Who did the Treasury Hack?

Written By: - Date published: 8:22 am, May 29th, 2019 - 292 comments
Categories: grant robertson, labour, national, Simon Bridges - Tags: ,

I was writing a post about the release of National’s culture review which is one of the most bland management speak documents that I have ever read, but there is only one story right now, who hacked Treasury’s server.

Treasury head Gabriel Makhlouf was on Radio New Zealand this morning.  Susie Ferguson describes the interview perfectly in this tweet:

And the details:

New Zealand Treasury chief executive Gabriel Makhlouf has told Morning Report that Budget information taken from Treasury’s website came under attack 2000 times over 48 hours.

Treasury has called in the police to investigate what they are calling a deliberate and systematic hack of the Budget documents on its website.

It comes after National revealed what it says are details from the government’s Wellbeing Budget.

The party released three separate documents which it says reveal the funding for 20 policy areas, including health, defence, overseas aid, and justice.

So the suggestion that the leak was the result of the budget site going live would appear to be incorrect.

For now Bridges is acting tough.  I wonder how long it will take to change?

National won’t say how it got the information, but Simon Bridges has gone on the attack saying the party has acted “entirely appropriately”. And he says the Finance Minister Grant Robertson had “smeared us to cover up his and the Treasury’s incompetence”.

He also said Mr Robertson will need to resign when the truth is revealed but he has yet explained what that means and he won’t talk to Morning Report.

The Finance Minister Grant Robertson had agreed to talk to Morning Report, but has deferred to the the chief executive of the Treasury, Gabriel Makhlouf.

I don’t understand why Robertson should resign. IT prowess is not normally considered to be a necessary skill for politicians.

Makhlouf could not rule out the possibility that the hack came from overseas.  Subversion campaign anyone?

Right wing twitter is suggesting that this may result in the resignation of Grant Robertson as Finance Minister of Simon Bridges as leader of the opposition.  I suspect they are half right. Because as said by Sanctuary if treasury was subject to a serious, politically motivated and clearly criminal cyber-attack to steal confidential government documents and the result of that criminal activity has been splashed across the media by Simon Bridges with zero attempt by him to establish the credentials of the source, then Bridges is in serious trouble.

292 comments on “Who did the Treasury Hack?”

  1. A 1

    That's Bye Bye Bridges from here on out.   

    • mpledger 1.1

      The problem is that a lot of National people had their hands on it – he can't resign or else he has to take them all with him.  He's trying to bluff his way out for now and resign innocuously in a month or so.

  2. Dukeofurl 2

    We all know how the National party reacts when the Police come knocking …the guilty parties refuse to make a statement or give an interview.

    Law'n'order is for other people  as they 'lawyerup'

     

  3. James 3

    Mark Mitchell has confirmed it was from a leak and nothing to do with the hack and did not come from someone linked to the hack. 

     

    Labour and robertson might need to be careful if they are stating this as fact with zero evidence 

     

     

    • Robert Guyton 3.1

      Mark Mitchell admits there was a hack and that the National Party were in receipt of the resulting material; isn't that receiving
      How on earth could there be no link from receiver to hacker? That’s a nonsense claim.

      • James 3.1.1

        the two are not related according to mitchel. 

        • Sanctuary 3.1.1.1

          james:

          "…the two are not related according to mitchel…"

           

          The NZ Public: 

          "If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it is probably a duck."

          • Gosman 3.1.1.1.1

            FIFY

            The NZ Public:

            "I don't really care but the Treasury (and by extension the Government) looks like a bunch of Muppets over this leak/hack"

            • Robert Guyton 3.1.1.1.1.1

              How can a Government possible look "like a bunch of Muppets" if Treasury has been hacked, Gosman?

              Your claims around this issue seem particularly feeble, almost wilfully ignorant.

              • Gosman

                Because the Government is ultimately responsible for what happens in the respective departments

                • William

                  You mean like when John Key accepted full responsibility for the Dirty Politics operation being run out of the DPMC?

                • michelle

                  But doesnt it depend on what hat they are wearing or does it depend on what party your in as jhonkey use to say he is not acting in his ministerial capacity he is wearing another hat 

      • Grantoc 3.1.2

        Just like Hager back in the day. I believe he was receiving hacked information too. Can you explain how Hager's situation is different/ok cf National?

         

    • mickysavage 3.2

      Labour said nothing of the sort.  Makhlouf has said that there was a sustained attack on Treasury's servers and the information obtained included that released by National.

      Time for National to come clean and show where it received the information from.

      • James 3.2.1

        nash outright accused mitchel of this on Newstalk ZB. 

         

        They dont have have to give up their leak. 

        • mickysavage 3.2.1.1

          They may have to if the police investigate the matter properly, unless individuals want to exercise their right not to potentially implicate themselves.

          • James 3.2.1.1.1

            i guess they will happily (where not who) as they throw Robertson under the buss – thus bridges comments. 

             

             

          • Gosman 3.2.1.1.2

            They don't have to. If the NZ Police want to involve themselves massively in the Politics of this country then it will look rather messy. Can you imagine trying to force sitting MP's to reveal their sources?

            • Lucy 3.2.1.1.2.1

              Just a few words for you “TeapotTape investigation”, the NZ Police are totally involved in politics but they will probably not want to investigate National Party.

            • mickysavage 3.2.1.1.2.2

              Lets see, significant hack of Treasury server, release of financially sensitive information, budget undermined, overseas companies being able to speculate on kiwi dollar and share market, sure there should be an investigation.

              • Sam

                If anything it would be more a play for a technical bounce so a fall and then straight back to the weekly or monthly high. Kiwi dollar has been pretty strong against all its pairs largely because of the governments massive stimulus programme. It's like taking candy from a baby.

              • Gosman

                How is the Budget undermined exactly?

                • Sam

                  Its not the budget that's undermined per Se. It's that Simon Bridges tried to undermine the budget.

              • Shadrach

                "Significant hack"?  I doubt it.

                "But cyber-security experts from Darkscope, a Kiwi organisation with expertise in artificial intelligence, suggest any claim that National received information as the result of the Treasury being hacked was likely incorrect.

                "Claims from the head of Treasury, Gabriel Makhlouf, that 2000 attempts in 48 hours as proof that their systems were hacked clearly shows their lack of cyber security awareness," a statement from Darkscope said.

                "There are nearly one billion website breach attempts blocked every day across the world – it is far more common than most people expect. The 1000 attempts per day is simply 'white noise' on the Treasury site."

                Darkscope conducted a scan of cyber-attack activity in the New Zealand Government sector and found that agencies were "always under attack, by mainly foreign attackers".

                "An attack rate of 1000 attempts in a day is at the very light end of the spectrum."

                While there are different types of attacks, of varying complexity, Newshub found last year that the Bay of Plenty District Health Board fielded up to 864,000 potential cyber attacks every day."

                https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2019/05/cyber-experts-not-convinced-treasury-was-hacked.html

                 

                • Muttonbird

                  Joerg Buss, technical director of Kiwi cybersecurity consultancy Darkscope, said he not believe the Treasury had been "hacked" in the way people would normally think of the term.

                  "A more likely scenario is that someone used a spider or crawler program to find 'hidden' content in the Treasury website, which is not considered a cyber-attack"

                  This Darkscope? That statement has got to be the most ridiculous thing said today, and there was a lot of competition.

              • Ed1

                "budget undermined" – ???    Hardly. I am sure it will be a good budget, but I am no wiser about what will be in it today than I was two days ago. I have heard a bit about a leak that Simon Bridges released, but I haven't seen any article analysing the numbers apparently given. Are they really financially sensitive? Does anyone stand to gain or lose money from this purported leak?

                I was amused that it has hit the media at about the same time as a book about Slater doing wrong with information he managed to get hold of. 

                I hope this is a "sting" operation, with content being able to be used to identify who held it . . .

                 

      • The Chairman 3.2.2

        Time for National to come clean and show where it received the information from.

        They will have to give some indication if they expect (as they do) it will result in Robertson having to resign. 

      • Grantoc 3.2.3

        One more sleep Mickey. Sounds like national will reveal all tomorrow. I imagine they will be timing their announcement to maximize the government's embarrassment. Or at least hoping to. 

    • Muttonbird 3.3

      Waiting patiently here for Mitchell's evidence which no doubt you will bring to us in due course.

      • James 3.3.1

        As soon as you give evidence you haven’t been fucking goats. 

         

        Its up up to the accuser to make a case – not the accused to have to answer to accusations with zero evidence. 

        • Muttonbird 3.3.1.1

          Oh dear. The mask has slipped. 😂

          You agree then National is now in the dock. A place they are becoming very familiar with!

          • James 3.3.1.1.1

            I guess you missed reading and comprehension lessons as a child. 

          • Gosman 3.3.1.1.2

            Not at all. The National party can sit back like Nicky Hager and claim they were not given information that was hacked. It is up to their accusers to produce evidence that they were.

            • vto 3.3.1.1.2.1

              Excellent. I look forward to the coppers raiding National Party offices and taking computers and records and everything, like they did (at dirty John Key's behest) with Nicky Hager

            • William 3.3.1.1.2.2

              Your memory's pretty crap eh. Nicky Hager didn't deny where the information came from, but he claimed journalistic privilege. The Police subsequently admitted that was correct & he received compensation for their actions.

              Simon Bridges doesn't have journalistic privilege. He does have Parliamentary privilege, but doesn't seem to have made his claims as part of "the proceedings of the House".

    • SHG 3.4

      Given that the root cause appears to be technical incompetence, I think reasonable fingers must point at Clare Curran.

    • lilamn 3.5

      Just a foolish error, not hacking.

       

    • michelle 3.6

      And you believe  mark the mercenary mitchell, James sounds like you are a bit naive 

       

    • cleangreen 3.7

      James = National house cleaner.

  4. dv 4

    So will the police interview Bridges?

  5. Sanctuary 5

    Bridges didn't front on RNZ this morning, after crowing yesterday about this leak.

     

    That should tell us all something.

    • James 5.1

      That there is more to come before budget day. 

      • Macro 5.1.1

        LOL Dream on!

        It has probably just occurred to Simon that he has erred rather drastically on this matter and that he had better STF up.

        Nincompoop.

    • Grantoc 5.2

      Robertson didn't front up for several hours today to explain his accusations – that should tell us something

  6. vto 6

    Didn't the Nats race in the coppers when John Key hounded Bradley Ambrose over the tea cups recording?

    The Nats – dirty and deceptive since forever

    • Gosman 6.1

      Are you suggesting the Government instruct the Police to investigate the National Party? I can't wait for that to become the story!

      • Muttonbird 6.1.1

        It’s what you are hoping. That much is clear.

      • vto 6.1.2

        It is well known that Police will often do the government-of-the-day's bidding, or bend to the politicians wishes.

        Key was an expert at that dirty corrupt behaviour.

        And no, I am not suggesting this government do that. I am reminding people that that is what the dirty John Key did.

        • Gosman 6.1.2.1

          Not relevant to the current situation then.

          • vto 6.1.2.1.1

            Police involvement in political party shenanigans is entirely relevant, hence the reminder.

            The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

            Dont wanna end up like Trumpland now do we… 

      • Gabby 6.1.3

        They can lodge a complaint and demand a return of the stolen info can't they gozzer.

        • Gosman 6.1.3.1

          Yeah, lets get the Police to raid the Leader of the Oppositions office and confiscate all material possibly related to the leak/hack. Would you like to see that? I would.

          • Sam 6.1.3.1.1

            Now you are just being silly. Any Party leader worth there salt would fully cooperate with police. Get real.

    • cleangreen 6.2

      vto yes exactly. smiley

  7. Muttonbird 7

    Bridges going off the reservation. PM needs to step in here.

    https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/113055687/live-national-party-claims-its-got-leaked-budget-details

    I see Simon Bridges didn’t appear without his usual security detail…

  8. xanthe 8

    "Who did the Treasury Hack?"

    um the treasury didn't hack anyone ?

    • Sabine 8.1

      good i am not the only one who thinks this might be a bit of an odd / somewhat misleading (unintentional i assume) headline. 

       

      • Robert Guyton 8.1.1

        It's the upper-case "H" that makes the headline accurate.

        • Sabine 8.1.1.1

          awesome. that makes it all so clear then right? 

          Any 'low information' reader or someone like me where english is one of several languages spoken, or someone who has a reading disablity,  someone who might just skim a headline might not know/realise that the trick is in the capital H. 

          but thanks. It now reads so much better 🙂 

          • In Vino 8.1.1.1.1

            Pedantic language teacher's comment:

            The question (Title) is ambiguous. If 'Hack' is a noun it means 'the hack on Treasury' as author intended, and most people understood.

            But Xanthe raises the other meaning: 'Hack' is a verb, and this makes it sound like Treasury hacked somebody. Not the intended meaning, but valid. Unlikely though, because then the word 'the'  should not be there.  The question would be, 'Who(m) did Treasury hack?'

            'Whom' is unhelpful because it is archaic and on the way out. Some of us use it still, straight after a preposition – 'To whom are you speaking?'

            But most of us use the preposition to end the sentence up with, and say, 'Who are you speaking to?'  Never 'Whom are you speaking to?'

            'Whom' is going the same way as Thou, Thee, Thy, and Thine.

             

    • AB 8.2

      It's not really ambiguous. If the story was about the Treasury hacking someone, the headline would be "Whom did the Treasury hack?"

      • woodart 8.2.1

        there would be more than one treasury hack, old white toyotas are cheap reliable hacks. old white men are cheap reliable(?) treasury hacks….how pedantic are we to be?

    • Who did the hack on the treasury?

      I would think they missed a word out.

       

  9. Robert Guyton 9

    WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW:

    * Treasury's systems were attacked more than 2000 times over 48 hours, with information from the upcoming Budget targeted, says Treasury head Gabriel Makhlouf.

    * National earlier said it has details from the Government's Budget, days before its release on Thursday. 

     

    • Gosman 9.1

      Again the two are not necessarily related UNLESS there is evidence linking the hack to the leak. Do you have such information?

      • Sam 9.1.1

        No one cares. Look at Simon Bridges record as Leader. Donations scandal. Leak after leak that he tried to plug and National are still leaking. Jamie Lee Ross. Simon Bridges is spent as a political force. He should know when he is defeated. 

      • Muttonbird 9.1.2

        Desperately trying to separate the connected.

        National are in a very difficult position because the events do point to the release of confidential documents obtained by hack.

        That is what the public see.

        Without revealing the source of what they claim is a separate leak, the public will continue to see that.

        • Gosman 9.1.2.1

          That is what YOU think the Public will see. I suggest you are too biased to actually know what the public will see. 

          • Sam 9.1.2.1.1

            The public see what commercial media wants it to see. Like anything reporters have there biases and we left or right just have to let them speak.

          • Macro 9.1.2.1.2

             I suggest you are too biased to actually know what the public will see. 

            And the same could be said of you Gosman. But in this case I believe the public are quite capable of putting 2 and 2 together.

          • RedLogix 9.1.2.1.3

            While you are correct that for the most part ordinary people don't pay much attention to the minutiae of political shenanigans, it's my sense that the Budget is a different matter.

            It's a bit like how Churches are largely empty most of the year, but come Christmas and Easter they're packed. These events remain important to a lot of people even if just for nostalgic reasons.  Something similar is in play here, there are some political rituals that you don't mess with.

            And Bridges has stepped right over the line on this one.

            • Gosman 9.1.2.1.3.1

              The average Jo/Joanne on the street is not getting in to a tizzy about some supposed iron cast convention that Budget details will not be leaked prior to the Budget announcement. The last few years it has generally been the Government that has leaked/released budget information prior to Budget day. Most NZers don't care.

              • RedLogix

                It remains to be seen whether the public care, but there is nothing 'supposed' about the absolute confidentiality of the Budget. 

                If confidentiality means anything at all, I can scarcely imagine a more egregious breach of it than the Leader of the Opposition leaking the Budget. 

              • Robert Guyton

                "The average Jo/Joanne on the street is not getting in to a tizzy about some supposed iron cast convention that Budget details will not be leaked prior to the Budget announcement."

                 

                I reckon that's exactly how people will feel; the crowing release of Budget details by Bridges seems nothing more than showboating and, well, crowing.

                There was no need and no usefulness to his actions, which seems petulant and like those of a spoiled brat. That's what I sense the public are feeling.

                • michelle

                  petulant yes like a spoilt brat throwing his toys out of his cot cause he can't get his way 

              • cleangreen

                Someone should hack Bridges to see the filth he has been up to eh?

            • Clive Macann 9.1.2.1.3.2

              Reading on the National Facebook page was interesting.

              The staunch National supporters are all up in arms about Simon leaking the info.

              A definite no-no in anything political.

              Many are vowing to leave the party as it's now too corrupt for them.

              • Robert Guyton

                Eg: "Michael Riley I hate to say this because we have the evidence of how great National can be for the country but you’re all on the wrong side of the fence with all this nonsense. It’s not going to win support. 

                I hope some National MP’s see into their hearts that they are backing someone who is losing National long term life supporters right before their eyes."

                • Gosman

                  I had a look at the National Party Facebook page as you suggested and none of the people who are against what Simon Bridges has done seem to be lifetime National party supporters or even casual supporters. 

                  The example of Michael Riley being a prime case as it seems clear from his Facebook site he supports Labour.

              • michelle

                too corrupt for some national supporters and that is a nice way of putting it 

          • George 9.1.2.1.4

            The public see a leader of the opposition clutching at straws. They're seeing a type of politics they dislike and a kind of leadership that belongs in the schoolyard gang. The public are vomiting a little in their mouths and wishing desperately that someone with sense will make it all go away so everyone can get on with the real business.

      • katipo 9.1.3

        "Again the two are not necessarily related"

        True, but the resulting slice of Occam's razor bolsters the case that they are – will be interesting to see what the next slices indicate.

        • mpledger 9.1.3.1

          It doesn't really matter whether the info was hacked or leaked – he was still wrong to use it.  Just as National were wrong to leak solo parents' informtaion, ACC patients' information and Winston Peter's Super information.

          • George 9.1.3.1.1

            ACC information…I ended up with one of those computers after they had been " cleaned" and sent to a DHB to use. It had ghost folders on it with ACC Sensitive Claims.. written on them. They were apparently supposed to have had the drives destroyed..  

          • Grantoc 9.1.3.1.2

            Peter's superannuation case is still in front of the courts isn't it. If so it's not proven that national leaked Peter's information

             

      • woodart 9.1.4

        not necessarily related, just like having an extra few million cows shitting and pissing doesnt necessarily have a connection with a sudden polluting of the waterways……..intelligent people that ARENT unpaid hacks for a right of centre political party(unpaid…sad) that puts $$$$ above everything, can join the dots…..

    • michelle 9.2

      why do you national people also say things like that  bm you sound so desperate lol  

    • michelle 9.3

      say no more Robert national received stolen information dress it up how you like they received it and they know it was not right but they don't care why ? 

    • SHG 9.4

      Something something pirates something global warming something

  10. BM 10

    I'll say one thing, all this carry on has completely fucked up and overshadowed Labours well-being budget, so much for the year of delivery, more like the year of complete incompetence.

    Ardern must be about ready to throw in the towel.

    • ankerawshark 10.1

      BM . Ha, ha ha……..I think you mean Bridges must be ready to throw in the towel…or have the towel thrown at him

    • BG 10.2

      At least they can say they've kept one election promise of being Open and Transparent

    • woodart 10.3

      any truth to the rumour that simon was measurered for a (back)stabproof vest??

  11. michelle 11

    why do you national people alway say things like that  bm you sound so desperate lol  

    • BM 11.1

      About Ardern throwing in the towel?

      Here it’s just clownsville and endless stress, overseas she’s a “superstar”, why would you want to hang around here when there’s probably far better offers going elsewhere?

      • Sam 11.1.1

        Is that like that time John key promised to resign for casual mass surveillance of New Zealand citizens?

      • AB 11.1.2

        "why would you want to hang around here when there’s probably far better offers going elsewhere"

        Because – and it's not exactly a wild guess – Ardern is one of those people who is motivated by wanting to make life better for others, not just enrich herself. I appreciate these types simply don't fit anywhere in the RW mental landscape – and tend to get belittled as 'do-gooders' for that reason. But there you go – that's the real reason. 

      • ankerawshark 11.1.3

        Meme's about Jacinda Ardern we have come to expect………..she really rather be/will be heading overseas, where she will get better/offers more acclaim……………

        I think that genius Kate Hawkesby first came up with that.

         

         

        • Sam 11.1.3.1

          Are we sure some one like Kate Hawksby is allowed to use a word like "acclaim?"

          • George 11.1.3.1.1

            Kate and Mike…the whinge twins. It's depressing hearing them go on and on and on… I don't watch read or listen …it’s like sinking into a pit of general despair with those two…eeerk!

          • Nick 11.1.3.1.2

            And hawkesby definitely has no association with the word Genius. 

    • cleangreen 11.2

      Yes I agree.

      So this is just a dry run by National ahead of the election  next year for "dirty Politics 2,.

  12. Muttonbird 12

    From Henry Cooke:

    What Robertson actually said last night followed on from the Treasury saying they had evidence they had been "deliberately and systematically hacked". Robertson said that it was "an extremely serious matter and one for the police" and said he had contacted the National Party to "request that they do not release any further material, given that the Treasury said it has sufficient evidence that indicates the material is a result of a systematic hack and is now subject to a police investigation."

    In other words, Robertson never directly said National hacked anyone, but he did draw the link between the material released yesterday and a "systematic hack". Bridges said that Robertson was implying the National Party were guilty of hacking.

    Bridges’ outrageous stand up this morning with his two minders in tow was based on fear, not fact.

    https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/113055687/live-national-party-claims-its-got-leaked-budget-details

  13. AB 13

    Was there a leak and a hack? If so, was the hack done to cover up the leak? Which of National's domestic proxies did the hack? Or was it a foreign intelligence agency sympathetic to National? Is the National Party a criminal organisation? Fascinating questions and most likely none of them will be properly answered.

    One thing is clear though. There is no public interest component in disclosing information that is going to be made public anyway. So what we have is a disloyal opposition that is undermining the very institutions and conventions it is actually going to rely on at some time in the future if it becomes government again. This is the sort of radical immaturity you'd expect from a Bridges/Bennett front row.

     

    • Gosman 13.1

      I would so like it if the Government attempted to follow your line and attempt to link the National Party with foreign intelligence operatives.

      • AB 13.1.1

        "The Government" won't do that because that's not what governments do and they certainly don't indulge in the sort of enjoyable speculation that is permitted on blog sites!  The police might make such a link if there is any evidence of it – but then again they might just prefer to steer clear of such a sh*tstorm. Odds on we'll never know and the farce will continue. But you know all this anyway.

        • Gosman 13.1.1.1

          I agree they won't for the reasons you mention. I would love it if they did though. It would be such a hoot and the blow back would be pretty impressive.

      • Nick 13.1.2

        I think National party and Intelligence in the same sentence is an oxymoron, gossman.

  14. Robert Guyton 14

    Who is in possession of material they ought not to have?

    Simon Bridges.

    Who is releasing information they ought not to release?

    Simon Bridges.

    Who is Simon Bridges?

    The Leader of the National Party.

    • Gosman 14.1

      The line could equally have applied to Nicky Hager and the information he used for Hollow men

      • RedLogix 14.1.1

        No it does not 'equally' apply.

        For a start Hager is a journalist and is legally permitted to protect his source. Bridges is not a journalist and has no special privileges outside of Parliament.

        Secondly Don Brash's emails do not have the same constitutional status as the Budget.

        And thirdly Hager had a legitimate 'public interest' defense in using the information he obtained. This emphatically does not apply to the Budget which has a long-standing, iron-clad expectation of absolute confidentiality. 

        • Robert Guyton 14.1.1.1

          That logic, read, is simply lost on Gosman, James, BM et al.

        • Gosman 14.1.1.2

          Do you really think the Opposition do not have similar rights to release leaked information to journalist's? I'm pretty sure most people expect the Opposition to get leaked information and use it. I would expect Labour to do the same if they were in Opposition.

          • Robert Guyton 14.1.1.2.1

            "Do you really think the Opposition do not have similar rights to release leaked information to journalist's?"

            Yes. 
            And in any case, Bridges released it publicly, in person. And the material he released was subject to different conventions to those released by, say, Hager, as RedLogix describes.
            That you “would expect” Labour to do the same speaks volumes about your cynical world-view.
            You say, “leaked”, but that’s not established. “Hacked” has not ben ruled out. The police, it is to be hoped, will discover the truth there.

            • Gosman 14.1.1.2.1.1

              Other than left wing activists and comments on the internet where is this general feeling that National has overstepped the mark? Can you give me an example of an relatively unbiased media commentator making the same case as you?

              • Robert Guyton

                Can't imagine why I should go to the trouble of finding a media-commentators view on this, Gosman. You ask, "where is the general feeling"? From what I've read so far, here and around the traps, I'd say there's a wide-spread unhappiness around what Bridges has done. Some lone-stars like yourself are head-down-bums-up determined to hold a line, but it's a greased thread, in my view, and won't stand up to the strain.

                • Gosman

                  From around the traps??? Please give me some examples of these traps you have visited which support you claim.
                   

                  • Robert Guyton

                    Are you an Inquisitor?

                    • Gosman

                      No, I am merely pushing you to back up your claims which I suspect are a load of tosh.

                    • Robert Guyton

                      Tosh? Mine are opinions. Are yours something other than that?

                      I regularly add; imo, "in my opinion", to my comments. I don't recall you using the same disclaimer. I try not to dismiss the opinions of others with such put-downs as "tosh", or assign demeaning names to those offering their views; it's a courtesy that helps the flow of convivial discourse, I think, but you seem not so constrained. 

                      In any case, with regard, "the traps", one instructive site I visited this morning where I found a number of deeply critical-of-Bridges comments was the National Party Facebook page; you might like to swing by and see what Simon's people think of his behaviour. Let me know your views once you've been there, won't you.

                  • Robert Guyton

                    Found this from one, "Gosman".

                    "

                    The NZ Public:

                    "I don't really care…"

                • Gosman

                  Have you got examples of a right wing commentator worried about the consequences of this?

          • ankerawshark 14.1.1.2.2

            Meme's about Jacinda Ardern we have come to expect………..she really rather be/will be heading overseas, where she will get better/offers more acclaim……………

            I think that genius Kate Hawkesby first came up with that.

             

             

    • Shadrach 14.2

      I'm curious Robert.  Why do you think the information, however it was obtained, should not have been released? It’s a genuine question.

    • Nick 14.3

      Sung to the tune of 'Goodbye Yellow Brick Road". Nice one Robert. 

    • mauī 14.4

      "Who is Simon Bridges?"

      …Great question! 

  15. Ad 15

    With Makhlouf leaving anyway, it's a good chance for Robertson to take out the whole of the top 2 management and repopulate with those who "get" the framework.

     

    Never waste a crisis Mr Robertson.

    • OnceWasTim 15.1

      Yep!

      And may the same apply elsewhere in the PS. If we can't have accountability and honour, we may as well have lynchings.

  16. Muttonbird 16

    Gosman began the day ambivalent. He's claimed several times this won't interest the public. Yet he's commented almost 50 times since 8:30am.

    🤣

    • In Vino 16.1

      Excellent point, Muttonbird. Coming in late, I see Gosman working overtime with all his punctilious nit-picking powers to deflect from an issue that will not even interest the public.

      That really is amusing.

  17. Wensleydale 17

    God, Bridges is a clown. I didn't realise Grant Robertson was also Minister of System Administration and Cyber-Security, and therefore responsible for the security of Treasury I.T. systems. "It's outrageous and he should resign!" At this point you could probably replace Bridges with a homeless alcoholic prone to rambling incoherently and hardly anyone would notice.

    • Gosman 17.1

      Why shouldn't Robertson at least offer his resignation? It is potentially a gross breach on his watch.

      • Wensleydale 17.1.1

        Because he's not responsible for it. Seriously, hacking — if hacking is indeed what has occurred here — is not known for taking place in direct sunlight or involving those whose knowledge of computer systems is functional at best. I don't know Grant Robertson from a hole in the ground, but I'm fairly certain he has enough on his plate operating his smart phone on a daily basis without involving himself in the digital witchcraft of hacking Treasury, or preventing Treasury from being hacked. I could very well be wrong in that assumption, but I'm probably not.

        • Gosman 17.1.1.1

          He is the Minister responsible for both data security AND Treasury. 

          • Wensleydale 17.1.1.1.1

            Really? Because according to the government, he's in charge of Finance, Sports & Recreation, and Arts, Culture & Heritage.

            Don’t they have expensive I.T. consultants to handle the sorts of things government ministers can’t get their collective heads around?

            • Shadrach 17.1.1.1.1.1

              If the business I run has a serious cyber intrusion, I can blame anyone I want, but ultimately I am accountable.  Likewise Robertson and Treasury.  I not saying it's a sacking offence, but there is accountability.  Or at least there should be.

            • Gosman 17.1.1.1.1.2

              I agree I got it wrong. I corrected myself on another comment.

      • George 17.1.2

        Using that logic, John key would not have lasted one term in office.

    • Shadrach 17.2

      For clarification – Grant Robertson has ministerial responsibility for Treasury.  Until we find out exactly what happened, calls for his resignation may be a bit premature.  But ultimately, he is the minister responsible.

      • McFlock 17.2.1

        fucking hell, I pretty much agree with that.

        If there's a governance failure, the minister is accountable.

        If there's an operational failure, the civil servant is responsible.

        If there are systemic operational failures, that strongly suggests there's been a governance failure.

        • OnceWasTim 17.2.1.1

          And I raise you a "fucking hell". I also agree.

          But long LONG gone are the days of quaint little ideas like that.

