September 19, 2008
U. of Tennessee-Knoxville Student at Center of Palin E-Mail Hacking Probe
Slippery politicians: Watch out for those hack-happy, tech-savvy college students. Tech-savvy students: Beware your own desire for glory.
Newspapers in Tennessee are reporting that a University of Tennessee at Knoxville student may be at the center of the investigation of who hacked into the Yahoo e-mail account of Sarah Palin, the Republican vice-presidential nominee. To make matters even more interesting, the newspapers say the investigation is focusing on the son of a Democratic state representative.
Over the past couple of days, a person who claims to have been the hacker has done something very stupid, given that he or she is the subject of an FBI investigation: bragging about how the deed was pulled off. The hacker used personal information about the Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate that has been made public recently — like where she met her husband — to trick Yahoo into reassigning the password to the hacker.
Early reports about the hacking had attributed it to a decentralized group of pranksters called Anonymous (read a great story about Anonymous here). But now newspapers and Internet sites are focusing on the son of Tennessee State Rep. Mike Kernell. The elder Mr. Kernell’s non-denial denial appears in the Knoxville News Sentinel:
Asked whether he or his son, a student at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville, had been contacted by authorities investigating the break-in of Palin’s account, he responded: ‘Me, no.’ As far as his 20-year-old son, David, he said: ‘I can’t say. That doesn’t mean he has or hasn’t (been contacted by investigators).’
A story in The Tennesseean says that Mr. Kernell confirmed that his son was a focus of the investigation.
The hacking has attracted attention not only for the evil genius by which it was pulled off, but also because it revealed that Ms. Palin was conducting state business on her private account. Now people are discussing whether the hacker, even if caught, could get away with it. —Scott Carlson
Posted on Friday September 19, 2008 | Permalink |Comments
Commenting is closed for this article.
Previous: Researchers Hope 'Smart Desks' Will Improve Classroom Interaction
Next: Report Finds Problems With Text-Message Alert Systems
Echoes of “Passportgate” during the primary campaign. If the trail goes no further than this, it is unlikely to be any bigger a story than that one.
I’m not sure I understand the addendum about “conducting state business on [Gov. Palin’s] private account,” though—unless there’s some federal or state requirement that such accounts not be used for official communications?
— Gustave Sep 19, 01:38 PM #
Isn’t that funny.
A student commits a crime that would aggravate and offend Chronicle of Higher Education management and employees, if they were the victims, but, officially, the Chronicle thinks it’s just another light-hearted story from the madcap world of presidential politics.
Invasion of privacy is an illegal and immoral act. Write that down if your parents didn’t teach you such things.
— June Dania Quayle Sep 19, 02:32 PM #
Gustave,
There are rules governing the use of state-owned computers, phones, etc. Perhaps Gov. Palin was conducting business which would not fit neatly within those rules, and chose to use a personal account which would not be subject to the same scrutiny?
I may be jumping the gun here, but in general I think it’s a bad idea for public officials to blur the line between their public trust and their private interest.
— me Sep 19, 03:59 PM #
It hasn’t been as widely reported, because of liberal media bias, but Obama’s email account was hacked too.
— proxy Sep 19, 04:31 PM #
#4 You’ve got to be kidding?
Did you read the email headers on the link you provided? I seriously doubt that Dick Cheney would send an email to Barack Obama that says “F**k You!”, or that Jimmy Carter would send one that calls him “Barracka” and uses pretty hip lingo.
While I agree that I doubt others hadn’t been hacked, don’t make things up! Please.
— Carson Sep 19, 04:41 PM #
#5: That was an image from a story in “The Onion”
— Johannes Sep 19, 04:46 PM #
I remember a case, a long long time ago, where somebody used illegal electronic means to get damaging information about a political adversary. Seems to me there was quite a bit of fuss about it. Of course, back then, it was a Republican doing it, so it was much much worse.
Oh, and proxy, want to buy some waterfront property in Florida?
— Gerard Harbison, UNL Sep 19, 04:47 PM #
I am finding less to like reading The Wired Campus with the bias in articles (I am referring to the article not the comments). The article seems fairly straight until reflecting on the opening comment directed to slippery politicians after noticing the sole politician is Governor Palin. Oh, maybe this article was just trying to be edgy.
