Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Here's What Facebook Sends the Cops In Response To a Subpoena

Posted by timothy on from the your-dna-in-a-box dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Facebook already shares its Law Enforcement Guidelines publicly, but we've never actually seen the data Menlo Park sends over to the cops when it gets a formal subpoena for your profile information. Now we know. This appears to be the first time we get to see what a Facebook account report looks like. The document was released by the The Boston Phoenix as part of a lengthy feature titled 'Hunting the Craigslist Killer,' which describes how an online investigation helped officials track down Philip Markoff. The man committed suicide, which meant the police didn't care if the Facebook document was published elsewhere, after robbing two women and murdering a third."

153 comments

  1. Feel bad for his girlfriend by danbuter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe they should have deleted his girlfriends name and location from this stuff, before publishing it to the net.

    1. Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend by Sir_Sri · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Or really anyone he befriended on facebook.

      The girlfriend might have been basically screwed on the deal no matter what, since as his girlfriend some of her information might have been out there anyway.

      It does seem like the article in question is very perturbed by the way the police released the info though, and didn't sanitize everything, leaving reporters to do it, who may not have realized that people can be linked via their unique facebook id's in the URL string etc. I suppose that's a good argument for an addendum to the facebook legal document pile, that if you release this information, the following other information should be redacted so as to not endanger the privacy of people not covered by the existing request.

    2. Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you friend somebody you make that information public, it's how social networks, you know, network socially. They're presenting that information in an unpleasant context, yes, but it's still public.

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    3. Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      unless, of course, you set your privacy to 'friends only'. anyone getting information beyond that is still a breech.

    4. Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend by tbird81 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not if your friend essentially releases that information (by committing crimes, then committing suicide). You've got to chose your friends well - even your Facebook friends.

      I've got a screenshot of Clayton Weatherston's Facebook main page. He's a narcissistic economics tutor who stabbed his girlfriend to death and her mother tried to get into the room - on his birthday.

      The year afterwards, there were still people wishing him happy birthday, oblivious to the fact that this guy was in police custody awaiting trial for a very well publicised and terrible murder. That's what Facebook friends are like.

      There were two med students I knew who still had him friended - they didn't even know how they knew him. They were clueless that their name was associated with one of the most hated people in NZ.

    5. Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The year afterwards, there were still people wishing him happy birthday, oblivious to the fact that this guy was in police custody awaiting trial for a very well publicised and terrible murder. That's what Facebook friends are like."

      So it's now forbidden to wish someone a happy birthday when he's awaiting a trial?? Moot.

    6. Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend by MagusSlurpy · · Score: 1

      Well, remember, this is the same police department that shut down a city because of Lite-Brites. Like a neanderthal confronted with a wheel, don't expect too much out of them.

      --
      My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
    7. Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend by tbird81 · · Score: 1

      Look the guy up. I know many here have soft spots for criminals, but this guy is one of the most hated in the country. He admitted doing it, the trial was just about him arguing that he was provoked (which, as a narcissist, he probably believed he was).

    8. Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not if your friend essentially releases that information (by committing crimes, then committing suicide). You've got to chose your friends well - even your Facebook friends.

      That is the most ignorant sentence ever. Many people choose their friends carefully. In the US more of often than not murders are committed out of rage and passion; in other words the two parties know each other very well. Just because you chose your friends carefully does not in and of itself mean you are spared from someone going off the deep end in a self-induced rage over something ridiculous. People are still human beings who have make rash decisions in times of heated arguments.

      Now, what could have been said is if those that were friended of a person committed of a crime un-friend themselves immediately (within a 24-48hr period) of finding out then I'd say those people should be left out of the information, unless they themselves become part of the process. Still most involved in such situations find that they don't want their information shared due to someone else's mental instability. People not directly associated with something like this can have their entire lives ruined due to crowd sourcing of information like this. Most of the time it is not even on purpose.

    9. Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend by eyenot · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the really irresponsible use of the term "Neanderthal".