          If it's a governance failure: spin, obfuscate, shift blame to the next nearest candidate in line

          If it's an operational failure: have the SSC shift the offender sideways and claim any bad publicity that's associated with it as "an employment matter" which cannot be discussed

  18. marty mars 18

    Wow desperate people and glass shits and all that. Bridges has constructed a final hurrah – he will not survive this debacle imo – congrats to those who placed his advisers and minders in there – well played you lot and look your hands aren't even dirty. Politics – not for the faint of heart.

    • Gosman 18.1

      If you are correct you will see senior National party MP's move to distance themselves from this very shortly. If they don't I suspect the information is not from the leak.

  19. Adrian thornton 19

    …it's that dirty rotter Putin and the Russians they're trying to steal out democracy….no wait that sounds ridiculous, like some sort of tin hat conspiracy, no one in there right mind would believe that..or would they?

    • AB 19.1

      Or it could be the Guaido 'government' in Venezuela registering their displeasure at NZ's not officially recognising them?  Hmm – is Gosman a cybersecurity expert? The plot thickens!

  20. Peter 20

    Anyone would think that Bridges had a National Party workplace culture review coming out this week which he didn't want any attention on.

  21. Muttonbird 21

    Joerg Buss, technical director of Kiwi cybersecurity consultancy Darkscope, said he not believe the Treasury had been "hacked".  

    "A more likely scenario is that someone used a spider or crawler program to find 'hidden' content in the Treasury website, which is not considered a cyber-attack, and may have found the Budget 2019 files which were not protected properly at that stage," he said. 

    W. T. F?

    https://i.stuff.co.nz/business/113082731/budget-hack-theory-could-raise-questions-as-to-what-is-illegal

    • Gosman 21.1

      In which case both the head of Treasury AND Robertson should resign.

      • Muttonbird 21.1.1

        Reckon if you asked any person whether using spider or crawler programs to access hidden content on a computer system constituted a hack, the answer would be a resounding, 'yes, of course'.

      • Peter 21.1.2

        The whole government should resign. Then at least we'll be able to say we tried to do something about the hysteria and lunatic responses to events. If there is no more desperate anti-coalition Government and anti-Labour madness we can say the strategy worked.

        Failing that step maybe the loonies can be politely told to just "get a fucking grip."

      • SPC 21.1.3

        Wandering into someones office and taking a copy of the budget is theft. Whether the office is locked securely or not. 

    • Macro 21.2

      So if it is hidden then obviously other people are not supposed to be looking at, it until it is made public. Buss can call it what he likes – but to all intents and purposes – it is not public information at this point in time (as he should well know) and therefore snooping around, by whatever you want to call it, and then downloading, and handing to others, is still stealing.

      • Gosman 21.2.1

        No, that is not the definition of hacking and stealing data. If you are foolish enough to put information relating to yourself on a publicly accessible location (even if you don't publicise this location) then you do not have much recourse to complain if people discover the information and then publicise it further. Their argument would be is that it was already in the public domain.

        • Sam 21.2.1.1

          Again, for the computationally challenged. To a large degree. Real world hacking very often is about conning people into giving you access, one way or another.

          • Gosman 21.2.1.1.1

            If you knowingly give your personal access information to another party then it is kind of like giving the keys to your house to someone and complaining they have rummaged through your personal effects and found out some juicy gossip

            • Sam 21.2.1.1.1.1

              Does Simon Bridges like taunting car wreckers by papering his balls in car hooning infringement fines and leaving them in his glove box? Because that's pretty much what he is doing. 

               

              • RedLogix

                It's not often the internet manages to provoke my modest sense of humour into action … but you got me good with that image Sam cheeky

        • Macro 21.2.1.2

          🙄

          Walking into an unlocked house and finding money on the table is still stealing.

          • Gosman 21.2.1.2.1

            Walking in to a house someone has inadvertently given you the keys for and you reading their personal diary open on the table isn't though.

            • gsays 21.2.1.2.1.1

              What you do with the information you read whilst snooping is where the dodginess and untrustworthy behaviour begins.

              Heh, National party leadership material.

        • mpledger 21.2.1.3

          IIRC, a judge has already ruled on a case like that and it's unlawful. 

          The only way they might get out of it is if it happened by accident e.g. pointed there by a search engine, but 2000 attempts in 48 hours doesn't look like an accident.

           

        • Doogs 21.2.1.4

          Gosman, you have a weird and quite anarchic view of what is right and what is legal. If I left my house open and it was burgled I wouldn't get the insurance, but the perpetrator would definitely have committed a crime. The 'you left it unguarded and it's your own bloody fault' seems to be de rigueur for right wing thinkers, which of course tells of the "rights of the individual" attitude inherent in true anarchy.

  22. ianmac 22

     

     

     

     

    Steven Price has an interesting take on the wisdom of Bridges to publish as he did.

    I’ve just been listening to Simon Bridges’ press conference at Parliament about the budget leak. His main point was to deny that the leaked budget material was a result of a hack. But he made the broader claim that the Nats’ behaviour throughout was “entirely appropriate”. He said there had been “nothing illegal or anything approaching that from the National Party.” He denied that their conduct was at any point unlawful.

    I think he’s wrong. I think the Nats have probably engaged in  unlawful behaviour from the get-go. That’s regardless of whether the budget material they released was hacked. The Nats have broken the law relating to Breach of Confidence.

    That’s not a crime. It’s a civil claim, like defamation or negligence. But it is the law.

    http://www.medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=717

  23. Muttonbird 23

    Of dear.

    In defence of the crooked National Party, Peter Williams quotes two bloggers; one involved in Dirty Politics, David Farrar. And one anonymous, Idiot Savant (the clue is in the name).

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/opinion/2019/05/peter-williams-treasury-incompetence-led-to-budget-hack.html

     

    • Gosman 23.1

      Idiot Savant is a left wing blogger (Hence the name of the blog No right turn).

    • Peter 23.2

      Guessing is good. When you don't know, guess. Peter Williams likes that.

      Well my guess is, and it's valid because it's me and because it's a guess, is that Peter Williams is an idiot. An important idiot though apparently, because he gets to write on a media site and is on the radio. 

      Williams regularly tries to redefine the meaning of 'shallow' with the quality of his work. The more practice he gets the closer he gets to perfection. He will be pleased with this latest show of progress.

  24. SPC 24

    Simon Bridges claims he got a leak. The only way he can know it was not as a result of the hacking of the Treasury site, is he knows the who and thus another means of how.

    If that is the case, and there was also an attempt since Sunday to identify the Treasury pages the data is to made available to the public then 

    1. the hacking could have been an effort to cover up the leak source  (protect the leaker and thus allow the same source to used again next year)

    2. the "hacking" was done to implicate Treasury and their Minister as responsible for lack of data security (having pages set up for data release but not yet for public access – and someone then identifying/cached pages for this and suggest a hacking of information). 

  25. Gosman 25

    Looks like Treasury has little clue about what constitutes a serious cyber attack

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2019/05/cyber-experts-not-convinced-treasury-was-hacked.html

  26. SHG 26

    Jacinda's throwing Treasury under the bus:

     

    Ardern has attempted to effectively washed (sic) her hands of it, pointing any responsibility for the security of the documents to the Treasury.”Ultimately this is a matter for the Treasury, they are the ones that hold the information around what essentially has happened in this situation; also the ones that made the decision over how they wish to handle it, and advised us in the aftermath of taking those decisions, so I see this ultimately as a matter for them.”

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/113055687/live-national-party-claims-its-got-leaked-budget-details

    • Gosman 26.1

      "Of course none of my Ministers are responsible for what Treasury does or doesn't do" /sarc

    • joe90 26.2

      Jacinda's throwing Treasury under the bus:

      As you do.
      /

      Ms Bennett rejected criticism she was passing the buck on responsibility.

