I was more struck by this and other statements by police representatives.
"The Cleveland Police protect and serve the Browns stadium and the Browns organization owes us an apology."
Several statements like this, others were more blunt, imply that the police were insulted and may not protect and serve if they feel slighted. Or am I reading too much into this?
He showed up at a city meeting with a .357 and said, "Let's talk". He clearly showed that he was willing to threaten the lives anyone that was involved. I'm usually the first one to point out over-reaction. However, it seems to me that the show was to make the old guy consider his own safety. It doesn't seem to me that they intended on escalating this but to control and protect the situation.
I would rather they didn't have these toys. Could they have, I don't know, watched the house for him to leave and nab him? Is there a LOT of things they could have done instead of this. No doubt. It does seem like overkill and lazy police work.
Because parents, by and large, want kids raised by the schools. "Don't teach evolution because I don't believe in that." "Don't teach that sciency stuff. It's confusing." "Better let my kid pray but not that kid that talks funny... he's odd and can't therefore cannot be trusted." "TV and lunchables for all kids."
Very good points. However, you state that you had to “jump through hoops” to get this system set up. I cannot imagine a high level executive of any company allowing their computer to be locked out of their systems for a full day or sit and hit “enter” at regular intervals. You’re right. Encryption and backup should be easy for the end user but you state that it’s not in your experience in the federal government. In my mind, you’re strengthening the argument that there is likely no backup of the local office system.
As for going into older tapes to get the data. Yes, that is entirely possible. However, if those tapes were being recycled and reused (common practice in a LOT of businesses) then the data could have been destroyed at any point.
The only explanation that has ever made any sense to me (I’ve done tech support for almost 20 years) is this.
I’ve read in the news that the IRS uses a Microsoft Exchange system for email. Each user gets X amount of data storage on the server that is backed up. The user goes over that limit of X. There are two solutions to this in general. The first is increase the size of the storage on the server and the back system. The second is to set up a personal storage file (.pst) on the local computer in that person’s office. The user (with the help of a tech, usually) chooses what emails are moved from the server to the local file. The office systems are not usually backed up. If the second option was deployed by the user or tech staff and later on that office system’s hard drive crashed… well, then the data could be gone for good.
Now, they say that there is a backup? If so, I have no idea how they’ve set up this system.
This seems to be a moot point. I can't believe that this has gotten this far. The government's main point is that they can't wait for a warrant to go through the phone... right?
So, let's walk through this. They have a bad guy and take his phone. He does not have access to another communication device that would be able to wipe the phone. The police have him "in custody" and can monitor his communications. No need to hurry, the data is safe because he can't wipe the phone.
Oh, what if his wife/gf/lawyer has his code to wipe the phone?!? Putting the phone in a radio stopping faraday style case would keep it from communicating out to the net and it could be taken to a police tech with a secure room to wait for a warrant. No need to hurry, it's all safe in the deadspot room.
oh, what if he manages to wipe the phone anyway?!? A lot of the data is actually saved on third party servers. Call logs, text messages, calendars, contact lists, sometimes even photos and videos are on the carrier's servers or on Apple's iCloud, Google's drive, etc. No need to hurry, it's all safe on the cloud and that's unprotected by the 4th because of the asinine 3rd party doc and that 1980's law about abandoned email.
No need to get a warrant, the data will be used against you no matter what.
I don't understand how he was able to install the keylogger. Is there no security at SDC? I know that they noticed it and caught him but there shouldn't have been any way that a student has root access to the local machine to install the software. So there is another parallel to the our government. They stop something that should never have been possible. Sloppy work for everyone except the network team. He will end up running some company that will own the politicians instead of becoming one.
W enacted this in 2008. Obama has supported it... both sides are selling us out and taking away our rights. We just get to choose if we want the MPAA,RIAA to own us or the "too big to jail" crowd.
...that if I link to a German article and expand their readership and expose the article to a wider audiance... can I bill their advertising department for all the work that I've done for them? There is a service that I'm providing for them and I'm sure that my fees will be based on sound math and fairness, just like they have done here. Oh, and with the same amount of transparency.
I am a huge fan of Tool and Perfect Circle. However, the only thing that Maynard James Keenan seems to hold in more contempt than religion or California is his fans. These are the lyrics from his song "Hooker With A Penis" (I hope this
is fair use):
All you know about me is what I've sold you,
Dumb fuck.
I sold out long before you ever heard my name.
I sold my soul to make a record,
Dip shit,
And you bought one.
.......
All you read and
Wear or see and
Hear on TV
Is a product
Begging for your
Fatass dirty
Dollar
So...Shut up and
Buy my new record
Send more money
Fuck you, buddy.
