Slashdot Mirror


Alternative Browsers Impede Investigations

rbochan writes "Allegations in an article over at CNET propose that alternate browsers such as Firefox and Opera impede law enforcement and investigation efforts because they "use different structures, files and naming conventions for the data that investigators are after", which can "cause trouble for examiners.""

12 of 720 comments (clear)

  1. It's *not* rocket science, guys... by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is one of the dumbest articles I've read in a while...

    From TFA:
    Internet Explorer hides nothing from police and other investigators who examine PCs to discover which sites the user has visited.
    Implying that 'alternate browsers' such as Firefox and Opera, 'hide' data? Shenanigans! These other browsers don't 'hide' anything...you just have to know where to look.

    Also from TFA:
    These programs use different structures, files and naming conventions for the data that investigators are after. And files are in a different location on the hard drive, which can cause trouble for examiners.
    You can't be serious. If it's this easy to thwart the authorities, maybe I should tender my resume.
    God help these 'professionals' if a suspect's computer happens to run Linux...which brings up a disturbing thought...is the presence of a 'non-standard' browser or OS now going to be 'suspicious' to investigators, because they can't seem to penetrate its 'arcane secrets'?
    --
    ____

    ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

    1. Re:It's *not* rocket science, guys... by MyLongNickName · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is is dumb, but not for the reason you suggest. It is dumb because software isn't to be designed with 'criminal investigator usability' as a design consideration.

      Simple as that.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    2. Re:It's *not* rocket science, guys... by RetroGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There you go, transparent encrypted directory

      Which means it is transparent to the logged in user, which means it is transparent to the virus/ trojan horse/ spyware.

      And your point?

      --

      - - - - - - - - - - -
      I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
    3. Re:It's *not* rocket science, guys... by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I also agree with this.

      we hired an Ex FBI computer forensics expert, he "retired" 3 years ago at the age of 37. the man knows absolutely nothing about computer forensics. I started talking to him during lunch to ask him how he would recover evidence from a company PC that a user was using to surf kiddie porn with.

      He said you grab the IE history folder and temp internet folder.

      I asked so what do you do when that user uses the option to empty the contents of that folder or uses XP power tools to set it to empty it on a regular basis. or installed one of those "hide your tracks" programs you get spams about every other week?

      He responded that highly skilled hackers like that are not common in the business world and then he would have to send the drive in for electron microscope examination.

      The man shit his pants when the situation finally came around that he was unable to retrieve evidence from a ex employee's laptop. I gave them a printout of cookies to all the websites the guy visited and a detailed record of his ill-gotten web useage for the last week he was here. I used my leet haxor skillz and unleased a secret tool called proxy server logs as well in my 20 minutes. He took 7 days to retrieve nothing.

      and at that time I was a lowly know-nothing IT guy.

      moral of the story? if you have 1/2 a brain it is really easy to elude the police in "computer crime" and hide all your evidence easily. the only thing going for the police is that the typical criminal is working with 1/16th of a brain.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:It's *not* rocket science, guys... by Total_Wimp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is dumb because software isn't to be designed with 'criminal investigator usability' as a design consideration.

      But I wish more software was designed with leaving a small or non-existant trail as a design consideration.

      When I speak on the phone, none of it get's recorded unless someone makes a special effort to do so. I would hope my computing experience could be the same.

      And I really hate the idea that a bunch of you people are thinking I'm some kind of major criminal for wanting it that way. If you happen to be one of the ones that think I should be happy to have everything logged, then please set up a web cam in your bedroom and tape everything that happens. After all, there really isn't any chance of it falling into the wrong hands and law enforcement might need to check those tapes to make sure you're not snorting coke in there. Cops are good people and none of them will laugh about what you're doing witht that banana. I promise.

      TW

  2. Dear god no! by Rei · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Heaven forbid that they have to learn to deal with a different file layout. I mean, it's not like these are supposed to be skilled professionals practicing their trade here...