      "At the end of the day I have a level of responsibility and certainly accountability. What I can't be held to is to blame for something I have no control over.

      "I set high standards for the ministry. They have not lived up to them in this case and I want … to be sure it will never happen again.''

      Ms Bennett said the fact the warnings about a major privacy breach were never escalated to more senior staff was "really hard to fathom''.

      "It seems incredulous to me that it wasn't escalated to the right people,'' she said.

      "I have made it very clear that this has not lived up to the expectations and high quality I expect.''

      Ms Bennett said "accountability should be followed through''.

      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10844604

    • SPC 26.3

      You are the same SHG who accused Treasury of covering their arse? 

      • SHG 26.3.1

        Accusing the public service of arse-covering is like accusing a fish of swimming.

  27. Gosman 27

    Isn't Grant Robertson also the Minister in charge of data security?

    EDIT: Nope it looks like this is Kris Faafoi

    • New view 27.1

      Love the comments Gosman. Interesting people on this forum. You are keeping them focused and accountable for their comments way better than I could. Any body would think Labour wasn’t capable of releasing sensitive information they had obtained. Many on this forum see all Nats as evil and all labour supporters as righteous. Well done. 

  28. Cinny 29

    Question time should be interesting today…. not long to wait now, Q1 & Q3 will be of interest to those following said topic.

    Q1   Hon SIMON BRIDGES to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all her Government’s statements, policies, and actions?

    Q3   Hon AMY ADAMS to the Minister of Finance: What evidence, if any, did he see or receive that led him to make the statement last night, “the material is a result of a systematic hack”?

    Meanwhile simon is getting slayed on twitter again, over the whole situation.

    And all of it has proven to be quite a distraction from the report about the national party culture.

    • SPC 29.1

      Yes. 

      and 

      I'm not the head of Treasury. 

    • ianmac 29.2

      Poor old Simon. A poor sad deflation by ever polite Jacinda. Amazing how a direct quote changes Simon's spin. Ditto Amy.

    • marty mars 29.3

      "The National Party has acted entirely appropriately. "

      No we or I just them – simon makes a weasel look less weaselly – utter disgrace – resign simon, go away, you're finished, resign!

  29. Cinny 30

    Interesting comment via twitter….

    Hey Simon – what did Amy Adams mean by what she said in Parliament yesterday that “National Party sourced and released the budget information” ? I’m particularly interested in what she meant by the word “sourced”

    • Gosman 30.1

      Is this like a Colombo moment but via Twitter?

      • Cinny 30.1.1

        Colombo moment…careful with the words, doing a google for a Colombo moment  provides different results than the one you possibly intended.  JS.

        Interesting observation, yes.

  30. SHG 31

    Stuff:

    The Prime Minister has walked back an apparent attempt from the Government to draw a link between National and an alleged Treasury hack.

    She said “we never made that accusation”.

    operation arsecover escalates

    • ianmac 31.1

      What link was that SHG?

      Jacinda made careful direct accurate quotes the she and Grant have made. Nowhere did they link National to the hack. 

    • Peter 31.2

      Arden should never walk back on any attempts to draw links between National and incompetence, illegality and anything sinister.

      Insinuations and implications are the stuff of politics. Ethics and morals don't come into it. National has tried to create the idea that Labour wants no people imprisoned and that criminals should not be held to account.

      That, reds under our beds, selling out to China, a whatever multi-billion hole in the country's finances and rife political corruption are how they're painting the country. Are they going to walk back on those things?

      The party of Dirty Politics getting a tad upset because they think there's been an attempt from the Government to draw a link between National and an alleged Treasury hack? They want to eye gouge, dish out head high tackles, stomp on heads in the rucks and are crying because the other team suggests they're cheating? Bloody wimps.

    • The Chairman 31.3

      @SHG (at 31)

      The interesting thing about that was she implied the accusation in her latest press conference. Ardern pointed any responsibility for the security of the Budget documents to the Treasury, yet Treasury weren’t the only ones to have access to the Budget information. Thus, to come to that conclusion, ruling everyone else out including her own finance minister, it seems she is linking the hack as the sole source of National's info.

      • SPC 31.3.1

        How is saying Treasury is responsible for the security of their information connecting that matter to National? 

        • The Chairman 31.3.1.1

          By ruling everyone else out, she is linking the hack as the sole source of National's info. Thereby suggesting it came from the hack, thus re-implying the accusation.

          • SPC 31.3.1.1.1

            How is saying Tresury is responsible for the security of their information, ruling anything out?

            And re-implying what "original" accusation?

            • The Chairman 31.3.1.1.1.1

              Treasury weren’t the only ones to have access to the Budget information. As I laid out above. Therefore, by ruling everyone else out, she is linking the hack as the sole source of National's info. Thereby, suggesting it came from the hack, thus re-implying the accusation.

              Robertson made the initial suggestion/accusation when linking the two yesterday. 

              • SPC

                Where has she ruled anything else out? 

                Robertson did no such thing. He merely quoted the head of Treasury, you are peddling Nationals' misrepresentation. It lacks any credibility. 

                • The Chairman

                  It's all been reported. Don't you look at the news?

                  https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/113055687/live-national-party-claims-its-got-leaked-budget-details

                  He merely quoted the head of Treasury 

                  Exactly. Thereby attempting to link the two. 

                  • SPC

                    Yes. And I understood it. 

                    No he did not, he quoted the head of Treasury referring it to police to see if they could do (prove) that. 

                    All he did was ask National not to continue to leak. 

                    • The Chairman

                      What you clearly fail to see is that by quoting the head of Treasury when asking National, it was linking the two.

                    • SPC

                      Linking the two only in referring to Treasury's statement when he asked them not to leak budget information. 

                • The Chairman

                  Furthermore, with National denying it came from a hack, and with no evidence at this stage showing so, shouldn't Jacinda be taking more responsibility to determine how this major breach occurred instead of washing her hands of it by deferring it to Treasury?

                  It may have come from within her Government.

                  • The Al1en

                    I bet you've run out of panty pads with all those little sex wees you must be doing at the thought this government might somehow be at fault for the hack and leak.

                     

                    • The Chairman

                      It's not all that exciting. It's just a sideshow.

                      This (link below) is the bigger story
                      https://mailchi.mp/criticalpolitics/political-roundup-should-we-worry-about-lobbyists-influence-on-the-government

                    • The Al1en

                      And yet you've been on the job all day

                    • The Chairman

                      On the Job? If only I was being paid.

                      And you'll find I've been talking about many things today, not just this sideshow.

                    • The Al1en

                      That's right, apart from trying to frame the leak and hack as you are, you've also been going on without any evidence about how the government is listening to the private sector over pay negotiations, about the PMs one time chief of staff, for 5 months, becoming a lobbyist, thus insinuating corruption, casting shade on the governments acumen because they haven't raised benefits to solve poverty, mental health, and family violence, and then telling us you're more left than most on here.

                      Phew, sounds like a full time job to me.

                    • The Chairman

                      The private sector have been publicly open about their concern, thus the evidence for this is in the public domain. And the fact Labour claim there is no more money for teachers (when in fact there is and they have just decided against it) is an indication they've taken that private sector concern on board.

                      The PMs one time chief of staff for 5 months being a lobbyist and the contexts around the arrangement suggests conflicts were not sufficiently addressed, thus a totally valid concern.

                      The shade being cast on the governments acumen isn't like it's undeserving.

                      And there are so many other things I haven't had time to even touch upon. So yeah, it's a big job holding the Government to account. But unfortunately, it's not a paying one.