      --
      "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
    10. Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend by MagusSlurpy · · Score: 1

      What was irresponsible about it? Neanderthals died out about 25,000 years ago, and no evidence suggests usage of wheels before 12,000 years ago. Presumably, they would be very perplexed.

      --
      My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
  2. The last thing they would care about by secretwhistle · · Score: 2

    After robbing two women and murdering a third, I'd be very surprised if the police cared about anything.

    1. Re:The last thing they would care about by Elbereth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Allegedly. Innocent until proven guilty.

    2. Re:The last thing they would care about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In the Police States of America, it's the other way around.

    3. Re:The last thing they would care about by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Allegedly. Innocent until proven guilty.

      If you're not a lawyer, a judge, or a juror, you have no obligation to maintain an artificial neutrality with regards to someone's guilt or innocence.

      Innocent in the eyes of the law != innocent.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:The last thing they would care about by Deep+Esophagus · · Score: 1

      Dang, I was going to make a snarky comment but somebody beat me to it about dangling participles.

    5. Re:The last thing they would care about by tbird81 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Very true. I wish people would stop believing that a court's decision is always correct. People escape conviction all the time.

    6. Re:The last thing they would care about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> It is, however, proper for you to stop voting for them.

      And vote for Romney?

      Or do you think that throwing away one's vote, by voting for an impossible candidate, is the way to go?

      Or do you think that forfeiting one's vote altogether, giving up a chance to at least choose the lesser of two evils, is proper?

      Look, it's fine to want candidates with more intelligence, integrity, and compassion for the public, but until you can rally enough support for such candidates, to make them credible competitors to the historically dominant parties, then, given a non-runoff election system, the only practical option remaining is to make the best of the candidates the majority factions of the population support. The public must be won over. If you think the public is hopelessly stupid, and unable to recognize the evil candidates and choose the good candidates, then your conclusion must be that our society is doomed.

    7. Re:The last thing they would care about by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      ...our society is doomed.

      Do you have an issue with that?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    8. Re:The last thing they would care about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That is true, but popular opinion is unlikely to be more correct than the courts, since they don't even have all the information available to them.

      If a man is found innocent in court but is treated as guilty by society, then what's the point of even having a trial?

    9. Re:The last thing they would care about by swalve · · Score: 2

      Regardless, since the courts are the best way to impartially try to determine guilt or innocence, thinking people reserve judgement until after a trial. "I just know he's guilty" really doesn't count for anything.

    10. Re:The last thing they would care about by illumnatLA · · Score: 3, Informative

      Very true. I wish people would stop believing that a court's decision is always correct. People escape conviction all the time.

      And vice versa unfortunately.

      The poor are more likely to get convicted and serve jail time as they can't afford the expensive 'good' lawyers and must rely on the overworked, under-budgeted public defenders.

      --
      Web hosting that doesn't suck!Dreamhost
    11. Re:The last thing they would care about by blackest_k · · Score: 4, Informative

      In normal circumstances, it is wise to proceed with caution before accusing somebody and generally the evidence isn't presented to be viewed by the general public.

      However in this case i am confident that the identification by one of the women robbed, the dead girls blood on his clothing the shell casings left at the murder scene that matched the gun found in his apartment along with the disposable phones he used for contacting the women ...

      The evidence is solid enough to be sure that he did in fact commit the crimes he was accused of. Plus there is no chance of being sued for deformation what with the guy having committed suicide while awaiting trial.

      There were a few interesting points made, while he used disposable phones to contact the women he also had his regular phone with him which tied him to the same cells used by the disposable phones at the same times which was useful in identifying him as a suspect. He also made the email account he used to contact the girl he murdered from his home ip address.

      The police nearly made a mess of things when they brought him in as after interviewing him there wasn't enough evidence to charge him, but luckily while he was in custody being questioned one of the women who was robbed identified him with absolute certainty which enabled the police to search his apartment and find the physical evidence. Without her identification of him they almost certainly would have had to let him go and give him the opportunity of disposing of the physical evidence.

