lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:11:10 +0100 From: Charles Skoglund <charles.skoglund@...sec.se> To: Bipin Gautam <bipin.gautam@...il.com>, Rohit Patnaik <quanticle@...il.com> Cc: full-disclosure <full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk> Subject: Re: Disk wiping -- An alternate approach? This discussion is getting weirder and weirder. If an examiner finds evidence on YOUR computer / cell phone / usb disks / whatever, please do tell me how it's not necessarily yours? By claiming your computer has been hacked? You do know an examiner usually knows how to double-check your story for malicious code right? Or what are you guys talking about? My experience is that when I find the evidence, the person/s being investigated confesses quite rapidly. Cheers! On 1/26/10 4:31 AM, "Bipin Gautam" <bipin.gautam@...il.com> wrote: > So to the point, the techniques of forensic examiners were flawed from > day one given that any text/evidence found on your computer is NOT > NECESSARILY yours! Does that break digital forensics........? > oops................. > > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists