and laid out concerns about “end-to-end” encryption, which makes it impossible for authorities to scrutinize the content of encrypted exchanges.

The meeting followed a decision by Apple to make end-to-end encryption a default setting for some features on its new iPhones. Google announced a similar move around the same time for its Android cellphone operating system, with both companies saying they were focused on protecting their customers’ privacy.

At the meeting, government officials raised the specter of a child’s murder going unsolved because a suspect’s or victim’s phone couldn’t be accessed. That infuriated the Apple lawyers and widened the gulf between the two sides, according to people familiar with the discussions. Tempers have cooled since then, but the policy differences remain.

Government officials acknowledge it may be hard to find a case where encryption indisputably prevented the thwarting of a deadly attack. Even where terrorists have used encrypted communications, they say, they generally also have engaged in unencrypted exchanges that law enforcement could monitor.

The problem of suspects “going dark” isn’t that investigators see nothing of what an individual does, but that they see far less of it, making it harder to know if an attack may be in the offing and try to prevent it beforehand, officials said.

Terrorism has made encryption a hotter issue, but police have long complained that it can interfere with investigations of an array of crimes. Some officials cite a 2012 federal appeals court ruling related to a child-pornography case as an example of how encryption can enable dangerous criminals to remain free.

In that case, investigators noticed an individual was using Internet connections at California hotels to access and share videos of child molestation. When they cross-checked the hotels’ registries for those dates, a single name came up. Authorities seized the man’s computers and hard drives, but all the data was encrypted. He was ordered to enter the password to the devices but he refused and was jailed for contempt of court.

An appeals court eventually ruled the man couldn’t be forced to provide a password, because to do so would have infringed his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. That forced prosecutors to drop the case and the man wasn’t charged.

Write to Devlin Barrett at


Essential tools for everyday encryption

December 14, 2015


Credit: Shutterstock
Thanks to technical advances and increased adoption, securing your data and communications is a lot easier than you might thinkBy

Encryption is under attack. Regardless of whether you think you have anything to hide, you should be concerned.

Encryption is the chief means by which we can secure our sensitive private information and communications from prying eyes, and governments around the world are challenging our ability to use encryption technologies by arguing that encryption makes it difficult for law enforcement officials to conduct investigations or monitor suspicious online activity. Their solution? Establishing “backdoors” through which government entities would be able to unlock protected data.
The best way to stop government from pressing forward with its demands for weakening encryption — and that’s exactly what backdoors would accomplish — is to make encryption ubiquitous and mainstream. If everyone is using encryption, from encrypted chat to encrypted email to encrypted Web surfing and everything in between, then it becomes much harder to argue that encryption protects only the select few who have something to hide.

Where to get started? To date, the primary challenge preventing encryption from being a routine factor in most people’s computing lives is the fact that it is still relatively difficult to employ. Encryption has traditionally required users to jump through a lot of hoops to get it to work, but that is slowly changing. Here we list various encryption technologies you can easily use to protect your data from prying eyes and to communicate online securely and privately. The more people use them, the harder it gets to take away our right to privacy and security.

Secure chat and messaging apps

Mobile devices are a growing security concern for users and organizations alike, given the breadth and depth of sensitive data they contain. Thankfully, encryption options for mobile devices are fast becoming ubiquitous. And it’s not apps alone. Apple turned on full-disk encryption by default on iOS devices so that all data stored on iPhones and iPads are automatically protected. With Google also offering full-disk encryption on its latest Android versions, though not yet turned on by default, full-disk encryption for mobile devices is becoming standard. Once it is, it will be much harder to rollback.
Apple also offers end-to-end encryption for its iMessage app to keep your iMessages out of the company’s reach. Law enforcement officials have been pushing Apple to make it easier for them to reclaim data from iOS devices, but Apple hasn’t backed down. For many regular users, getting an iOS device may be the easiest way to avail themselves of encryption tools.

Several apps provide secure messaging for Android and iOS, including Wickr, Signal, and Telegram. One drawback of these encrypted chat and messaging tools is that both the sender and the recipient have to use the same app to communicate. For example, Wickr users can send encrypted text messages to other Wickr users, but they will have to use a standard text-messaging app to send unencrypted messages to non-Wickr users.

Wickr’s popularity is also fueled by another layer of security it provides: Chats and photos delete themselves after a specified period of time. This extends to audio, video, and even documents pulled from cloud storage. Everything sent via Wickr is transmitted over encrypted channels and automatically removed after it expires. When law enforcement comes knocking, there’s nothing to hand over since the data is long gone.

Telegram is currently getting a bad rap because of reports that various terrorist groups and criminals use the app. It allows users to share encrypted media and messages with up to 200 people at once. The secret chats can bypass Telegram servers entirely, be stored only for a specified duration, or be stored securely for later retrieval.