      The facebook stuff is interesting in that it shows what information facebook holds about someone even after that information has been "deleted". However in this case nothing facebook released gave any evidence towards the criminal case.

      The guy was a medical student so it is reasonable to assume he was highly intelligent, he also seems to have had a gambling problem.

      His choice of who to rob was probably made on the basis he thought that the services these women offered was likely to mean they would have money from earlier clients and less likely to report a robbery. The article also mentioned he had a collection of women's underwear under his mattress so maybe it was more than just getting money to pay his debts.

      Did he rob other women who didn't report the crime?

      --
      Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
    12. Re:The last thing they would care about by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      What history book did you get that statement from?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    13. Re:The last thing they would care about by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      The idea of the "lesser of two evils" is kinda odd considering that the big two are essentially on the same payrolls. It's like buying a crappy product from one salesperson rather than the other one from the same company selling the same product and thinking it somehow improves the quality of the product.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    14. Re:The last thing they would care about by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Depending on the color of your skin it could also be the opposite.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    15. Re:The last thing they would care about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you're not a lawyer, a judge, or a juror, you have no obligation to maintain an artificial neutrality with regards to someone's guilt or innocence.

      You do if you actually believe in "innocent until proven guilty" as a principle, as opposed to an arbitrarily law that we make the justice system follow just for the lulz.

    16. Re:The last thing they would care about by canadian_right · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The bigger problem is convicting the innocent. It is very rare for people who commit serious crimes to get off. It is much more common for the wrong person to be convicted.

      --
      Anarchists never rule
    17. Re:The last thing they would care about by EdwinFreed · · Score: 2

      Um, when an innocent person gets convicted doesn't that also mean the actual guilty party got away with it?

    18. Re:The last thing they would care about by ShakaUVM · · Score: 2

      >>Plus there is no chance of being sued for deformation

      Oh, thank goodness!

    19. Re:The last thing they would care about by alexo · · Score: 1

      It is very rare for people who commit serious [emphasis mine] crimes to get off.

      That's because they are rarely (if ever) charged.

  3. Direct link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/105727/fb-subpoena-db/index.html

    1. Re:Direct link by Magic5Ball · · Score: 1

      On page 5: "Neoprints"

      What are neoprints? Google only knows about teenage Asian girl photos adorned with visual clutter bling from Myspace or Geocities, and various local printing companies.

      --
      There are 1.1... kinds of people.
  4. Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Funny

    "The man committed suicide, which meant the police didn't care if the Facebook document was published elsewhere, after robbing two women and murdering a third."

    Indeed, if the cops are going around robbing and murdering, why should any of us worry about a Facebook profile?

    --
    The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    1. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a reason that English isn't used as a programming language.

    2. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by colinrichardday · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, clearly it was the Facebook document that robbed two women and murdered a third.

    3. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://wtfcontent.com/img/130192274684.jpg

    4. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by dgatwood · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Except that the comma in that picture is wrong unless you put a comma before "Jack" as well. The commas aren't needed anyway. The capitalization is what makes the difference.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    5. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by Lumbre · · Score: 1

      Indeed, if the cops are going around robbing and murdering, why should any of us worry about a Facebook profile?

      Let's hope they aren't tagged in hundreds of photos; that would mean hundreds of pages in the report. Captain Planet and the Planeteers would not be happy.

    6. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posting anon as to not erase the moderation done here. Comma's are used to set off parenthetical elements.

    7. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Posting anon as to not erase the moderation done here.

      Comma's are used to set off parenthetical elements.

      Wherea's apostrophe's are used to warn reader's of an impending 's' at the end of the word.

    8. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2

      Oh God, I didn't think of that angle. That's even more terrifying. WHO WILL STOP THE KILLER FACEBOOK PAGES?!?

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    9. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by philip.paradis · · Score: 1

      WHO WILL STOP THE KILLER FACEBOOK PAGES?!?

      Nancy Grace to the rescue once again!

