full-disclosure - Careless Law Enforcement Computer ForensicsLacking InfoSec Expertise Causes Suicides

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <EFBC8C21B2F6CCEF1BEDA548@utd59514.utdallas.edu>
Date: Mon Oct  3 16:59:24 2005
From: pauls at utdallas.edu (Paul Schmehl)
Subject: Careless Law Enforcement Computer
	ForensicsLacking InfoSec Expertise Causes Suicides

--On Monday, October 03, 2005 09:38:16 -0400 Lane Weast 
<lweast@...clerk.org> wrote:

> In theory, what you say is incorrect.
>
> They may take you in but, in court they have to prove it was yours.
> It is not your responsibility to prove your innocence.
> It is their responsibility to prove your guilt.
>
Whenever I read stuff like this on an international list, I always wonder 
if the people posting understand that the rest of the world doesn't 
necessarily work the way your little corner of the world works.

For example, French law, which is based upon Napoleonic law, places the 
burden of proof on the defendant.  You are guilty unless you can prove your 
innocent.

So, your comments almost certainly do not apply to many people reading 
here.  Which causes one to wonder - what value do they have to the audience 
reading?

Paul Schmehl (pauls@...allas.edu)
Adjunct Information Security Officer
University of Texas at Dallas
AVIEN Founding Member
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/