— Fred Sep 19, 04:57 PM #
Conducting public business on a private email account? Been there, done that. I teach online, work on the road, do work-related business anytime/anywhere, and use whichever account is most convenient at the time. What am I hiding???!!! Or do I just like to keep up with my work as best I can? Don’t let the paranoids follow you, folks, there’s no “there” there – the kid himself wrote that he didn’t find anything interesting. And yes, I want hackers to suffer. Helloo! They’re thieves!
— Mimi Collins Sep 19, 05:06 PM #
#5 & #7 — Ha! Two more specimens to put on display in the Museum of the Humorless Left.
Palin Derangement Syndrome strikes again.
— proxy Sep 19, 05:08 PM #
Alaska – like many states – has an open records / “government in the sunshine” law that dictates that government business be conducted using government resources such that citizens may make requests of records in order to keep a watch on their elected officials. It is extremely clear from the releases of Gov Palin’s private Yahoo account that she was conducting state business out of the public eye. This may all have been innocent, but why go to the trouble of hiding something unless you know that what you’re doing won’t pass the “smell test”?
The hacker(s) whoever s/he/they were, should not have broken into a private account. Just as Gov Palin should not have conducted state business from a private e-mail account. What’s interesting is something I used to hear continually from conservative friends, “The ends justify the means.” Of course, they were talking about government intrusion into liberals’ private lives.
The greater question, listening to evrything that’s being turned up, what does this behavior say – as part of a continuing patter – about a candidate to the 2nd highest public office in the country?
— Gary Sep 19, 05:15 PM #
To #10 (proxy): Why Humorless Left? What makes it clear that #5 and #7 are on the Left or Right or anywhere?
— itchy Sep 19, 05:56 PM #
Why should Sara Palin not have a private email account, if she were using her official email account to communicate with her family and friends on non state business, the same critics who are chastising her for having a yahoo account would be going after her for mis use of state property (server space) and if someone sends her a email to her private account that might have something to do with official business how is that her fault? What is supposed to do? how is her receiving possible non appropriate email her fault?
And how does her receiving that kind of email have an reflection on her ability to govern?
If you are looking for a reason to vote against her this is a pretty lame one.
If the child of a Republican Party official had done the same to Obama and the same kind of emails were disclosed those who are going after the candidate (Palin) would instead going after the true criminal here (the hacker)
— Warren Sep 19, 06:02 PM #
To # 13, Warren: “…if someone sends her [Palin] a email to her private account that might have something to do with official business how is that her fault? What is supposed to do? how is her receiving possible non appropriate email her fault?” Could Palin not have responded by saying something like, “I’m sorry. I cannot respond to you via this email address. If you wish, please write to me at (insert Palin’s ‘official’ email account).” Doing what I’ve suggested would certainly have prevented this from being an issue, right? If Palin had nothing to hide, using a little common sense could have saved her the scrutiny. Given the facts thus far, I’m inclined to believe she knew exactly what she was doing—conducting state business via private emails so that those emails would not be part of the public record.
— Abbey Lincoln Sep 19, 09:45 PM #
State Rep. Mike Kernell’s son David should be prosecuted for this illegal and immoral activity. I wonder how much his father, a democrat, is involved? The purpose of this activity is to defame and find dirt on Governor Palin.
— kvc Sep 20, 01:30 AM #
“Vociferous, erudite Socialists\Communists\Democrats embrace death and lies as Life and Truth. The word “hypocrisy” cannot be applied to their subhuman system of belief. Hypocrisy is for humans.”
— JordanJordanJordan Sep 20, 10:37 AM #
To #14 Hind sight is 20 20. perhaps Palin should have directed others to her official email and perhaps she did and perhaps she did not.
Unlike the son of a Democratic party official I have not hacked into and I am not privy to her private emails, so I can not be sure of what occurred.
In the work day I am sure all of us get many emails via numerous accounts, and in many occurrences half the time people are not even conscious of the account they are accessing at any one time. That is a long way from the mens rea that would need to exist for the crimes that you are alleging.
I do not think there is sufficient proof to show that it is an overtly conscious act. Like say borrowing mobbed up money for a house (mansion) down payment or
starting a political career by using legal maneuvers to force all 6 of your primary opponents of the ballot, assuring election.
— Warren Sep 20, 01:13 PM #
#17: Forcing people off the ballot—-because of legal issues with their candidacy—- is a fairly common practice on both sides of the aisle.
