I'm just sayin'.
It sounds like Broadwell was getting mad and harassing his friends. Not a good look lol
Why David Petraeus’s Gmail account is a national security issue
The beginning of the end came for CIA Director David Petraeus when Paula Broadwell, a younger married woman with whom he was having an affair, “or someone close to her had sought access to his email,” according to the Wall Street Journal’s description
of an FBI probe. Associates of Petraeus had received “anonymous
harassing emails” that were then traced to Broadwell, ABC’s Martha
Raddatz reported, suggesting she may have found their names or addresses in his e-mail.
The e-mail account was apparently Petraeus’s personal Gmail, not his
official CIA e-mail, according to the Wall Street Journal. That’s a big
deal: Some of the most powerful foreign spy agencies in the world would
love to have an opening, however small, into the personal e-mail account
of the man who runs the United States’ spy service. The information
could have proved of enormous value to foreign hackers, who already
maintain a near-constant effort to access sensitive U.S. data.
If Petraeus allowed his Gmail security to be compromised even
slightly, by widening access, sharing passwords or logging in from
multiple addresses, it would have brought foreign spy agencies that much
closer to a treasure trove of information. As the Wall Street Journal
hints, investigators were concerned about Petraeus’s Gmail access
precisely because of the history of foreign attempts to access just such
Security officials are sensitive to misuse of personal email
accounts—not only official accounts—because there have been multiple
instances of foreign hackers targeting personal emails.
A personal e-mail account like Petraeus’s almost certainly would not
have contained any high-level intelligence; he probably didn’t keep a
list of secret drone-base coordinates on his Google docs account. But
access to the account could have provided telling information on, for
example, Petraeus’s travel schedule, his foreign contacts, even personal
information about himself or other senior U.S. officials.
Private e-mail services like Google’s, though considered
significantly more secure than most, still have susceptibilities to
foreign intrusion. And it happens. Technology writers have sometimes discussed what one writer called the “password fallacy,”
the false sense of safety created by access systems such as Google’s
that balance security against ease of use. Even with Google’s extra
security features, the company must also avoid making security so
onerous as to drive away customers, making it an easier target for
foreign hackers even before Petraeus possibly started sharing access and
thus diluting the account’s integrity. And, as a Wired magazine
investigation demonstrated in
August, personal e-mail accounts often allow hackers access to other
personal accounts, worsening both the infiltration and the damage.
All of this might sound a little overly apprehensive – really, U.S.
national security is compromised because the CIA director’s personal
Gmail account might have been a little easier to hack? – until you start
looking at the scale and sophistication of foreign attempts to
infiltrate U.S. data sources. Chinese hacking efforts,
perhaps the best-known but nowhere near the only threat to U.S.
networks and computers, suggest the enormous scope and ferocious drive
of foreign government hackers.
Some Americans who have access to sensitive information and who travel to China describe going to tremendous lengths
to minimize government efforts to seize their data. Some copy and paste
their passwords from USB thumb drives rather than type them out, for
fear of key-logging software. They carry “loaner” laptops and cellphones
and pull out cellphone batteries during sensitive meetings, worried
that the microphone could be switched on remotely. The New York Times called
such extreme measures, which also apply in other countries, “standard
operating procedure for officials at American government agencies.”
Even still, the publicly reported incidents of successful Chinese
hacking – such as a March intrusion that stole a $1 billion, 10-year
research project overnight
– suggest that the efforts might be near-continuous and the successes
rampant. A 2010 Chinese infiltration of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
ended up funneling weeks of corporate data; even after the chamber
thought it had reestablished security, it discovered that an office
printer and a corporate apartment thermostat were still sending data –
who knows what kind? – back to China. You have to wonder what a similar
infiltration into the private e-mail account of the director of the
Central Intelligence Agency might have turned up.
Of course, the CIA director is not the Chamber of Commerce, which may
explain why the FBI’s counter-intelligence monitoring is so sensitive
that just Broadwell’s access to his Gmail account triggered an
investigation. But the fact that the FBI looked so hard and so carefully
– and that Petraeus lost his directorship of the CIA over an intrusion
that many of us might consider minor or even routine – underscores the
potential risk to U.S. intelligence entailed in Petraeus’s, or
Broadwell’s, alleged misuse of his personal account.http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/11/10/why-david-petraeuss-gmail-account-is-a-national-security-issue/