In the scheme of "UK Gov Shitshows so far in 2022", this is a non-issue.

Retrain and put her back to work. Which is exactly what's happened.

In the scheme of "UK Gov Shitshows so far in 2022", this is a non-issue.

No. It is the tip of the iceberg. (Another lettuce to bring the government down!)

She admitted that she did it six times in the six weeks that she was Home Secretary for the first time. Presumably because she has been confronted with the logs showing these six events.

Follow-up questions which should be asked include:

- how many times did she do this during the 31 months that she was Attorney General? (for those overseas, that position is the most senior law officer in the government)

- how widespread is this practice throughout government?

But it could be worse. Governments could be competent...

"- how widespread is this practice throughout government?"

Ask Hillary Clinton :)

> "She admitted that she did it six times in the six weeks"

She sent a document to her own gmail 6 times. She sent it from there to the wrong person once (that we know of)

But what kind of information governance allows sensitive material to be sent by email outside the organisation? That is the bigger question, not some numpty's misuse of it.

In the scheme of "UK Gov Shitshows so far in 2022", this is a non-issue.

I'm pretty sick of this kind of attitude. "Everything else is so awful, this thing that's a bit shit doesn't matter". Of course it matters, if I'd done this with sensitive company documents I wouldn't be retrained, I'd be fired for gross misconduct. The fact it was done 6 times in such a brief tenure ask Home Sec means this is not a mistake, it is a habitual way of working for her, it's just this is the first time she's been caught it's been detected.

I'm beyond the point of accepting "I know our politicians are beyond useless, but we accept it because we tell ourselves the others are just as useless". Why do we think this is OK? Why as a population do we accept it? These people are meant to be the best of us, the wisest of us and yet I wouldn't leave them alone for 5 minutes unsupervised in a room with a pair of safety scissors. The excuse "We think others are as bad" is not a reason to accept it.

"I'm beyond the point of accepting "I know our politicians are beyond useless, but we accept it because we tell ourselves the others are just as useless". Why do we think this is OK? Why as a population do we accept it? These people are meant to be the best of us, the wisest of us and yet I wouldn't leave them alone for 5 minutes unsupervised in a room with a pair of safety scissors. The excuse "We think others are as bad" is not a reason to accept it."

Everybody is free to stand for election against 'these people' and everybody else is free to vote for them. So if we want a change, all we have to do is change our voting habits. Stop electing 'these people'. And stand for parliament against them. Simples! :)

So if we want a change, all we have to do is change our voting habits. Stop electing 'these people'.

Which is exactly my point, and yet people insist on voting for these imbeciles and putting them in power, despite all previous experience. If people still want conservatives in charge in spite of the last few years, no amount of "someone I never heard of" putting their name on the ballot is going to change masochistic tendencies.

That being said I would gladly stand against them, care to lend give me the £500 it costs to do so? Unfortunately I can't afford to throw that kind of money away.

Parliament and government are supposed to represent ordinary people. This incident proves that they do. Government by supposed experts would be like government by the civil service: awful.

If I'd done this with sensitive company documents I wouldn't be retrained, I'd be fired for gross misconduct

It's even worse than that. These are government documents we're talking about, not corporate....send those where they aren't meant to go and you could be looking at imprisonment.

The Register seems to be rather late...

The lettuce knew of this before you...

On some occasions, she said she needed to do so in order to view documents on her private phone while conducting a Microsoft Teams video call on her official phone.

If only there were some sort of IT device with a screen big enough to do more than one thing at a time on...

Or even better, imagine if the government could have been able to afford to buy her two phones. Or if they could afford a new toner cartridge and print out government documents for her, which could have been secured in some kind of box.

We might have been one spyware loaded "sink the migrants" game in the app store away from our entire national security being blown wide open.

You'd sort of hope that HMG's I.T. people would enforce RMS/conditional access etc for important docs - rather than relying on policies which are routinely ignored!!

Yes it should be easy, studying for the ccnp security exam to renew it and in the section on email security one of the chapters is data loss prevention or how to stop confidential docs going to unsafe email addresses.

It isn’t that hard to configure either

"To the disgust of most, Braverman was reappointed as Home Secretary"

If these fuckers think they can get away with it, then it's a lucky day for any sod accused of it with me on their jury. I know judges are up to their necks in it, but for now you can't stop a juror saying "fuck you Cruella".

When I worked for the Attorney General life was so simple. Classified documents came and went by hand. The AG had two phones, one was scrambled, and for anything urgent, there was always the telex.

Pretty sure if I sent a document marked "confidential" to my home gmail account from work it would count as misconduct with an attendant likelihood of being sacked. 6 times? I'd definitely be out with a black mark on my name for a job. Why is this deemed tolerable for someone who is allegedly in charge of national security and policing? To wave it away with "I've had IT training so everything is fine" is crap, this should be basic confidentiality training for any incoming politician so I'd be surprised if she hadn't had the exact same training at various points in the past, she just chose to ignore it. If there isn't training given to politicians on IT security and document handling, someone needs a massive boot up the arse to get it sorted.

Take her personal phone and stick it in a blender

I suspect that has already been done to her brain, especially given the crackpot ideas she and her predecessor came up with.

So we threw out Boris and his gang for holding parties because they were above their own law, not to mention being a menacing bunch of loose cannon.

Then we threw out I've-forgotten-her-name-already for being above the natural laws of the financial markets, not to mention being a fracking menace.

Now we have a Home Secretary who is breaking cybersecurity law because she is above the laws she is responsible for. I mean, what kind of excuse is it that she forwarded Govt stuff from Gmail because it was the only phone she had - it shouldn't have been in her Gmail box in the first place! Not to mention being a menace to all "invading" desperate foreigners. Then there was the story about her which appeared here about a week ago and shortly afterwards mysteriously disappeared.

So that's all right, then.

Another clueless dipshit idiot in charge of the country. As if hashtags Rudd was not bad enough. What was she thinking? All that training, signing the OSA (I presume she must have done that to become home secretary), constant briefings on cyber terrorism, knowledge of auditing and traceability, and she still does something like this 6 times? And on a gmail account of all things. Now big brother google knows more about our government policies than the government.

Surely when you become a senior government minster, someone from somewhere tells you to close all your personal "publicly hosted" free email accounts, and only use a personal email account that is hosted in a suitably secure environment.? Aside from anything else, the ability to get malware through a public account like that is just not worth any risk. No doubt Liz trusses hacked phone suffered similar.

In any commercial organisation distributing internal classified information would be a sackable offence. It needs to be in this case too. And properly sacked. Not just removed from the cabinet, but sacked as an MP for misconduct in public office and a by-election called. Then people (and her cronies) would actually start to question and understand what she has done.