Labour Leaks

Absurdity or irony?

rwrewe

David Cunliffe, facing the media, saying that Labour must stop the leaks [to media].

What he means is, he wants the leaks that are damaging to him to stop.   All the others need to continue at all times.

This is what Pete covered this morning in his post – the absolute two-faced nature of both politicians and old media that leaks are somehow rare and dirty.

What a bunch of numpties. ¬† If you don’t like the game, get off the field.

Labour can hardly comment on data security

I find it highly ironic that Labour is going on about sensitive data security:

Is Labour asking Keith Ng and Ira Bailey to handover or delete the files.. no…they’re making political capital out of them. Remember when they had their own data breach…at that time Labour threatened and blustered and attacked the person who breached their security, such as it was.

While Labour, the Greens and left wing blogs all stick up for Keith Ng and Ira Bailey, I do wonder how things would¬†have¬†panned out had it been revealed that it was me who found this data breach, and that I took files and that I or my source asked for money. I know exactly how it would have panned out…¬†because¬†Labour did it to me.

They accused me of hacking, they laid complaints against me with the Privacy Commission and wrote threatening letters. The whole saga is summarised here.

Be careful what you wish for Phil

Phil Goff said yesterday that basically because the cup of tea incident was political and in public that the details of an illegally recorded meeting should be made public.

That is an interesting qualification. In April Labour’s entire website was open to the public. I still have their database, their credit card transactions, their mailing lists, their illegally gathered emails from ECE postcards and their membership lists. It was public, open to the world.

Given Phil Goff’s new stance that anything public and anything political should be open and transparent I could easily release that information. He could hardly complain could he.

Be careful what you wish for Phil.

Whaleleaks: Is that all you've got?

The other day i wrote about Trevor Mallard’s and Labour’s new election strategy it is called the Gnome’s Underpants Stealing plan.

When I broke the story of Labour’s appalling information and privacy security with their wide open site I fully expected that they would¬†retaliate.

I knew they would attack my mental health, attack my employment status and attack my integrity. I also knew they would attack my site.

Yesterday I received confirmation from my third independent source that Labour has put out a contract amongst the hacking community to deface or take down my site. All sources confirm that the job has a price and that senior Labour figures are the ones requesting the attack.

They will of course deny it, but the simple fact is that people are talking and people are angry that such a job is out there. Two of my snitches are left leaning, one is a Green member. They were appalled by the suggestion.

I have been told that no one as yet has accepted the job. Labour and their conduits are being turned down flat.

Which gets me back to Labour’s Underpants Stealing Plan.

So here is Duck‚Äôs cun¬≠ning cam¬≠paign¬†plan to defeat a blogger in an¬†asymmetrical¬†war he can’t win, following the Underpants Stealing plan:

  1. Hack Whale’s site
  2. ?
  3. Win votes

Yep that’ll work. But seriously, I’m flattered that they hate me so much and think I am such a threat that they will put out a contract to hack my site. Excuse me while I just laugh and laugh and laugh some more.

I mean seriously? Is that it? Is that all you’ve got?

Whaleleaks – NZEI non-political?

When I busted the Labour party for harvesting emails from an NZEI organised petition Paul Goulter the union  boss was quick in a letter to point out that the NZEI was non-political.

NZEI pro­vided the post­cards in good faith to Sue Moroney to present to the Prime Minister.  As an inde­pen­dent organ­i­sa­tion that is not affil­i­ated to any polit­i­cal party, NZEIdid not, and does not approve of any unau­tho­rised use of per­sonal emails.   We never give per­sonal infor­ma­tion to polit­i­cal par­ties or organ­i­sa­tions to use.

This of course is horsehit. Labour and the NZEI have a cozy little deal going.

They have the same sort of¬†lackadaisical¬†attitude to information security that Labour has. On their website they have an¬†interesting electorate-by-electorate plan to attack the Government don’t you think?

NZEI plans for campaigns against the government

Since they will probably take it down it can also now be found on Scribd.

So let’s just stop pretending that the NZEI is a non-political r even independent organsisation. They are holding hands with the labour party, if they aren’t sharing data with them then they are tacitly giving approval for the labour party to harvest data from postcards that were addressed to john Key not to the Labour party.

The NZEI is clearly aligning themselves with Labour, there is little point in National actually bothering to engage with them now.

 

Sir Les Patterson could be Labour Party Spokesman for the yartz

Chris Flatt has yet to reply to my demands. I said I would hand back their data, which it turns out some of which isn’t theirs in the first place, if they made Fred dagg the number one on their list and appointed Sir Les Patterson to second place and made him Arts spokesman.

In good news for the Labour Party, it appears Sir Les is definitely in the running for a safe Labour list position.

After all Labour don’t mind politicians who do silly things when drunk.

Whaleleaks – Goff lies

NZPA is reporting on Labour’s latest spin regarding the NZEI email scandal:

Wellington, June 20 NZPA – Thousands of people who signed an early childhood education petition have had their email addresses added to a Labour Party database, with leader Phil Goff saying it was solely to let people know the outcome of the campaign.

The email addresses, taken from a New Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI) postcard campaign against cuts to early childhood education, were added to a database of about 18,000 people that could be freely downloaded from Labour’s website until the problem was fixed last weekend.

Right-wing blogger Cameron Slater, who obtained a copy of the database, said on his website that NZEI national secretary Paul Goulter had written to petition signatories to explain why their addresses had been added to the database.

The letter said the postcards were given last year to Labour early childhood education spokeswoman Sue Moroney, who had agreed to present them to Prime Minister John Key because no Government MPs would do so.

Mr Key has not yet accepted the postcards.

Mr Goff today said people who signed the postcards wanted to know outcome of the petition and Ms Moroney had written back to a number of people.

“It’s purely about early childhood education, there’s a letter that’s gone out to some of those people,” he said.

The NZEI in its letter said only some campaign signatories had received Ms Moroney’s letter.

NZEI had made it clear to the Labour Party that it was “very concerned” about the database breach and had asked for the addresses to be deleted.

NZPA

Unfortunately for Phil Goff he is lying about the intent of what they were going to do with those emails. Yet again he has misled the media. Here is a copy of an email that is still sitting undelivered in Labour’s system that is to be sent out to the ECE ¬†protesters¬†that had their emails harvested and stored illegally by Labour.

ECE petition followup

Delivery Summary

Delivery has not yet begun for this mailing. If the scheduled delivery date and time is past, ask the system administrator or technical support contact for your site to verify that the automated mailer task (‘cron job’) is running – and how frequently. (learn more…)

Recipients Included

Members of ECE petition contacts

Hi {contact.first_name}

This message is sent to you because you wrote your email address on a postcard about Early Childhood Education. If I’ve contacted you in error, please unsubscribe below.

Last year you joined thousands of others in writing to me, or filling out an NZEI postcard, expressing concern about the National Government’s cuts to early childhood education.

Those cuts mean thousands of parents are facing bills of $10 to $60 a week more per child. The cuts mean staff redundancies and cutting hours in our early childhood centres, fewer field trips, or not providing food or other extras.

Labour is fighting hard to stop the cuts. Our focus will be  quality, free and accessible early childhood education for all children. For every dollar spent on early childhood education, our country saves $11 in future costs.

We need your support.

It’s easy and simple to pitch in:

Please Like our Facebook page: http://facebook.com/kidscountnz

You’ll find lots of information about what’s going on, people swapping news. Please suggest it to your friends too.

We want children to get the best start possible. Please feel welcome to email me any time with your views.

Kind regards

Sue Moroney

Labour Spokesperson for Early Childhood Education

Hamilton-based Labour Member of Parliament

facebook.com/suemoroney | labour.org.nz

To unsubscribe: {action.optOutUrl}

{domain.address}

Sue Moroney clearly says in this email that she may be contacting people “in error”. This is her way of saying that Labour are doing something dodgy here, hoping that you won’t notice. This email proves that Phil Goff lied to the media, far from being “solely to let people know the outcome of the campaign“, Labour actually planned to further enroll the signatories to the Labour causes on other matters. There was no letting the signatories know about the outcome of the campaign, it was purely¬†solicitation¬†for the Labour party. It was solicitation again from labour’s system which was hosted and stored on parliamentary services provided servers.

At every turn in this whole scandal Labour has lied. They claimed they had been hacked, they were wrong. They claimed that the National party gave me the information, they lied about that too. They claimed that the data was theirs, when it turns out it wasn’t. Now they are claiming they were going to tell those people whose details they illegally harvested from a petition something about the progress when the database files tell us something else entirely.

Whaleleaks – Dompost follows up and raises even more questions

Tracy Watkins has followed up the story about the NZEI emails.

Labour insiders confirmed they were aware of an email from NZEI to those who signed the petition, sent on Friday, explaining that some of their names had ended up on Labour’s database.

The email addresses were obtained from tens of thousands of postcards calling on the Government to reverse cuts to early childhood funding. People who signed the postcards were told they were destined for Prime Minister John Key, but they were presented to Labour MP Sue Moroney instead.

Labour then uploaded the email addresses on its database, supposedly so it could contact people who protested to tell them that Mr Key had refused to receive the postcards.

But, according to the NZEI email, only some people appear to have received such an email.

There are two files on Labour’s servers, I have copies of them, that contain thousands of email addresses.