    --
    sed "s/SJW.*$/... never mind. I was about to say something stupid, and also, I'm a troglodyte./Ig"
  3. Professional white-hat script kiddies by Kelson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It sounds like a lot of the people doing this kind of investgation aren't actually computer experts, but using pre-packaged software or following a list of directions someone has tailored for IE.

    Effectively, they're professional script kiddies working for the common good instead of against it.

    The lesson? Training. You wouldn't put a detective in the morgue and hand him a scalpel, and you wouldn't drop him in a science lab. You'd hire a coroner, you'd hire someone trained in forensic science. If you're going to search someone's computer for evidence, hire an expert or train someone to become an expert.

  4. Dumb law enforcement vs. dumb criminals by code65536 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is going to be moot if the law enforcement is dealing with people who are serious about what they're doing. I'm sure that if someone is planning an elaborate high-profile attack, they would have the sense to be careful as well, so it won't matter if you use IE or if you use Firefox or if you use Lynx--it's not that hard to wipe out all traces of activity from your computer no matter what browser you use. So I doubt that this is going to be of any help in dealing with smart criminals.

    And if the law enforcement can't figure out how to write a simple tool to decipher the files that are left behind from alternative browsers (especially one like Firefox that is open-source, meaning that the format of such files would be easy to determine), then that's just, well, pathetic.

    And finally, I think that this is a good thing. Most people in this world will probably never ever have to deal with law enforcement. But they do have to deal with snooping parents, snooping friends, snooping girlfriends, snooping spouses, snooping bosses, etc., so I welcome this as good news. ;)

  5. New Firefox Ad: even the popo can't touch this by drgonzo59 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    If the police has problems looking through the firefox files, I think I'll remove all the IE browsers from my lab and install Firefox or Opera.

    In other words, they seem to be slamming Firefox, but actually it is pretty good advertisement for Firefox. They should put on their front page.

    "Even the brightest police investigators can't look at your browser history! Get Firefox today, the most secure browser."

  6. Re:Another article with the same logic by maxwell+demon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I guess those people locking their door are all bad guys as well. After all, the fact that they lock the door shows clearly that they are thiefs, and just want to protect those things they've stolen. So the result of more people locking their doors will be an increase of stealing from those good citizens who leave their door open.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  7. Re:Ummm - it's not offline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We show too much kindness to rapist and child molesters.

    Welcome to Oops!

    Here, we have aa drunken frat boy who took a whiz in a parking lot. Public indecency, sex offender. Over here, we've got a highschooler who mooned his principal on graduation day. Sex offender.

    So lets all say it together! "OOPS!"

    Keep that in mind while you're busy waving around your burning crosses and what not. Not everyone who is a "sex offender" is a child rapist, or even really all that offensive.

  8. Re:Ummm - it's not offline by dougmc · · Score: 4, Insightful
    We show too much kindness to rapist and child molesters.
    Well, when they start `sex offender' type registration for all serious offencers, not just `sex offencers', I'll agree with it a bit more.

    But for now, you can murder somebody, and you don't have to register, but mooning somebody, peeing outside, or being 20 and having sex with a 17 year old who said she was 19 can get you labeled as a sex offender for life (depends on the state) and that's just plain wrong.

    Did you know that a person who molests a child still has parental rights so long as it was their child they molested?
    I suspect that varies from state to state. In any event, even if you molest your child, you're still their parent, so it would seem appropriate that you should still have `paternal rights' (which is a remarkably vague concept anyways.)

    They (Child Protective Services and similar government organizations) don't generally take children away from their parents and never ever give them back except maybe in the most extreme cases. Being placed in a foster home or orphanage, especailly forever, is seriously disruptive to a child's life, so they're not going to do that if there's any other alternative. They'll have to look at each case individually and try and work out what's best for the children. In most cases, that probably involves staying with the parent(s), and instead getting counselling for the parents or something.

    Infants generally have no problems getting adopted. But once the kids grow up a bit, things change, especially if they're not white. Few people want to adopt them, and so they get shuffled between foster parents and orphanages. Not a good way to grow up.