Matthew Molyett (candidate for Howard County Board of Education in District 1) recently reported a Campaign Data Breach. Here is what is listed on his website on October 16th:

Campaign data breach

There was a misconfigured cloud service in use by my campaign. The cloud account has been secured, the person responsible has had their access removed.

The campaign is assessing what private data has been exposed. The FBI has been contacted about the unauthorized accesses and associated criminal hacking. Please forward any relevant information or screenshots to

breach@molyett.com

###

This data was shared in a number of places. I saw it posted to a number of Facebook groups recently. Many groups admins saw what this data contained and removed those posts quickly.

The data (a spreadsheet that has been obtained by Scott E’s Blog) contains more than 300 entries of names, phone numbers, email addresses, physical addresses and other information of what appears to be campaign supporters and volunteers.

Scott E

5 COMMENTS

  1. There’s so much wrong with this response. Where go begin?

    1. It’s a reflection on Mr. Molyett’s view of his supporters that in this entire statement, there’s no apology to them for putting their private information on the Internet.

    2. Mr. Molyett does not take responsibility for the “breach.” Instead, he immediately points blame at (I assume) one of his campaign volunteers–someone who likely is taking extra time to support him–instead of saying he himself bearing responsibility. That is not leadership.

    3. A significant part of Mr. Molyett’s campaign is based on his knowledge of cyber security. Mainly this is due to him having no significant educational background as it relates to the BoE, unlike the decade+ his opponent has. People can draw their own conclusions on that experience given how much effort it takes to secure an online account (spoiler alert: it doesn’t take much).

    4. What is all this techno-jumble in the response as in a “misconfigured cloud server?” Is that the type of communication that we want as a BoE member? If I read between the lines correctly, it was simply a Google Doc of some type that anyone could see.

    5. Hacking? What hacking. If this explanation is all there is, why is he wasting the time of the FBI on this? As we saw in Michigan, the FBI has quite a few things they are pursuing that are bit more important than a BoE race.

    6. Really, this was just a simple mistake. It’s unfortunate and it happens. There are going to be much greater crises that will occur if Mr. Molyett becomes a BoE member. However, do we want a member who takes a small event like this and responds to it unapologetically, throws a campaign worker under a bus, and overreacts by calling in the Feds? Personally, I’ve had seen enough of all three of those types of responses over the past four years at the national level. I don’t need four years of it on the BoE.

  2. Well this could have happened to anyone and I am one of those volunteers and the type of information is much less than one would have divulged with the numerous data breaches from large companies that have happened with everything from health insurance to yahoo.

    As for his opponent – she proposed we open the schools in the Fall because like many Trump supporters she doesn’t understand that Covid is real and a danger to our children. So if that is what you cite as experience I’ll take inexperience.

    • While mistakes can and do happen, real leadership is how you handle those mistakes. Do you take responsibility and try to remedy them, or do you just go around blaming everyone else? From what I have seen Mr Molyett is the latter type and therefore should not be on the BOE.

    • Thanks for validating my point, although calling it a “breach” is a misnomer. Like you say, it is hardly that huge of a mistake, yet, as I stated above, Mr. Molyett threw a campaign worker under the bus, didn’t apologize, and called in the FBI. And since you didn’t respond to any of my points, I can only assume there’s nothing you can say in response.

      As for Ms. Delmont-Small: it’s an oft-repeated misnomer by way too many that she called to simply “open schools.” She did not. She voted no because the motion left no option for reconsideration of opening or options for opening for small groups. And, as for opening schools, multiple Democratic governors and the CDC have set the standard of a 5% positivity rate to do so–based on science–to open schools, which Howard County has been at since July. Yet, we seem to not even be close to small groups for kids that desperately need it.

      But putting that aside, here’s the thing about Ms. Delmont-Small. Unlike Mr. Molyett, who, given his complete and utter “inexperience” (your word) in education, must rely solely on his followers’ blind devotion to party alignment to win the election, Ms. Delmont-Small actually has a resume for the job for which she is applying. She also has the courage to avoid political expediency. The easiest thing for her to have done was to have voted against opening. But when you care about all children–whether they are kids with disabilities, students learning English as a second language, disadvantage children with limited tech access, or any of the numerous non-privileged students your candidate supposedly supports–you don’t do what is easy, you do what it is right.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here