— Johannes Sep 20, 06:44 PM #
Okay, Warren, I will consider this for a moment. The cliché is that hindsight is, as you say, 20/20. That was not my point. I have two email accounts. I have a personal email account, and I have a work-related email account. I do not use the personal account for work-related reasons, and I do not use the work-related account for personal reasons. The two address books, in fact, are separate. If a work-related contact wants to reach me for a personal reason, he or she can certainly do that via my personal email. If there is anything even remotely work-related in the message, however, I will not respond to it. Also, if a friend or relative contacts me via my work-related email, I will not respond. If anything, I might copy the personal message into a Word document and paste the contents to my personal email to respond, asking the person to use my personal email, not my work-related email, for personal reasons. It is not hindsight. It is common sense. Anybody who still doesn’t realize that personal and work-related emails should be kept strictly separate is inviting trouble. That was what I meant when I said that doing what I’ve suggested would certainly have prevented this from being an issue, right? If Palin had nothing to hide, using a little common sense could have saved her the scrutiny. In other words, why would anyone invite the potential for trouble when it can very easily be avoided?
Now, please allow me to say this: Although you did not hack into Palin’s private email, you are privy to some of her “private” email messages as a result of the fact that someone did hack into her personal email. If that were not the case, you and I would not be talking about this. The hacker, if the reports are true, discovered potential work-related business being conducted via Palin’s private email. That is why we are talking about this. In other words, secrecy breeds suspicion. There is now cause for suspicion.
You also wrote as follows: “In the work day I am sure all of us get many emails via numerous accounts, and in many occurrences half the time people are not even conscious of the account they are accessing at any one time.” While this might be true for you, or for others, it is not true for me. I don’t loose track of which account I’m looking at and, even if I did, it wouldn’t matter because work-related people don’t email me about work related things via my personal account. Nor do friends, etc., email me at my work-related email about personal things.
So … I did not allege any crimes, as you said. All I said was that if Palin used her personal email address for work-related purposes, it is cause for suspicion. Why did she do that? Given the fact that Palin is running to be the Vice President of the United States, I think people have a right to know, or at least to inquire.
You also said, “I do not think there is sufficient proof to show that it is an overtly conscious act.” Nor do I—yet. But there is reason to inquire. If she didn’t do anything “wrong” by using her personal email to conduct work-related business (i.e., if she wasn’t hiding anything), then being scrutinized won’t matter. However, if investigating the matter does reveal wrongdoing, I believe we, you and I both, have a right to know the facts. Wouldn’t you agree that knowing whether Palin tells the truth or not seems like a reasonable expectation?
— Abbey Lincoln Sep 20, 07:01 PM #
1. Hacking someone’s email account, much less for purely political purposes, is illegal and the person responsible should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
2. I love how Democrats on the one hand belittle Governor Palin’s role as an administrator at all levels on the one hand, then try to make this bigger than Watergate on the other. Either she is an important executive who does things consequential enough that everything should be “on the record” or she isn’t.
3. Much is being made about her talking about official business, but nothing is being made of exactly what she was talking about. This tells me that there is a lot of smoke here, no fire.
4. This is a cautionary tale. never assume that personal information you give in the form of correct answers to questions about your middle name or your first dog’s name in order to gain access to an email system is secure. Lie. Lie big. Just remember what the lies are in case you actually have to go through the process of recovering your password.
— Hal Sep 20, 08:31 PM #
Good grief! The level of immature online bickering and name-calling on these threads are starting to resemble the juvenile idiocy posted on YouTube comments. If this is in any way representative of what has become of the American voter, we are in deep, deep trouble. GROW UP!
— Lee Sep 21, 11:19 AM #
Abbey:
On one hand you write that
“I’m inclined to believe she knew exactly what she was doing—conducting state business via private emails so that those emails would not be part of the public record.”
and on the other that
“I did not allege any crimes, as you said. All I said was that if Palin used her personal email address for work-related purposes, it is cause for suspicion. “
How is it that you can on one hand argue that she was delberatly violating state records laws and on the other hand claim that you are not alleging any crimes?
Is not violating the law the very definition of a crime?
— warren Sep 21, 12:57 PM #
The “boys-will-be-boys” reaction to this serious invasion of privacy is very distrubing. Where is the outrage?
— observer Sep 21, 05:03 PM #
“evil genius by which it was pulled off…”
I think the hacking is funny—anyone silly enough to be that insecure about secure information deserves what they get, and no harm was done. Granted, anyone silly enough to brag about doing also deserves a comeuppance.
But this hideous grammar, coming from the Chronicle, makes me hopping mad!