                      Nevertheless, good to see you've been paying attention. Perhaps you might learn something. And feel free to ask questions on the above topics mentioned. But better take it over to open. 

                    • The Al1en

                      Still nose to the grindstone. Crack on.

                  • SPC

                    She is in fact deferring the issue of the Treasury site "hack" to police, as are Treasury and her Minister of Finance.

                    It may have come from a lot of places, printers or the parliamentary service – last night Hipkins mentioned that all the information was in the domain of the Parliamentary Counsel Office

                    “It is probably from an indicative document(legislative programme) created for planning purposes at the start of the year that is in wide circulation.”

                    On another note, I’ve confirmed that the Parliamentary Counsel Office (PCO) would have access to the 2019 legislative programme – as well as the budgetary figures in the format National had them today.

                    However that does not make them the source of the leak – a spokeswoman for National have just confirmed that legislative programme came from somewhere different to the earlier budget figures.

    • SPC 31.4

      If that's from a media outlet, the journalist who wrote that is the arsehole. 

      She could say that because there is no evidence of it. 

      The Minister simply asked National not to use budget information.  

    • greywarshark 31.5

      The Prime Minister has walked back an apparent attempt from the Government to draw a link between National and an alleged Treasury hack. She said “we never made that accusation”’
      https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/bu92o4/the_prime_minister_has_walked_back_an_apparent/

      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/113064046/government-says-budget-details-not-from-beehive-while-pm-refuses-to-state-confidence-in-treasury
      Robertson has been advised by Treasury that the figures National have obtained had never been uploaded anywhere online, seemingly ruling out the scenario that they had accidentally gone up early….

      NZ First MP Shane Jones said Robertson needed to find out what had happened as it was serious.
      If the leak had been malicious in intent he would want Robertson to use a taiaha to "lop their head off" but Jones acknowledged human error could also be at fault.

      https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2019/05/cyber-experts-not-convinced-treasury-was-hacked.html

      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/112966892/questions-over-relationship-between-pm-jacinda-ardern-and-highpowered-lobbyist
      A third industry source said it was important not to burn through that political capital.    "All you have is your reputation."

      Any blurring of lines, or loss of reputation, could cost a government relations expert their career. This meant there was a strong aspect of self-policing.    However, those who spoke to Newsroom all questioned whether that was enough, especially when it came to transparency and avoiding unwanted accusations of corruption.

      Laura Walters, Newsroom.co.nz08:29, May 24 2019   This article was first published on Newsroom.co.nz and is republished with permission. 

  31. Muttonbird 32

    The way the information was leaked is not a question the National Party should be answering.

    National Party advisor, Brigitte Morten, is ambivalent about the legality or otherwise of the source of the leak/hack. To her, the important thing is the government has been damaged. The means to which that end was reached doesn't trouble her set of values, ethics and morals.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/on-the-inside/390798/opinion-national-plays-strong-hand-over-politics-jackpot

     

    • Rapunzel 32.1

      Maybe Morten thinks that's the best way to frame it but I don;t think the public see it like that I think they are weary and wary of what looks to them as nothing but another cheap shot for attention by the National Party and that they have got their hands on stuff in a sneaky, possibly illegal way

  32. Gosman 33

    Jacinda Ardern is significantly walking back the allegations that National was involved in the "Hack" of Treasury budget information

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/113055687/live-national-party-claims-its-got-leaked-budget-details

    [I am releasing you from moderation but can you please stop repeating the lie that labour alleged national was involved in the hack? Any empirical analysis of what has happened will show that this is a load of tosh – MS]

  33. Jackel 34

    If this cheap trap is the best Bridges can do, long may he remain the leader of the Gnats.

  34. SPC 35

    Grant Robertson last night

    We have contacted the National Party tonight to request that they do not release any further material, given that the Treasury said they have sufficient evidence that indicates the material is a result of a systematic hack and is now subject to a Police investigation." 

    National party (Simon Bridges and Amy Adams) quoting what he said today in parliament

    What evidence, if any, did he see or receive that led him to make the statement last night, “the material is a result of a systematic hack”?

    The reason is that Simon Bridges has been boasting he was going after Robertson, but the only basis he had for it was Robertson's reference to what was said by the Head of Treasury earlier.

    Some prosecutorial mind (he would fail early level comprehnsion in primary school), and Adams going along with the whole sham because that was the attack line Bridges asked her to go along with. Clearly no alternative leadership credibility there. 

  35. dv 36

    Peters say he knows  AND it is VERY bad for the Natz!!!

    • Muttonbird 36.1

      Unfortunately Peters' predictions rarely amount to anything concrete.

  36. Muttonbird 37

    By not being clear and honest about where they got the information, here's National's problem:

    Budget 2019: 'They'll remember it as the budget that got hacked'

    Digital communications specialist Paul Brislen said the damage had already been done. "No one will remember this as the well being budget. They'll remember it as the budget that got hacked," Brislen said.

    https://i.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/113084773/budget-2019-theyll-remember-it-as-the-budget-that-got-hacked 

    It's National's problem, it's the government's problem. It's the problem of the people of New Zealand who are really struggling.

    Why is the National Party so very destructive?

  37. marty mars 38

    yep onya winnie – the Deputy Prime Minister – 

    “Are you saying the cleaner got hold of stuff, I don’t think so … the facts are different to that. The facts are very, very bad for the National party.”

    “The information came to them in circumstances where the behaviour was totally illegal and they should have known it. That’s all I can say right now … it’s my job to know.”

    He said Bridges was being “thoroughly unethical” and cashed in on the material.

    “He has been found out and made a right fool of himself.”

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/113055687/live-national-party-claims-its-got-leaked-budget-details

    • Rapunzel 38.1

      I bet not one person – well very few – let's say most of the "public" have pretty much any idea of the details that Bridges is waving around as a "leak". What will stick in the minds of the public in general is that the National Party has some stuff it's not supposed to have yet and that the documented :stuff" did not grow legs and walk over to Simon's place.

      He needs to tell the police or treasury how and from who he got it.

    • joe90 38.2

      老皮, forty years running rings around National.

  38. Muttonbird 39

    I had the sound down, but did he not finish up on the 2018 Budget?

    🤣

  39. Peter 40

    So getting towards 6pm what progress has been made today?

    Well, Judith for Leader of the Opposition, Mark Mitchell Deputy, Amy Adams, still just a joke. smiley

  40. Ken 41

    Hey, cut Soimun some slack…….this is the only budget that he's ever going to get to announce.

  41. Observer Tokoroa 42

     

    National Politicians – in the Year 2019

    Implore Landlords to raise the cost of rentals to Monstrous Heights. So that Simon Bridges and Mrs Bennet can force more and more citizens out into the streets and slums.

    Daily Show that it is correct to receive and disseminate stolen property for Simon Bridges. Because he loves receiving Stuff that does not belong to him or his Party.

    Daily and nightly allow the Trolls on here to have their hands pressed by Simon Bridges and Mrs Bennett.  For they are the suckers. 

    Just remember this !   If you receive or theive stolen Stuff  – hang on to it.  Steal it. Like a good troll. It's yours.  Put your heart into  dragging thousands and thousands of your friends into forever slums. Just like Simon wants.  Just like John Key and Bill English did. 

    You are total Troll. You are National !

     

     

     

     

     

     

  42. Cinny 43

    When the JLR situation happened, paula was so loud and vocal, and obviously in the wrong. 

    Interestingly she's been loud and vocal on this too.

    Things that make you go hmmmmm

  43. mosa 44

    This from No right turn 

    Treasury owes us answers

    http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2019/05/treasury-owes-us-answers.html

    We should all be concerned with a breach at this level.