      -------- SNIP --------

      Please note: the following text is inserted to defeat the "lameness filter," which apparently got triggered even though I'm simply verbatim quoting the text from the parent post.

      Capicola ball tip shankle boudin. Salami short ribs ground round shankle leberkas frankfurter. Fatback ball tip pig pork chop. Boudin flank t-bone, pork loin biltong leberkas chuck ham frankfurter. Cow bresaola spare ribs prosciutto. Leberkas drumstick sirloin, chuck turkey tri-tip beef tenderloin corned beef jowl shankle fatback swine pastrami short loin.

      --
      Write failed: Broken pipe
    10. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by Teun · · Score: 1

      I like your filler!

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    11. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by houghi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      On a serious not, I think it is worrisome that the police did not care. To me even a convicted criminal has rights to privacy. I understand that many people say that as soon as a person is convicted (I am not even talking mugshots of arrested people) they should lose all their rights.

      I hold myself to higher standards and will defend the privacy rights of everybody, including the worst mass murders and my ex-girlfriend.

      If nothing else because of the "First they came for the criminals ..." slippery-slope.

      If I want to defend MY privacy, it means I must respect YOURS as well. The moment I get an excuse not to respect yours (e.g. you are a convicted killer) you will find an excuse not to respect mine.

      The fact that my phone-number is in the phone-book does not mean you can write it on the wall in the mens-room.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    12. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by indeterminator · · Score: 1

      There's a reason that English isn't used as a programming language.

      And what is that reason? IANANES, but it seems to me that GP's interpretation of the sentence is the only correct one.

    13. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by asylumx · · Score: 1

      If we tried to turn the entirety of Facebook into paper documents... it would kill us all!

    14. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you're incorrect. The last part "after...third" is related to the first subject named in the sentence, in this case "the man", not the police, even though the police is closer to the end part in the sentence. WHAT UP

    15. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      Actually it appears it was elsewhere. I knew it! Always those people coming from somewhere else... (I.e., starting wars is easy.)

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    16. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love Bacon Ipsum. Mmmmmm...

    17. Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what is that reason?

      It's been banned ever since some senator's daughter helped her uncle Jack off a horse.

  5. They send an annoying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    full-screen viewer with page-flipping animation? I'd commit suicide too.

    1. Re:They send an annoying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That document viewer robbed two women and murdered a third!

  6. What does slashdot provide... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    to a formal subpoena?

    1. Re:What does slashdot provide... by tftp · · Score: 2

      Slashdot has very little to provide beyond public comments that the account holder wrote. There is probably only the email address that isn't public, and preferences (which don't have much value.)

      The IP address may be logged, but I doubt that all the millions of HTTP requests per day are logged for more than a day, even if that. Slashdot has no duty to keep logs, and it costs money to do so, and it creates a legal obligation to make those logs available. Why to have them then?

    2. Re:What does slashdot provide... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      What does slashdot provide...

      1x Bag of Hot-Grits
      1x stained 1979 signed photo of Natalie Portman
      2x pairs of Cmdr Tacos underpants (slightly soiled but usable)
      2x bags of Pickled Onion Chips (crushed)
      1x Copy of Linux for n00bz (2nd edition)
      1x Pony (pink natch)
      1x ????
      1x PROFIT !!

    3. Re:What does slashdot provide... by larry+bagina · · Score: 2

      You forgot about the "anonymous" comments.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    4. Re:What does slashdot provide... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..2x bags of Pickled Onion Chips (crushed)

      Who knew /. had such refined tastes?

      Pickled Onion crisps, the food of the gods..

    5. Re:What does slashdot provide... by russotto · · Score: 1

      1x stained 1979 signed photo of Natalie Portman

      Now that would really be something.

    6. Re:What does slashdot provide... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1x stained 1979 signed photo of Natalie Portman

      She was born in 1981... so is that just a blank sheet of a paper?

    7. Re:What does slashdot provide... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That is awesome! I am totally sending a subpoena to Slashdot!