Doesn't the CFAA have a section about "trafficking passwords" or something like that?
I suspect that software hacking for this sort of thing is really rare in comparison to social engineering. Even Kevin Minnick really didn't "hack" as much as was given access to the information he wanted.
I don't disagree with anything here (except for moe being rude). I'm just curious how this line of thought would impact postings on forums, bbs systems, and comment sections like this.
If it ruled that the DCMA violates free speech and it is illegal for companies to limit free speech. Does that imply that my local motorcycle forum, indie music bbs, or this comment system cannot remove offending posts?
If I were to have gotten mad at moe's post above and called him various names (some true, some false, all very funny), would the mods of this site have the legal ground to censer my offending (at least to moe) posts? Now, I understand that moe would have the legal right to sue me for defamation of character, libel, and internet tomfoolery (covered by the DCMA, I think). However, if he were to send a nasty-gram to the site demanding that the post be removed, and if the courts ruled that outside of a conviction a company must protect free speech does the site have legal ability to remove or edit the post?
Taken one step further changes things. Suppose there was a hate group that gets on a diversity site. If it's protected, it's protected. I'm just wondering what happens when the pendulum swings the other way .It may not be so bad, but it will have consequences and it is worth talking about. Honestly, I'm in favor of more free speech (including moe's) than I am of the DCMA and it's heavy handed goals.
I think you get the idea of my question and I can't think of another way to insult moe in a passive aggressive way.
I find it very funny that the "chief research and strategy officer" for Microsoft thinks that we should have a system that keeps us safe from viruses, trojans, and hackers. Wouldn't it be better for him to research and strategic chiefly about fixing those bugs in Windows that let the viruses, trojans, and hackers into my computer in the first place?
-chad
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by chad holbrook.
Problematic phrasing
Does anyone else have an issue with the phrase "we've gone and done a forensic analysis"?
Undertone?
I was more struck by this and other statements by police representatives.
"The Cleveland Police protect and serve the Browns stadium and the Browns organization owes us an apology."
Several statements like this, others were more blunt, imply that the police were insulted and may not protect and serve if they feel slighted. Or am I reading too much into this?
Re: hmmm
He showed up at a city meeting with a .357 and said, "Let's talk". He clearly showed that he was willing to threaten the lives anyone that was involved. I'm usually the first one to point out over-reaction. However, it seems to me that the show was to make the old guy consider his own safety. It doesn't seem to me that they intended on escalating this but to control and protect the situation.
I would rather they didn't have these toys. Could they have, I don't know, watched the house for him to leave and nab him? Is there a LOT of things they could have done instead of this. No doubt. It does seem like overkill and lazy police work.
Re: Why...
Because parents, by and large, want kids raised by the schools. "Don't teach evolution because I don't believe in that." "Don't teach that sciency stuff. It's confusing." "Better let my kid pray but not that kid that talks funny... he's odd and can't therefore cannot be trusted." "TV and lunchables for all kids."
xkcd.org
http://xkcd.com/504/
Re: Typical and Far Too Common
Very good points. However, you state that you had to “jump through hoops” to get this system set up. I cannot imagine a high level executive of any company allowing their computer to be locked out of their systems for a full day or sit and hit “enter” at regular intervals. You’re right. Encryption and backup should be easy for the end user but you state that it’s not in your experience in the federal government. In my mind, you’re strengthening the argument that there is likely no backup of the local office system.
As for going into older tapes to get the data. Yes, that is entirely possible. However, if those tapes were being recycled and reused (common practice in a LOT of businesses) then the data could have been destroyed at any point.
Mail server blues
The only explanation that has ever made any sense to me (I’ve done tech support for almost 20 years) is this.
I’ve read in the news that the IRS uses a Microsoft Exchange system for email. Each user gets X amount of data storage on the server that is backed up. The user goes over that limit of X. There are two solutions to this in general. The first is increase the size of the storage on the server and the back system. The second is to set up a personal storage file (.pst) on the local computer in that person’s office. The user (with the help of a tech, usually) chooses what emails are moved from the server to the local file. The office systems are not usually backed up. If the second option was deployed by the user or tech staff and later on that office system’s hard drive crashed… well, then the data could be gone for good.
Now, they say that there is a backup? If so, I have no idea how they’ve set up this system.
odd to me...
This seems to be a moot point. I can't believe that this has gotten this far. The government's main point is that they can't wait for a warrant to go through the phone... right?
So, let's walk through this. They have a bad guy and take his phone. He does not have access to another communication device that would be able to wipe the phone. The police have him "in custody" and can monitor his communications. No need to hurry, the data is safe because he can't wipe the phone.
