Whaleleaks

Whaleoil Redux 2011 – The Labour party website story

In June I released the details of several months of investigation into the Labour party website which was left wide open with no security.

I started by releasing the minutes of a meeting of Labour North. In those minutes it revealed that Labour planned to use the resources of parliamentary services to campaign, and the attendence of an ALP strategist to assist.

Then I released an email that Labour party General Secretary Chris Flatt sent to members once they realised what was about to happen to them. They were in full damage control mode. They spun and  lied from the get go. I already had and still have all their data. There was no system vulnerability and no hacking. It had taken me several months of analysis to be ready for this week and I was going to make them lie and prove they lied.

I posted several videos during this story, usually to lead into the next stage.

But I was under attack from the leftwing, sho started the smears almost immediately. I reminded them of their own words about Wikileaks, not that they cared. It seems that it was more important to smear the messenger rather than wonder at the parlous state of Labour’s information security.

Then it got serious. The Labour party threatened me. It is ironic now given the amount of posts they have written about John Key and Bradley Ambrose. Even more ironic as I did nothing illegal.

I responded to Chris Flatt in typical Whale fashion:

Dear Chris

In response to your letter of 12 June 2011, I will show the same compassion to private individuals as Labour showed when using The Hollowmen.

The exception will be that I will do it in full public view not hiding behind the privilege of parliament.

Then I started to drip feed information about Labour’s credit card donations. This information was in the clear for anyone with mild interest to gather up. I was pretty interested and so I did. Initially I was sceptical that these were production system transaction but then as I scanned through them I found the proof I needed.

Cactus Kate had donated to the Labour party as a result of a sledge on Trevor Mallard. But the real result was that I now had all of Labour’s credit cards transactions taken from their website.

Just to mix it up I released the information I had gathered about ALP consultant Sandy Rippingale. Trevor Mallard had run a massive, defamatory attack on political consultants int eh preceding week and yet we now had evidence that Labour too used consultants. The leaks form the website were proving what many already knew, that Labour lies, cheats and does everything that they accuse others of doing.

Labour and their proxies try to blame me for the information being made public. I tell people to complain to the Privacy Commissioner. Labour said they were going to yet for some reason I haven’t heard a squeak out of them in more than 6 months.

Donors to the Labour Party have every right to be angry, but not with me.  The Labour Party failed in their duty of care to protect your information, not me.  If anything I have done a great service to highlight the Labour Party’s inadequacies in their security of information.

I would advise all Labour Party members to complain to the Privacy Commissioner Marie Shroff for a full investigation, and to ensure the Labour Party has appropriate systems in place to protect any information you provide in the future.

I am now openly mocking Labour. It is hard not to when they blatantly lie about simple details.

What I can tell you is that Labour continues to tell lies. They claim they are contacting more than 18,000 donors. There aren’t that many, there are only 452. Labour can’t be trusted to keep your data secure and they certainly can’t be trusted to tell the truth.

One thing Labour have failed to understand is that I have known about and planned this story fro a couple of months. I float teasers to see how they react. They have choices, they can tell the truth or they can lie. I predict to my friends and confidants who have helped me with this information (none are in political parties) that they will lie. I have war-gamed each possibly issue. So far Labour is proving me right, they are liying and I am showing them they have.

I post another teaser video:

I have to admit this now but I was having fun, but mostly that was because of the way the Labour party were reacting.

Suddenly though Labour and their proxies, including John Pagani start getting into the media accusing me of hacking and other illegal behaviour. I let it run for a couple of days then I post the video of how I did it. Again their lies are exposed for all to see. Every step of the way Labour has lied about salient details and every step of the way I have proved their lies. As I said I war-gamed every aspect of this story so that I could predict how they would react and so I could be prepared for their attacks. They wrongly thought I couldn’t prove how I did it because they took down the sites. I had kept telling people from the get go that I had been in there for months. That I had prepared and one of my preparations was a video to show how I did it:

Labour says they are appealing to the Privacy Commissioner. Funny thing is I haven’t heard a word from them. Is this another Labour lie?

Malcolm Harbrow has a go at The Standard and he isn’t happy about it either.

Then Greg Presland, the third rate flea lawyer from West Auckland, craps his pants and emails me. I publish his email as it is my policy to publish all correspondence of this type. He stupidly insists that I publish his email in it’s entirety including his email address, phone numbers and website.

Then I show how labour had left passwords in the clear in the code of their website. Passwords to their credit card processing provider. Once again Labour has lied to people, once again I knew they would and prove it.

Labour again writes to me, this time they are begging. They make demands of me and I respond with my own set of demands.

It all started with the “Let’s Not” campaign website, now I am using that site to openly mock Labour:

One of the things that has never adequately been answered nor investigated is the use of parliamentary staffers to process financial transactions. We already had seen that labour planned to use Parliamentary Services resources in campaigning and the leaks from their website showed that parliamentary staffers were active in processing financial transactions. This is one of the reasons why I constantly call for the opening up of parliamentary services to the Official Information Act.

The story is by now not only mainstream in New Zealand but it has also gone global. Labour have had two weeks of embarrassment, lies and subterfuge as they try to weasel out the predicament they are in. So far none of their attacks on me have any merit or substance. But I am not finished yet with them.

The information contained on their site showed collusion with the NZEI, Sue Moroney and the Labour party. Labour had harvested more than 18,000 email addresses and personal details from an NZEI petition to the government. They kept those details and stored them on an unsecure server.

I published an email from the NZEI to those 18,000 where they lie about the connection between Labour and the NZEI. Unfortunately for Paul Goulter I also have an email from Chris Flatt to those same people outlining a slightly different story.

LAbour and the NZEI then concoct a story for the media but again instead of telling the truth they lie. Again I prove the lie. They are all slow learners. The damage is now running into its second week.

The supporter database software, logs and email trails show that Labour is tracking where its emails end up. They have spent nearly two weeks moaning about privacy and yet they track emails just like Blue State Digital do.

Labour are now starting to feel heat from mainstream media sick of their lies. They are now full out lying about where they got the NZEI mails from. Labour now stand accused of the very thing they were pointing the finger at me for.

Then Phil Goff lied. Not a subtle lie, an outright full blown false-hood. Again I prove he has lied. Labour keeps giving the story legs by lying. Each time they do I produce documents to prove it. I am now simply reacting to each of their lies, drip feeding the truth.

Phil Goff has decided then to continue to lie, to tell even bigger whoppers, but then I guess at this stage he was being closely managed by parliaments biggest liar of all, Trevor Mallard.

All along I have followed my own rules. I never ask a question unless I already know the answer. Labour still haven’t worked that out. I continue to be gob-smacked that they haven’t conducted an audit of just exactly what I have.

The NZEI claimed that they were non-political but on their website they have documents that outline attacks against National MPs. It makes their excuses for the harvested emails rather hollow.

The final chapter in the whole Labour website saga was when a couple of hackers around the country contacted me to tell me that Labour affiliates were recruiting someone to have a go at my website. It never happened.

With this story I outlined fully exactly how I obtained the data, at every step I published documents or proof to show how labour, Phil Goff and the NZEI lied about various aspects of the scandal. At the very least though I showed that Labour were lackadaisical about internet security, treated the privacy of their donors, members and contacts with the flimsiest of security and that if they couldn’t run a website then they surely couldn’t be trusted to run the country. I ahd also proved that when in a corner Phil Goff will lie. This would come back to haunt him in coming months.

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’s cun­ning cam­paign 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?

Poll driven fruit cakes

Tracy Watkins has a very good article in today’s Dompost about the subterfuge that political parties will go through to find out how you are thinking.

There was a time when the ultimate political put-down was to call your rival a poll-driven fruit cake, the phrase coined by former prime minister David Lange. You don’t hear it much these days. It’s a pot, kettle thing.

There isn’t a nook or cranny of Parliament that isn’t inhabited by poll-driven fruit cakes. Finding ways to gauge what you or I think about any given issue is what politicians do now in lieu of playing pool, propping up the bar and smoking cigarettes.

Both National and Labour are certainly poll-driven fruit-cakes. Helen Clark focus grouped everything, John Key and Steven Joyce do the same.

The pity is that politics has become cerebral rather that guts. The left-wing dominate in cerebral politics, though they have had some goo gut -feel politicians. The last though were Lange and Mike Moore. Trevor Mallard would be a gut-feel politician but he has an anger problem which clouds his judgment.

These days they have many more insidious and intrusive ways of gauging public opinion than the old-fashioned method of hiring a polling company to phone you during your dinner and ask if you have 40 minutes to answer “a few” questions.

There is still plenty of phone polling being done  and of an increasingly sophisticated nature  but at least you have the option of slamming down the phone after shouting some obscenities.

Polling is still the most effective way to gauge support, luckily the politicians have excluded that from any scrutiny by hiding it inside Parliamentary Services. When Labour had money they used UMR, I wonder if they have started up their own polling company like they used to have and if they are running it from parliament like they used to. Their dramatic shortage of money may mean they are doing just that.

They do have other ways of connecting though.

Other methods are used by political parties to discover what presses your buttons and the odds are that you won’t even realise you’ve just been probed.

The recent security breach of Labour’s website lifted a corner of the curtain into some of these ways. Blogger Cameron Slater, aka Whaleoil, revealed that Labour had effectively left the door open to its website and was able to download 18,000 names of donors and people whose names Labour had entered on to a database.

It turned out many of those email addresses were unwittingly supplied by people who had no idea that their details were destined for a Labour Party database. That was because they responded to a postcard campaign run by the teachers’ union the NZEI that was supposedly destined for Prime Minister John Key’s desk.

Instead, those postcards ended up in the hands of Labour MP Sue Moroney  and their names were loaded on to the party’s database.
Anecdotally, it has sparked many dozens of angry phone calls.

I hope it has sparked some complaints to the Privacy Commissioner. Labour were caught red-handed and they are still to explain properly their illegal activities.

The explanation from Labour and the NZEI as to why this happened seems pretty flimsy; in an age where lists of names and email addresses can be traded and haggled over for significant sums of money it’s not too big a stretch to assume that one of the intended spin-offs of the campaign was to expand Labour’s database.

How many of the myriad other Facebook campaigns, blogs, petitions and single-issue lobby groups with web pages that require you to register and sign in are used to harvest your email address for similar political purposes?

Who knows. But you can bet the answer is “plenty”. There are other more upfront ways of electronic campaigning. These days most politicians will tweet. Those who haven’t managed to find any other form of gainful employment for themselves after nearly three years in Parliament seem to be the most enthusiastic adopters.

Ouch… nice stab by Watkins on Mallard, Henare and Curran. I think she is perhaps being a bit harsh on Clare because she is doing some good work in the communications sector and even maybe Trevor, he is crippled after all and so must do something to fill the time when he is not chasing skirt like he normally does. He does seem to have some competition from David Parker though who is working his way through the caucus.

On a more concerning note, it is how politicians use our email addresses to tailor their campaign messages that we should all be questioning.

For instance, Labour’s IT programs allow it to track what happens to emails once they are delivered to people on their database. They know whether you opened the email or deleted it without getting past the subject field, and whether you forwarded it to anyone else.

You are being polled by email, in other words, and you don’t even know it. If only 5 per cent of emails are opened then the party knows it is on to a dud and it will go back to the drawing board on how to better tailor the message. If 80 per cent of emails are opened then it knows it is on to a winner.

Labour has been quietly confident for months that its programme to stop asset sales struck a chord with voters and that is probably one of the reasons why.

Yes they were confident, that is until I busted their systems wide open. There is plenty more to come too BTW, I’m just biding my time.

The only notable thing about the incident is that the database became publicly available through sloppy IT procedures  not that it existed. It’s a sure bet that National also has a database with names garnered from campaigns that are not obviously email-harvesting exercises.

In fact, National has Labour’s database for good measure as well. National’s explanation is that it was just seeing if it could download the material after learning about the security flaw exposed by Slater  but now that it has the database it refuses to destroy it, ostensibly because it needs to take legal advice first.

This is the first I have heard of this, but it makes sense. There is plenty in the files and it takes a huge amount of time to go through it all. If I was National I would have kept it too. Of course there are my several copies in existence around the globe and on a few Ironkey’s.

The point about Whaleleaks was though, that Labour placed a heavy reliance on IT, Social Media and email systems and that avenue has now largely been busted for them.

The rest of Tracy’s article focuses on polling and messaging in and around the issue in Christchurch. I will cover that in a separate post tomorrow.

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.

 

Whaleleaks – Goff keeps on lying

Phil Goff gave an interview on bFM where he lied about the ECE/NZEI email harvesting.

He said:

PHIL GOFF: ….But on the other thing on the website, yeah, that sort of thing happens, regretfully the National Party was involved in gaining information from that system, it’s not actually confidential information, it was a petition that people had signed about early childhood education, and it was some donations to the party in regard to the Stop Asset Sales campaign, but you know, obviously Whaleoil was threatening to divulge private information, I think the party, the National Party, although it’s been two hours downloading it from our site, warned them off from doing that.

Where do I start. The information was confidential information. We know this because the NZEI has complained to Labour about it. Labour had no right to that information, they stole it from the petition results. If they didn’t steal it then it was given to them by the NZEI, in which case they harvested the details themselves and passed it to Labour. Since Phil Goff doesn’t think that all those signatures and emails aren’t confidential then perhaps I should just publish the two csv files full of teachers email addresses that they left lying around on the internet. (Just so Phil knows what I am taking about the files are called ece_postcards_d621c508caeee97e4a6adcb6445be714.csv and ece_postcards_9ebd3c5a3c97643dd445657547546cf2.csv . Go ahead Phil check to see if the NZEI wants those files put on the internet, again)

The petition was in the form of a postcard. Here it is:

ECE Postcard

Nowhere on that postcard, either side, is any suggestion your personal information is going to be stolen by Labour, or even given to them. The campaign isn’t a Labour party campaign and for Phil Goff to suggest that it is is yet another lie.

If Phil Goff doesn’t think donation information to a political party is confidential information then lord knows what he thinks is. But then again this is a man who lied about a comment by Don Brash in a private meeting with US officials.

Does he not know that Whaleoil, is me, it is not them. He should know, he refused to come on Close Up with me once. For the record and becasue Phil Goff would rather lie, the National party has not been in contact with me about this information, either before I broke the story nor after. As if I would listen to their advice anyway. He obviously hasn’t been checking out the smears by Trevor Mallard that says I am in the pay of Don Brash and the Act Party now. The two contentions of Labour can’t both be right.

I didn’t release the confidential inforamtion because this is not about the struggling person who donated $6.60 to Labour, it is about the fact that they allowed me and god knows how many other people to gain their information, including DoB information, 18,000 emails and 450 odd donations.

Labour can talk all they like to the Privacy Commissioner, they are the ones in breach not me.

The hilarious thing is that Phil Goff, in trying to smear National, tells the world that they let their opponents access their site for more than two hours.

Of course I was in their database and site for much longer than that, over several months. That doesn’t seem to matter a bit to Labour.

Phil Goff and Labour, from Chris Flatt and Moira Coatsworth chave handled and continue to handle this in the most apalling way. They show no contrition and prefer instead to lie and spin. There is no one else to blame for this huge breach of privacy other than themselves.

Well, we will just have to see what else comes out of the files I have won’t we.

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/suemoroneylabour.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 thou­sands of sup­port­ers and donors. As part of the first stage of its cam­paign BSD and an anti-fascist mag­a­zine, Search­light, has sent thou­sands of emails ask­ing each recip­i­ents to for­ward it to five friendsand make a small dona­tion. The soft­ware means cam­paign­ers can then track who opens the emails, where they are sent and what hap­pens when they arrive at the other end — tai­lor­ing 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.