    8. Re:What does slashdot provide... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the location of the basement where the posts originate, of course. and the parents names.

    9. Re:What does slashdot provide... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah ... and what cop want's to slog through thousands of goatse.cx links?

    10. Re:What does slashdot provide... by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      In criminal cases, it has no choice - they're not issued by lawyers anyway, they're issued by district judges.

      And frankly, if they're investigating a murder or other such criminal behaviour I would expect even Slashdot to assist law enforcement with properly formed discovery requests.

      Anti-establishment nutbag.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    11. Re:What does slashdot provide... by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      ... and what cop want's to slog through thousands of goatse.cx links?

      A cop with a stick up his ass?

    12. Re:What does slashdot provide... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I suddenly noticed we need a lot more goatse-links.

      (btw, I find it highly disturbing that my spell checker doesn't mark "goatse")

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    13. Re:What does slashdot provide... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Maybe just the stains?

      And no, I think you do not want to know what the stains are. For God's love, don't hand it to the CSI, you just do not want to know.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    14. Re:What does slashdot provide... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      If signed by a lawyer and thus made official and subject to due process, I'd be highly surprised, or even a bit disturbed, if they didn't.

      If they just get some kind of toilet paper from a shyster, then yes.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    15. Re:What does slashdot provide... by allo · · Score: 1

      maybe you added it to your user dictionary.

    16. Re:What does slashdot provide... by PPH · · Score: 1

      Makes you wonder what you'd be in for if the cops asked you to look at a photo lineup.

      "So, do you recognize the Anonymous Coward that made off with your karma points in any of this pictures?"

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    17. Re:What does slashdot provide... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could totally have done without this insight into your thought processes.

  7. Private Messages by Celexi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is it just me, but it doesn't include private messages? or is it because there were none?

    1. Re:Private Messages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They were requested. I'd expect some kind of response from Facebook even in the very unlikely event that he didn't have any. My guess is the reporters omitted them or never received them from the police.

    2. Re:Private Messages by rgbrenner · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Is this the same data people get when the request a DVD (under EU laws)? Because if it is, then I'm having a hard time imagining what the problem is... It's basically everything the user has posted on the site + their IP address/last login.

      Were people really surprised that the stuff they stored on Facebook was stored on Facebook?

    3. Re:Private Messages by Cederic · · Score: 2

      It doesn't include everything about the user, so it would be an incomplete record under EU law.

      Which is in itself interesting :)

    4. Re:Private Messages by rgbrenner · · Score: 1

      Is it incomplete? It has their entire profile... so what do you think is missing?

    5. Re:Private Messages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facebook supposedly tracks every change a user has ever made to their profile (i.e. including deleted information) along with every profile view. (Profile views are at least counted, as the news feed definitely shows more entries from friends whose profiles you view more often.)

    6. Re:Private Messages by Cederic · · Score: 1

      It lacks configuration settings, at the very minimum. That tlels me it's not complete, without necessarily knowing what else is missing.

    7. Re:Private Messages by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      Is it incomplete? It has their entire profile... so what do you think is missing?

      the entire profile is just the entire information the person has entered. under eu data laws you should be able to get all the data they're keeping on you - that means data they have generated from your behavior too, the data they use to decide which ads to show you etc.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  8. Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is the best argument for browsing at -1 that I have ever seen. Even though it looks like it's machine-generated nonsense, it's still one of the best comments ever made on Slashdot.

  9. account by 101percent · · Score: 2

    Never had an account. Never will. I'm glad I've stuck to my guns this long and I hope others will push forward as well. I wonder if this correlates to me never having a girlfriend.

    1. Re:account by jonbryce · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you read the Boston Phoenix article, it was actually the IP address he used to sign up for his throwaway hotmail account, followed by the street address associated with that from Comcast that identified him. Then they did further field work to establish that it was him, and not a neighbour or passer-by who had hacked into his wifi network. The Facebook profile in this case didn't produce any useful information.