Oh, what if his wife/gf/lawyer has his code to wipe the phone?!? Putting the phone in a radio stopping faraday style case would keep it from communicating out to the net and it could be taken to a police tech with a secure room to wait for a warrant. No need to hurry, it's all safe in the deadspot room.
oh, what if he manages to wipe the phone anyway?!? A lot of the data is actually saved on third party servers. Call logs, text messages, calendars, contact lists, sometimes even photos and videos are on the carrier's servers or on Apple's iCloud, Google's drive, etc. No need to hurry, it's all safe on the cloud and that's unprotected by the 4th because of the asinine 3rd party doc and that 1980's law about abandoned email.
No need to get a warrant, the data will be used against you no matter what.
-chad
XKCD
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/legal_hacks.png
I don't get it.
I don't understand how he was able to install the keylogger. Is there no security at SDC? I know that they noticed it and caught him but there shouldn't have been any way that a student has root access to the local machine to install the software. So there is another parallel to the our government. They stop something that should never have been possible. Sloppy work for everyone except the network team. He will end up running some company that will own the politicians instead of becoming one.
Re:
W enacted this in 2008. Obama has supported it... both sides are selling us out and taking away our rights. We just get to choose if we want the MPAA,RIAA to own us or the "too big to jail" crowd.
ACLU's map of the Constitution Free Zone
See if you have any right to the 4th Amendment.
http://www.aclu.org/constitution-free-zone-map
Could this mean....
...that if I link to a German article and expand their readership and expose the article to a wider audiance... can I bill their advertising department for all the work that I've done for them? There is a service that I'm providing for them and I'm sure that my fees will be based on sound math and fairness, just like they have done here. Oh, and with the same amount of transparency.
Re: Re:
So, in that case, I'd suggest that he should go it alone. He's shown that the client part of the old saying (IMHO).
-chad holbrook
Tools being Tools
I am a huge fan of Tool and Perfect Circle. However, the only thing that Maynard James Keenan seems to hold in more contempt than religion or California is his fans. These are the lyrics from his song "Hooker With A Penis" (I hope this
is fair use):
All you know about me is what I've sold you,
Dumb fuck.
I sold out long before you ever heard my name.
I sold my soul to make a record,
Dip shit,
And you bought one.
.......
All you read and
Wear or see and
Hear on TV
Is a product
Begging for your
Fatass dirty
Dollar
So...Shut up and
Buy my new record
Send more money
Fuck you, buddy.
http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/tool/hookerwithapenis.html
-chad
Use the office address
Use the office address in south Texas that all those patent trolls use. That would wrench two issues that I have with Texas.
Re:
Chris Brown doesn't get a say in this. He doesn't own the rights to the songs.
CFAA has password sharing provisions?
Doesn't the CFAA have a section about "trafficking passwords" or something like that?
I suspect that software hacking for this sort of thing is really rare in comparison to social engineering. Even Kevin Minnick really didn't "hack" as much as was given access to the information he wanted.
-chad
How would this apply to forums?
I don't disagree with anything here (except for moe being rude). I'm just curious how this line of thought would impact postings on forums, bbs systems, and comment sections like this.
If it ruled that the DCMA violates free speech and it is illegal for companies to limit free speech. Does that imply that my local motorcycle forum, indie music bbs, or this comment system cannot remove offending posts?
If I were to have gotten mad at moe's post above and called him various names (some true, some false, all very funny), would the mods of this site have the legal ground to censer my offending (at least to moe) posts? Now, I understand that moe would have the legal right to sue me for defamation of character, libel, and internet tomfoolery (covered by the DCMA, I think). However, if he were to send a nasty-gram to the site demanding that the post be removed, and if the courts ruled that outside of a conviction a company must protect free speech does the site have legal ability to remove or edit the post?
Taken one step further changes things. Suppose there was a hate group that gets on a diversity site. If it's protected, it's protected. I'm just wondering what happens when the pendulum swings the other way .It may not be so bad, but it will have consequences and it is worth talking about. Honestly, I'm in favor of more free speech (including moe's) than I am of the DCMA and it's heavy handed goals.
I think you get the idea of my question and I can't think of another way to insult moe in a passive aggressive way.
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
-chad
Microsoft Calls for It to be Some else's Fault
I find it very funny that the "chief research and strategy officer" for Microsoft thinks that we should have a system that keeps us safe from viruses, trojans, and hackers. Wouldn't it be better for him to research and strategic chiefly about fixing those bugs in Windows that let the viruses, trojans, and hackers into my computer in the first place?
-chad