Making encrypted voice calls
Buying a burner phone every time you want to make a phone call you don’t want traced back to you is a thing of the past, thanks to several new apps geared toward securing voice communications.

Signal, created by security researcher Moxie Marlinspike, lets users easily make encrypted voice calls and send encrypted messages on Android and iOS. (The Signal Desktop Chrome app, in beta, extends Signal’s secure messaging to the desktop.) A bonus to Signal is that the app lets users communicate with everyone on their contact lists. If the call recipient is not a Signal user, you will be warned that the call will not be encrypted, but you do not have to switch to your standard phone app to make the call, so the adoption process is even easier.

Open Whisper Systems, which makes Signal, recently partnered with WhatsApp to provide end-to-end encryption for the popular messaging app, but it’s not clear at the moment where that partnership stands. Even so, the popularity of apps such as WhatsApp and Snapchat show there is a strong appetite for secure communications.

For a long time, people who were interested in making calls from the desktop had only Skype as a viable option. But Skype has been plagued by accusations that the U.S. government forced Microsoft to build a backdoor into the service. OStel, maintained by The Guardian Project, is a secure voice and video communication service available for both desktop and mobile users. Users have to create an account with OStel (no personal information is required) and download the appropriate software. CSipSimple and Linphone work with Ostel on Android and iOS devices, for example.

Both ends of the call, the caller and the recipient, must be using OStel. Also, OStel can’t make calls to landlines or SIM card phone numbers on cellular networks. One of the advantages of OStel is that it works on BlackBerry, iPhone, Nokia, and Android devices, as well as on Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux. It also uses ZRTP, the same encryption protocol as the aforementioned Signal.


Websites are increasingly using HTTPS to help protect data sent from users’ computers to their servers. Credit card information typed into a Web form is transferred through an encrypted channel to the retailer’s server, so any attackers who might be monitoring the traffic won’t know what was sent. But that’s only the start.

With the ubiquity of public Wi-Fi — in airports, coffee shops, parks, and even the New York subway — it’s easy to forget why hopping online isn’t always the best idea. Attackers can easily intercept data traveling to and from your device regardless of what online services you access. Here, encrypting your Internet connection via a virtual private network such as F-Secure’s Freedome service, NordVPN, or CyberGhostVPN can make that data useless to eavesdroppers.

Most of us are familiar with VPN as software that comes installed on our work computers to enable us to access corporate applications. VPN services, on the other hand, let users establish an encrypted tunnel with a third-party server, then access the Internet through that tunnel. When a user in California connects to Facebook through a VPN service in France, as far as Facebook is concerned, that user is from France, not California. This is a great way to conduct online banking from an airport, as the VPN service encrypts the connection, preventing anyone from eavesdropping on your banking activity.

Then there is Tor, which grants complete anonymity on the Internet. It relies on a multilayered, onionlike security mechanism that bounces communications around multiple nodes to hide its origin. Not only does Tor prevent surveillance, it also prevents sites from tracking users. You can even access Facebook via Tor. Users new to Tor can go with the Tor Browser to get started. Orbot is a Tor proxy for Android from The Guardian Project.

Encrypting your email
Of all forms of modern communication, email is perhaps the most sensitive. Your email inbox can contain bank statements, bills from various services and retailers, tax-related documents, as well as personal messages. Information about who you are talking to, what you are talking about, or even when you are sending email can be dangerous in the wrong hands. Law enforcement can also subpoena copies of mail stored on mail servers, so sending encrypted blobs of text ensures the only eyes to see your messages are those you authorize.

Secure email service such as Hushmail and GhostMail promise built-in encryption. When you send an email to another member, the service encrypts the contents of your message before delivering it. If you want to send a message to a recipient who is not on Hushmail, your message can be encrypted with a secret Q&A combination. The recipient will need to know the answer to the question to decrypt the message. These services handles the keys in the background, making the process seamless for users.

Outlook has built-in cryptographic security features based on digital certificates generated by the software. Before users can send encrypted messages to each other, they need to digitally sign messages and exchange certificates. Once done, it’s a matter of opening up a new message and selecting “Encrypt message contents and attachments” under the Options menu.

If you have years of history on Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail, or other services, it’s a hard sell to move to a new email provider in the name of security. One option is to use Hushmail or GhostMail for sensitive communications, and keep going with the existing service for normal messages. But that works against the goal of encryption ubiquity.

Managing private/public keys
Until email providers decide to set up a universal encrypted email system, the onus of security falls on the sender and recipient. The sender has to generate a public/private key pair and publicize the public key. The recipient has to know how to use the public key to decrypt the message. For many tools that make use of public/private keys, public/private key management is transparent. That’s not the case with email.

Services such as and Android apps such as K-9 and OpenKeychain attempt to make key management simpler. With, you use Twitter, GitHub, Reddit, or a handful of other tools to publish the public key. You can store the private key with Keybase or store it somewhere else, for example, OpenKeychain on your phone. When you want to sign your messages with your key or encrypt a whole text message, you can use Keybase’s built-in tools, then cut and paste the generated block of text into your email message. Because Keybase uses PGP (Pretty Good Privacy), the recipient can decrypt or verify the signature using any key manager that handles PGP keys. Mailvelope is a Chrome app that can encrypt and decrypt messages using your PGP keys in popular webmail services.

Encrypting personal email still has a long way to go before it is easy enough to be used by everyone, but it’s getting there.

Encrypting your hard drive

Microsoft built file and disk encryption into some versions of Windows with BitLocker, as Apple has done so for Mac OS X with FileVault2. Unfortunately for Windows users, BitLocker doesn’t come with standard versions such as Windows 7 Home or the core versions of Windows 8 and 8.1.

For Windows users who don’t have BitLocker, there is TrueCrypt and its successors. TrueCrypt ceased development in 2014, and though it is no longer actively maintained, the last stable version of this file encryption program is still widely regarded as secure and effective. VeraCrypt is a fork and successor to TrueCrypt. It is under active development and supports multiple encryption ciphers, including AES, TwoFish, and Serpent.
It’s also worth noting that your data isn’t only on your mobile device or desktop. Many of us rely on flash drives to carry files or share them with others. And external hard drives are used for backups and to expand file storage. These drives should be encrypted, too.

Encrypted flash drives are available from manufacturers such as Imation, Corsair, and Kingston. Plug the drive into your USB port and drag the file over. As simple as that, you’ve protected the file. Some flash drives also support biometrics. The idea is that if you lose your flash drive, the data on the drive is still secured because the only way to access the contents is by guessing the password (or breaking the biometric protection). There are also secure self-encrypting hard drives from vendors such as Seagate and Western Digital that you can use to back up data securely.

Protecting your files

While full-disk encryption automatically encrypts all files saved locally, it doesn’t address what happens when those files are stored elsewhere or shared with others.

Many cloud storage services, such as Google Drive and Dropbox, automatically encrypt files saved on their servers. But if the wrong person manages to access those files, there is nothing to protect the contents. Dropbox, Box, and Syncplicity all offer tools for businesses that let IT assign specific policies to files, but those controls typically apply so long as the files are stored on those services. The best way to make sure the files are protected regardless of where they are is to use file-based encryption.

A Chrome app called MiniLock makes it easy for users who are intimidated by encryption to encrypt and decrypt files. There is no signup involved beyond installing MiniLock from the Chrome Web Store. The app uses an email address and a passphrase (pick a strong one!) to generate a 44-character MiniLock ID, which serves as the public encryption key. Drag a file of any type, including videos, images, and documents, into your MiniLock window to encrypt it, specify the MiniLock ID of the user who is allowed to open the file, then email or store the encrypted file on a cloud storage service knowing full well that only the person with the valid MiniLock ID will be able to decrypt the file.

two hands pointing at each other creating an electrical charge against blue background

In this increasingly devops-minded world, automation is king. Here’s how to get started with PowerShell


A startup called Vera is also addressing the need to protect files when they leave a company network or secure file storage. Users can set policies on a document, such as not allowing copy-and-paste or printing, not opening if it has been forwarded to someone else, deleting the file after a certain time, and encrypting the file so that only one recipient can see it.

Some software suites have encryption tools built in for you to use. Microsoft has included encryption tools in the Info tab under the File menu since Office 2010. Adobe Acrobat Pro X includes the option under the Protect section in the Tools tab. In both cases, the file is encrypted and decrypted with a password, so make sure to select a very complicated one, and keep it separate from the file itself.

If you frequently send Zip files and don’t want to make recipients jump through hoops to generate a MiniLock public key or install special software, the 7-Zip file archiving utility may be for you. While its primary purpose is to compress and decompress large files and folders, it can also turn individual files into encrypted volumes using 256-bit AES encryption. When creating the archive, assign a password, and the utility will take care of the encryption. The recipient only needs to know the password to decrypt the volume. It’s the easiest way to use encryption without confusing people who may not feel comfortable creating public keys or don’t want to sign up for yet another service.

User adoption is key

Encryption helps keep our communications with our banks private from criminals interested in stealing our money. It keeps our health records safe when they are transferred from one server to another. It prevents others from spying our credit card numbers when we are shopping online. Yet governments will continue to push back against encryption technologies in pursuit of backdoors by pointing to criminal activity and communications online — regardless of whether they were conducted using encrypted channels.

What governments and law enforcement agencies are missing is that encryption benefits everyone, not only terrorists and criminals. Even governments rely on encryption to keep their secrets, after all.

While encryption technologies advance, becoming easier to implement, and default standards for encryption begin to fall into place, the best thing we can do is begin to use encryption tools in our daily computing lives. Too much depends on our right to privacy and security not to.