    The government must act and quickly.

    I hope the police put bias aside and do what's in the best interests of the country.

    • Macro 44.1

      I normally agree with much of what NRT writes, but on this occasion I believe he is way off beam. For instance, in 2011 the Pentagon, no less, was hacked and thousands of secret papers on weapon systems etc were compromised. I worked in NZ's Defence HQ for 8 years. The Pentagon would have similar systems in place. Here are the rules for the storage of sensitive information in NZ:

      Electronic Storage · Electronic files (including databases) should be protected against illicit internal use or intrusion by external parties through two or more of the following mechanisms: – user challenge and authentication (username/password or digital ID/Certificate) – logging use at level of individual – firewalls and intrusion-detection systems and procedures; – server authentication – OS-specific/application-specific security measures

       There are only a limited number of people who would have had access to the Budget papers in Treasury, and they would be at a senior level. They would be highly unlikely to be leaving such sensitive stuff lying around on the desks over weekend, and certainly all sensitive electronic files would be created under password and firewall.  But no system is completely safe from attack, especially on-line systems that  are under constant barrage from snoopers world wide.

      • RedLogix 44.1.1

        Thanks for this Macro. Cyber security is a specialised area and unless we have a competent and trusted analysis of exactly how Treasury implemented their security, and the details of exactly what they mean by 'attacks', then all we have is uninformed speculation.

        The broad outline you describe makes good sense, but it doesn't tell us what happened and I doubt we will ever know exactly what happened. Most organisations never reveal these details for obvious reasons; everytime you give them away you expose potential vulnerabilities.

        But always the biggest vulnerability is any system is the people using it. Even well intentioned users are prone to mistakes and misunderstandings that drive their IT and Security guys crazy. 

        But how Bridges got hold of the documents is to my mind way less important than what he then did with them. 

      • SHG 44.1.2

        There are only a limited number of people who would have had access to the Budget papers in Treasury, and they would be at a senior level.

         

        Do you include among them the people who print the Budget paper copies?

        • Macro 44.1.2.1

          Are you nuts or what?

          Security around the printing of the budget and other sensitive material is intense. Anyone found secreting a paper on their person would find themselves in very serious trouble. Jobs in printing btw are few these days. So they would be risking not only a court appearance, and its consequences, but loss off employment as well.

  44. Cinny 45

    Apparently….

    Simon Bridges will address media tomorrow morning at 8.45am in the National Party Caucus Room.

     

    • joe90 45.1

    • Anne 45.2

      What's the bet that whatever he says will leave more questions to ponder than answers.

  45. JohnO 46

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2019/05/budget-2019-eclipsed-by-allegations-treasury-was-hacked.html

    If Bridges does present the method by which the documents were obtained, and it was a simple case of picking them up off an insecure server, then the egg-face around here is going to be epic.

    Alternatively if he fumbles tomorrow's big reveal, Bridges will be dog tucker.

    Plenty of people will not sleep well tonight….

     

  46. Observer Tokoroa 47

    The Strange Appropriate Man

    The Strange "Appropriate" Man Mr Bridges, has kept on announcing that he is the Appropriate man to Recieve and Disseminate stolen Documents.

    In his self established role as the appropriate man, Simon appears to be guilty of aiding and abetting any person, or persons who gave him the highly embargoed documents that did not belong to the National Party.

    This release of the documents possibly will have pre-released excellent information into the hands of National Business Men. Here and Abroad.

    It is the sort of thing that our Appropriate Man apparently deems himself as able to do with impunity.

    In Brief, The National Party Receives Stolen information at Will, and places it into the willing hands of Simon Bridges. Who further Announces it to New Zealand and the Business World. Mates on Mates.

  47. Panda 48

    National are saying there was no hack. Yet the matter was referred to the police on the advice of the National Cyber Security Centre – an arm of the GCSB. I just want the opportunity to get decent coverage of the budget instead of the distractions of a self serving few. 

     

  48. Robert Guyton 49

    “Stuff understands National Party policy advisors stumbled across the documents by using Treasury’s search feature to look for past Budget documents.”

    “Essentially a cloned private version of the Treasury website with new Budget information was accidentally cached and partially accessible using the public-facing search engine. The more than 2000 “attacks” appear to have been repeated search engine queries to access this information.”

    Makhlouf said.

    "In my view, there were deliberate, exhaustive and sustained attempts to gain unauthorised access to embargoed data."

    • RedLogix 49.1

      I don't care how National got the documents, this is a distraction. National operatives knew perfectly well that they did not authority to access them and they were embargoed.

      And there simply is no excuse for what Bridges did with them.

      • Robert Guyton 49.1.1

        Bridges learned from Key to take advantage from breaking convention. From our point of view, it's shameful, from theirs it's a clever, advantageous play.

      • Formerly Ross 49.1.2

        Well, yes, there is no excuse for his behaviour. But there's no excuse for such important information being publicly available. And calling the police really makes Treasury look like idiots.

        When the PM was asked last night whether she would have released the info if she’d been in Bridges’ position, she hesitated before answering. I’m not convinced she would have acted differently.

        • Robert Guyton 49.1.2.1

          "she hesitated before answering"

          Give us a break, Formerly Ross. That you're "not convinced" merely reflects your keenness to pardon Bridges and implicate Ardern. She's played straight, Bridges has played the "Key" game.

          • Formerly Ross 49.1.2.1.1

            Robert

            Your crystal ball needs new batteries. I think I'm allowed to be unconvinced by the PM's response. And, no, I haven't pardoned Bridges. There was a hint in my previous comment where I said there is no excuse for his behaviour. 🙂

            • Robert Guyton 49.1.2.1.1.1

              Oh yes, of course you are, FR. You've made much on the basis of a mere hesitation though; you might have concluded that Jacinda paused momentarily to inwardly reaffirm  her commitment to fair-play and integral behaviour, but instead felt she might instead be considering "Bridging" it; playing it sneaky, rather than kindly.

    • Macro 49.2

      Nah.

      They fell off the back of a truck.

    • Freddo 49.3

      You have only told half the story there Robert. You failed to actually say that Police and Treasury both now explicitly say there was no illegal hack or illegal access of treasury systems, which is kind of a major part of the latest development this morning.

      Bridges in serious trouble over this? An emphatic No is now the answer.

      Makhlouf in trouble? Surely now, Yes.

      Robertson? We will see.

      • Robert Guyton 49.3.1

        Hey, Freddo. Indeed I have, not being a journalist on the case. However, that there was no successful hack, that the accessing of the treasury system was not illegal according to the police is not the full story either. Simon Bridges has released material that by convention and perhaps parliamentary rule, should not be released before Budget Day, is still a live issue. This new development; release budget information and exploit the situation to the sitting Government's disadvantage, is now the new norm; something that damages further the integrity of Parliament, in my opinion. Playing this way lowers public respect for Parliament and in this instance, Bridges and National are the ones responsible for yet another blow to our democratic institutions. I reckon.

  49. Sacha 50

    Twas emotional junior staffer hammering the search function: https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/390846/budget-breach-didn-t-break-the-law-treasury

    • Sacha 50.1

      Calling in Police probably expedited some aspects of investigating this.

      • Formerly Ross 50.1.1

        Yeah nah, the Police probably said they haven't got around to investigating Sarah Dowie's texts, so it could be a while before they properly investigate this "hack". Treasury then admitted the information was publicly available.

        • Sacha 50.1.1.1

          Verifying who owned the IP addresses may have been easier for Police to do promptly without revealing the capabilities of DPMC's own IT security team.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

No feed items found.