— Dana Sep 22, 07:07 AM #
State public records laws are generally not criminal in nature. So, it is correct to say that one may have violated the law, but not be saying that the one committed a crime.
Also, I think it is important to understand that most public records laws have two things going on: a duty to make public records public and a duty to retain public records. Various states define what is ‘public’ differently – for example, some states make the personnel files of state employees public, some states do not. However, there is an obligation to produce public records when requested and to retain public records generally for a minimum period of time. The reason why the use of a personal email account is problematic is because that use (1) makes finding public records difficult (because those accounts can only be searched by the individual rather than by IT support) and (2) makes hiding public records easy (because those accounts can only be searched by the individual rather than by IT support).
There are various news articles from multiple sources that suggest the Palin administration actively encouraged the use of personal email for state business as a means of keeping the communications private. If the thought was that those email communications, just because done through a personal account, would actually be private under the law, then they were mistaken. But they do get more argument time that way, don’t they? And therein lies part of the problem.
And, just for the record, since otherwise some of the Republicans on the comment board can’t get to the real point of the comment, I do think it was wrong of someone to hack into Ms. Palin’s email account. I would not want such a thing done to me.
— Sigh Sep 22, 08:53 AM #
I simply object to the opening line, “Slippery politicians: Watch out…” The story thern goes on to discuss the case of a student who hacked Sarah Palin’s personal account. Very slick way to paint Sarah Palin as slippery, don’t you think? Personally, I think there has to be a way for anyone in a leadership position – Republican, Democrat, it doesn’t matter – to be able to discuss business with advisors and staff members in private. I would consider this to be non-official discussion that should NOT be documented, since the very fact that it is being documented inhibits candor. Does private, unofficial conversation make someone “slippery”?
— FB Sep 22, 09:28 AM #
Hacker should be prosecuted. He knew what he was doing was wrong.
— Cicero Sep 22, 09:55 AM #
“Private” unofficial conversation is not restricted to the slippery. That issue regards efforts to conduct official public business in private. Before Palin’s off-the-books account was hacked it was already known she had tried to evade open records laws and potential subpoenas by using her “private” email account. But that is a side issue here, albeit one that indicates the McCain/Palin ticket would be not only 4 more years of Bush, but 4 more years of Cheney, as well.
The main issue here is privacy, something even MySpace exhibitionists probably want to have available. The violation of Palin’s unwarranted, even goofy, expectation of privacy should be prosecuted.
— BertW Sep 22, 10:02 AM #
Hacker = bad
Hiding stuff = slippery
— mk Sep 22, 01:06 PM #
Palin was using her private e-mail account to discuss mattters of and approaches to state government that she didn’t want anyone to have privy to – it was an obvious attempt to avoid the “sunshine laws” that are in place in AK – and the approaches that she wanted to take – like getting her ex-brother-in-law fired for overblown and discredited reasons that she knew about and in some cases participated in three years before she complained about them – were approaches that were at best inapprorpiate and at worst actionably harrassing – and an abuse of her power. Use of personal e-mail accounts for such purposes was a required practice of her administration; one e-mail response to an aide who sent a message to her govt account was a reprimand that the message had come to the official rather than private account. She is a secreative and unethical politatician – but she will be a perfect continuation of Cheney if she and McCain manage to get elected. Sure the hackers shouldn’t have been hacking – but quite frankly, she asked for it!
— A Worried Alaskan Sep 22, 01:10 PM #
#24: If hacking is funny, then “borrowing” people’s postal mail from their curbside mailboxes, steaming it open, reading it, and then returning it would equally well be a riot. Of course, it’s actually a very serious crime. Although hacking isn’t as serious a crime (yet), the underlying principle is the same. And that fact is completely independent of the additional fact that this in no way excuses the use of U.S. mail to conduct business illegally. There aren’t very many heroes in this one.
— Atokal Sep 22, 01:36 PM #
Using a personal email account for public business may or may not be shady, but in the end it makes the task of the records manager and archivist nearly impossible. It’s one thing to design an email system that can archive the work the state for later analysis…all those presidential emails that have replaced letters, memos, and the like on paper. When Palin, and I suspect many if not most other rising politicos use the yahoo, gmail, etc accounts, I suspect those don’t get archived. That does seriously reduce the capacity of historians to later write accurately about politicians…both of their great achievements or their mistakes.
— DW Oct 8, 06:13 PM #