Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11
    ********** |ceWriterguy
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    The second one is arbitrary because email can be run through remailers that don't keep logs and it can be spoofed.
    I'm curious in my paranoid mind exactly how many of these 'anonymous remailers' and 'anonymous proxy servers' are run by law enforcement?

    Oh, and she's not a lawyer yet, but we're hoping VERY soon...

    Jinxy - same here, and I personally hope it succeeds - the issue at hand is who is more responsible? The person who put the trojan on the machine, or the *supposedly responsible* user who was too stupid to get the software to find/remove it? I side with the 'painful stupidity' offense - hang the idiots.
    Even a broken watch is correct twice a day.

    Which coder said that nobody could outcode Microsoft in their own OS? Write a bit and make a fortune!

  2. #12
    Dead Man Walking
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    I'm curious in my paranoid mind exactly how many of these 'anonymous remailers' and 'anonymous proxy servers' are run by law enforcement?
    While i am willing to conceed the possibilty I have to disagree. The "hacking/cracking" comunity in general isnt stupid. Yea it has its dumbasses but every group does. If they were run by law enforcement there would be more busts come about because of their use. Somebody would figure it out. Or when someone got busted and found out that the "annonymous remailer" they used was run by law enforcemnt they would spread the word. AFAIK in court they not only have to disclose evidence but dont they aslo have to explain how they got it?

  3. #13
    Computer Forensics
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    zombieman: You might be surprised as to what the government does.
    A snippet:
    I attended last weeks "Information, National Policies, and International Infrastructure" Symposium at Harvard Law School, organized by the Global Information Infrastructure Commission, the Kennedy School and the Institute for Information Technology Law & Policy of Harvard Law School.

    During the presentation by Paul Strassmann, National Defense University and William Marlow, Science Applications International Corporation, entitled "Anonymous Remailers as Risk-Free International Infoterrorists" the questions was raised from audience (Professor Chaarles Nesson, Harvard LAw School) - in a rather extended debate - whether the CIA and similar government agencies are involved in running anonymous remailers as this would be a perfect target to scan possibly illegal messages.

    Both presenters explicitly acknowledged that a number of anonymous remailers in the US are run by government agencies scanning traffic. Marlow said that the government runs at least a dozen remailers and that the most popular remailers in France and Germany are run by the respective government agencies in these countries. In addition they mentioned that the NSA has successfully developed systems to break encrypted messages below 1000 bit of key length and strongly suggested to use at least 1024 bit keys. They said that they semselves use 1024 bit keys.

    *note* this was in 1996.

    This is why people tend to just compromise joe user's box and use it as a jump point.
    Antionline in a nutshell
    \"You\'re putting the fate of the world in the hands of a bunch of idiots I wouldn\'t trust with a potato gun\"

    Trust your Technolust

  4. #14
    ********** |ceWriterguy
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Within an ongoing investigation (read as Sting operation, pending investigations into other offenses or other offenders, etc.) the methods used to obtain evidence may be kept confidential. The right of the accused to confront their accuser still remains untouched since the evidence remains, but the method of obtaining may be kept silent - revealed only to the judge and attorneys involved, but not directly to the accused. A good example of this would be the DEA agent that's working undercover that has already caused someone to be arrested - his face may be blurred, voice disguised, etc. so his identity will remain secret, but the evidence he presents stand. There are very strict laws governing such methods, but (back on computer crimes here) I'm quite sure that in the interest of National Security such methods are in place on the web.

    Mrs |ce adds that it's a very complicated process and that law enforcement has to be extremely careful in its usage, but that it exists and does occur.
    Even a broken watch is correct twice a day.

    Which coder said that nobody could outcode Microsoft in their own OS? Write a bit and make a fortune!

  5. #15
    Regal Making Handler
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    So we now have a bunch of stuff before the law makers trying to negate this.
    Dear oh dear i realy should stay away from the pc when i'm drunk. Wrong choise of words i'm afraid. I should have said that these cases have started people looking at the law and the way cybercrime is dealt with. You can bet that as the Trojan Defence has been used successfuly on, something like three occasions i think, that something will be done, it has to. Otherwise we all get a free get out of jail card.
    What happens if a big asteroid hits the Earth? Judging from realistic simulations involving a sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog, we can assume it will be pretty bad. - Dave Barry

  6. #16
    HeadShot Master N1nja Cybr1d's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Boston, MA
    SOmetimes its not that complicated . Perfect example: In the town I live in a parking cleck was accused of child pornography by his mother. She found a few printouts of little kids having sex. She calls the cops and the cops confiscate everything, including his PC. The cops take the PC to their "computer forensics" department (I dont even know if they have one here), and the analysts pull up a whole bunch of other pictures, website addresses that the guy visited, and whatever other information they needed to lock him up.....and thats what they did. The mother also accused him of beating her so he gets a few extra years for assault and battery....

    IMO most of the time you would deal with "careless" people who get caught, and you just need to get as much information out of their computer as possible that might lock em up. I say you won't have to deal with many cases where there's a screwdriver through the HDD because if someone is smart enough to put a screwdriver through it, knows how to completely dispose of it. Hackers/Crackers usually get caught because they get careless....and they dont know they were careless most of the time, so they do not have much time to react and to destroy any evidence on their computer.


  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    I found this while digging up some information, thought you guys might like to read it. It's pretty interesting.

    Don\'t be a bitch! Use Slackware.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

We have made updates to our Privacy Policy to reflect the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation.