Date: Tue Jul  5 13:50:21 2005
From: gkverma at gmail.com (Gaurav Kumar)
Subject: Re: Tools accepted by the courts

i wish to share what happened in real life-

the lawyer shows proofs of the hacking done. the judge say "ok" the
defense guy asked, is this proof passed through the x-ray detector of
airport while the proof was shipped. "yes" was the obvious reply.
defense lawyer continued .."since this proof has passed thru xrays,
there are chances that it might have been mutated" by the rays.

the defendant wont having benefit of doubt.

regards,
gaurav


On 7/5/05, Jason Coombs <jasonc@...ence.org> wrote:
> Evidence Technology wrote:
> > That era is quickly fading. Going forward, I think we'll see more
> > and more digital evidence rendered inadmissible via failure to
> > adhere to established evidentiary standards.
> 
> Jerry,
> 
> No way. What 'evidentiary standards' are you talking about here?
> 
> I'm sorry but that's just absurd. How will there ever be 'evidentiary
> standards' on the contents of my filing cabinet and my personal
> pornography collection?
> 
> The police find the data where they find it. That's called
> 'circumstantial evidence' and digital evidence will always be treated
> exactly as such no matter who we successfully convince of the flaws
> inherent in the filing cabinet or printed document/glossy photograph
> analogy.
> 
> What I demand to hear spoken by law enforcement, and what I insist
> prosecutors compel law enforcement to speak if they don't volunteer
> these words out of their own common sense, is the following:
> 
> "Yes, that's what we found on the hard drive but there's little or no
> reason for us to believe that the defendant is responsible for placing
> it there just because the hard drive was in the defendant's possession.
> We often see cases where hard drives are installed second-hand and data
> from previous owners remains on the drive, we can't tell when the data
> in question was written so it's important to be aware that hundreds of
> other people could have placed it there. We also see cases where
> software such as spyware or Web pages full of javascript force a
> suspect's Web browser to take actions that result in the appearance that
> the owner of the computer caused Internet content to be retrieved when
> in fact the owner of the computer may not have known what was happening,
> malicious Web site programmers know how to use techniques such as
> pop-unders and frames to hide scripted behavior of Web pages.
> Furthermore, once the Web browser is closed and its temporary files are
> deleted, every bit of data that was saved 'temporarily' to a file by the
> browser becomes a semi-permanent part of the hard drive's unallocated
> space and we have no way to tell the difference between data that was
> once part of a temporary file created automatically by a Web page being
> viewed or scripted inside a Web browser and the same data placed
> intentionally on the hard drive by its owner without the use of the
> Internet. Also ..."
> 
> Disrespectfully Yours,
> 
>  (with extreme prejudice born of intense frustration due to the fact
> that nobody cares about getting this stuff right when it's so much
> easier just to collect a forensic paycheck and move on to the next
> victim -- I would like to think you are part of the solution rather than
> being part of the problem but you're talking nonsense and so is nearly
> everyone else in the computer forensics field, most especially the
> computer forensics vendors who need people to love them in order to make
> their businesses grow. They do not deserve respect and they most
> certainly fail the 'lovable' test, but television shows like CSI and
> visions of fat bank accounts have deceived everyone temporarily...)
> 
> Please get a clue before you hurt somebody.
> 
> Jason Coombs
> jasonc@...ence.org
> _______________________________________________
> 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