Labour Party president Moira Coatsworth and secretary Chris Flatt did not return calls yesterday.

But party insiders rejected suggestions there was a breach of privacy because details of those who took part in the postcard campaign would have been available under the Official Information Act had they gone to Mr Key’s office.

There is a very large problem with Labour’s insiders whispers to Tracy Watkins. For a start even if the details were able to be obtained under the Official InformationAct, and that is suspect right from the get go, it would be illegal for those people to then be contacted about something else by an organisation that they did not give permission to for them to use their personal details.This lie is easily disproved, all the media have to do is ask under¬†the¬†OIA for details of petitioners on any petition they choose that has already been presented to the PM.

Can you imagine the howls of outrage now that people who signed a petition can now have their personal details released to anyone who cares to OIA the petition. And according to Labour they are then free to use those details to their own ends.

As we have seen from the NZ Post case this is a serious breach and one which Sue Moroney at the least and Labour have appeared to have breached.

Labour’s weasel excuse doesn’t hold water and now additional questions need to be asked. Since Chris Flatt and moira Coatsworth appear to be in hiding then it really rest on Phil Goff’s shoulders to answer some of these questions at this stand up today.

The huge irony of this situation is that labour now stand accused of the very thing they were accusing me of.

Whaleleaks – What does Phil's email tell us

WhaleleaksThe email from Phil Goff to NZEI and other harvested email addresses tells us a great deal. You do have to know what you are looking at though.

We know that the server that their system is stored on and the server that their CRM system uses to process transaction including the mass emailing of people is funded by parliamentary services. Two of the sites on the server are funded and identified as such.

Therefore the email from Phil Goff, apart from being sent to people illegally because their email addresses were harvested illegally by Labour also breaches parliamentary services regulations as well as electoral law.

It breaches parliamentary services funding rules – because it solicits a donation.¬†So therefore, it should technically have a promoter statement too – because there’s no way it is Parliamentary business.

In not having a promotor statement it also breaches electoral law.

Both Parliamentary Services and the Electoral Commission should be investigating Labour. It is apparent that they are blatantly blurring the lines between genuine constituency work that parliamentary services can and does fund and outright electioneering. Labour has consistently shown that they will not and do not use promoter statements and that they are using parliamentary services as their private campaign fund.

What is more concerning though is that the email details obtained from the server show that Labour is using the same sort of technology that has got Blue State Digital, Labour’s American¬†black¬†ops advisors, in big trouble around the world.

The data clearly shows:

Stop asset sales email 1
Deliv­ery Sum­mary
Intended Recip­i­ents 6190
Suc­ces­ful Deliv­er­ies 6190 (100.00%)
For­wards 0
Replies 0
Bounces 0 (0.00%)
Unsub­scribe Requests 19 (0.31%)
Sched­uled Date April 8th, 2011 2:41 PM
Sta­tus Com­plete
Start Date April 8th, 2011 2:44 PM
End Date April 8th, 2011 5:35 PM

That shows that, just like Blue State Digital does, Labour is tracking your emails. They are recording forwards, replies and bounces. If you get an email from Labour you are being tracked.

I blogged in January about this, asking if it was possible that Labour was following their American black ops advisors lead and now I have the proof that they are. The tactics are identical and it looks like the tracking codes are too.

Blue State Dig­i­tal (BSD), which used the lat­est inter­net tech­nol­ogy to mobilise mil­lions of peo­ple behind Obama, has been employed to help cre­ate a grass­roots net­work across theUK as part of the cam­paign to stop the BNP leader, Nick Grif­fin, becom­ing the far-right party’s first MEP.

The firm began work last week and has already signed up thou¬≠sands of sup¬≠port¬≠ers and donors. As part of the first stage of its cam¬≠paign¬†BSD¬†and an anti-fascist mag¬≠a¬≠zine, Search¬≠light, has¬†sent thou¬≠sands of emails ask¬≠ing each recip¬≠i¬≠ents to for¬≠ward it to five friendsand make a small dona¬≠tion.¬†The soft¬≠ware means cam¬≠paign¬≠ers can then track who opens the emails, where they are sent and what hap¬≠pens when they arrive at the other end ‚ÄĒ tai¬≠lor¬≠ing future emails to groups and individuals

Be very wary now if you receive an email from Labour. There is a high chance it contains tracking code, a high chance that they harvested your email illegally.

This is turning into, to quote David Farrar, a clusterf*ck for Labour. Their server was wide open to the world, then they blamed hacking or malicious intent for the acces when the evidence proved it was their ineptitude. They followed up that fiasco by blustering and lamely threatening a blogger about their data. Then it turns out that Labour are asking me to delete personal information that they weren’t entitled to hold in the first place. Personal information, that I might just add here includes DoB information that they illegally obtained from the NZEI.

Can it get any worse for them? …well… yes it can. There is plenty more to come.

Whaleleaks – NZEI and Labour up a tree

Labour has been caught harvesting email addresses from a union’s protest to Parliament.

The addresses were collected from 20,000 postcards the New Zealand Educational Institute teachers’ union sent to Prime Minister John Key over early childhood education concerns.

Key refused to take the postcards so Labour MP Sue Moroney took them.

And without the sunlight of Whaleleaks¬†we’d never know that Moroney either:

a) took the emails without authorisation, or,
b) the NZEI gave them to her willingly and knowingly.

Of course the plan was to make sure¬†the people who shared their information¬†with the union –¬†would¬†never¬†know how Labour got their details.

NZEI national secretary Paul Goulter told members the postcards had been given in “good faith” and Labour was not allowed to use the information for other purposes. He said Labour was told the union was “very concerned” and demanded the emails be deleted.

Yesterday I released the email that Paul Goulter had sent out. He mentions that an email had already been sent by Labour. That email was from Phil goff and was about their asset sales campaign, a campaign that started well after the emails were harvested from the NZEI.

The text of that email and the delivery details are:

Stop asset sales email 1
Delivery Summary
Intended Recipients 6190
Succesful Deliveries 6190 (100.00%)
Forwards 0
Replies 0
Bounces 0 (0.00%)
Unsubscribe Requests 19 (0.31%)
Scheduled Date April 8th, 2011 2:41 PM
Status Complete
Start Date April 8th, 2011 2:44 PM
End Date April 8th, 2011 5:35 PM

Hi {contact.first_name}

National wants to sell our assets that previous generations have worked hard to build up. Last time National sold our assets they were bought up by foreign buyers. Power prices rose and billions of dollars in profits went offshore.

Under Labour there will be no asset sales. Our plan is to build up our assets so they’re part of growing the economy, and part of providing a secure future for you and all Kiwi families.

On Monday night in Auckland I launched Labour’s campaign to stop asset sales.

Over the coming weeks we’ll be ramping things up with billboards, fliers, signage and online activities – including a few things we haven’t tried before.

I’ll keep you up to date as things progress but I’m writing today to offer you the chance to be part of the campaign by sponsoring a ‘stop asset sales’ sign and to ask you to show your support for the campaign online too.

If you want Kiwi assets to stay in Kiwi hands please make a secure online donation right now:

http://labour.org.nz/civicrm/contribute/transact?reset=1&id=4

Your donation will be put to immediate use in printing stop asset sales ‘stop signs’ which are showing up nationwide (check out the photos here: http://www.facebook.com/album.php?id=177063955675166&aid=35637). They’re a powerful way to spread the Stop Asset Sales message but we need your help to cover the country with them.

The signs cost $10 each to produce. Every extra one we have at our disposal is a great help to the campaign. Please consider sponsoring one or more by making a secure donation here:

http://labour.org.nz/civicrm/contribute/transact?reset=1&id=4

If you support keeping Kiwi assets in Kiwi hands please also show your support on our Facebook page, make sure you follow the Stop Assets Sales campaign on Twitter and forward this email to a friend – these are highly effective (and free) ways of helping to spread this important Labour message.

Thanks again for getting behind the campaign to protect New Zealand’s assets.

Kind regards,

Phil Goff

Labour Leader

PS. Writing a letter to the editor is another easy way to express yourself on this issue.

If you’re able to write a few words right now please click here for a list of newspaper email addresses: http://labour.org.nz/letterwriting

To unsubscribe: {action.optOutUrl}

{domain.address}

This email is referred to in the NZEI apology.

“Some sig¬≠na¬≠to¬≠ries may have been sent this email in April.¬†¬†Others of you may not have received anything.”

So Moroney’s follow up (the shorter list of names) sounds¬†like the names of those who didn’t protest after receiving the first unsolicited email.

In other words, MISSION ACCOMPLISHED already.

The NZEI had just helped Sue Moroney recruit thousands of sympathisers on this single issue.

Quite apart from the egregious lies in the Phil Goff email, I’m also smirking¬†at the line about the NZEI not being ‘affiliated’ with any political party.

This is of course complete rubbish Рbecause the NZEI is affiliated with the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions, and the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions is, according to Wikipedia, closely affiliated with Labour.

Labour and the NZEI have some ‘splaining to do. Some questions that I want answered are:

  1. Did the union provide the harvested emails in electronic format to Labour?
  2. Did Labour harvest the emails themselves?
  3. Where was the harvesting done and by whom?
  4. Does Labour have any idea about spam laws?
  5. Will Labour destroy the harvested emails?

More to come on this later today, including the mail that Sue Moroney has yet to send to all those harvested email addresses.