    2. Re:account by gravis777 · · Score: 1

      This really seems useless to me, and a waste of resources. The only thing this may be useful for is people who have their profiles set to be viewed by friends only. I guess it could be useful if you are trying to track someone who is on the run by monitoring IP addresses, and for the really dumb criminal, their check-ins, but a savory criminal would just need to use some VPN service or something else to mask their IP address. I mean, seriously, that seems to be the only bit of useful information in here at all is the IP address. It may also be useful for private messages (which now should include chat conversations), but, seriously, they asked for his pictures and videos? The average Facebook user has their profile set to be wide open where anyone can view it, and many who have set their privacy levels up higher still approve every single friend request they get.

      Seems like it would be a lot easier to just subpeona Facebook for the IP address and private messages, as its really the only info of any use.

    3. Re:account by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      Well IP addresses aren't always useful. If you connect to the Internet using a cellphone, the cellphone is allocated an IP address typically in the 10/8 range and connects to the internet via a NAT connection. There are more cellphones in the world than routeable IP addresses. Then all the IP address logged by the website would tell you is which network they used and approximately which county they were in, or for a larger city, which district or group of districts.

      Facebook profiles do sometimes produce useful information, and they don't know whether it will or not until they get it; and they have to try all lines of enquiry in the hope that one of them will lead to something.

    4. Re:account by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      God save them if they ever get mine. I use facebook to host almost all my photos. Including ones I scanned in of family from back through the '50s. I'd say I have 10k+ photos distributed among various albums

    5. Re:account by gravis777 · · Score: 1

      Same here. I want to know how they are going to "print" my videos! I probably have 5k - 10k photos myself, and over 100 videos, and I have been on FB since 2004. I just downloaded my profile a couple of months ago, and it was about 4 gig

    6. Re:account by reub2000 · · Score: 1

      Except my cell phone includes the model of the phone and the android version in it's User Agent string. There are probably other identifying things that it sends.

  10. Makes you wonder by phazemstr · · Score: 1

    What does the information they provide to paying parties (advertisers) look like?

    --
    Nothing to see.
    1. Re:Makes you wonder by gellenburg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Same info but without the redactions.

    2. Re:Makes you wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A pile of statistics?

    3. Re:Makes you wonder by Esteanil · · Score: 1

      They don't. Facebook works as a "black box" for advertisers. The advertisers specify what kind of profile they want their ad to appear in. Facebook then puts the ad on said profiles, without giving any information back to to the advertiser.

      --
      I'm a dreamer, the world is my playpen. But hey, I'm a serious person, I can't dream all the time.
    4. Re:Makes you wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, otherwise advertisers would be able to mine the data from facebook and be independent from it, lock in works both ways.

  11. Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! by EdIII · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is the best argument for browsing at -1 that I have ever seen. Even though it looks like it's machine-generated nonsense, it's still one of the best comments ever made on Slashdot.

    I wholly agree. It reminds me of Vogon poetry. Butthole is used throughout, quite successfully, as a lubricant for the deep prose sprinkled about. Without it, I believe it would make much less sense. While the statement that "God is a dog's anus farting loudly" was quite provocative as a commentary on the meaning of life, it derailed rather quickly with the nonsequiter introduction of a catfish arriving at noon of all times....

    Not the work of a true Vogon master, but I sense much potential.

  12. Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 0

    I believe it may be the work of one of Pratchett's Gonagle's, a Pictish battle poet. Not that they do poems about battles as such, they're usually to busy killing the enemy with doggerel. I can't wonder if it isn't abstract insults from another language translated into English. I'm surprised to see the absence of Butthole and Levopoda at Tenagra.

    --
    Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
  13. Interesting... by Memroid · · Score: 1

    Based on the documents, it looks like Facebook even was able to provide deleted wall posts and friends.

    1. Re:Interesting... by mc10 · · Score: 1

      It's been long known that Facebook does this, after the EU required that Facebook must send DVDs to users requesting info about their accounts.

  14. Facebook Logging a good thing? by grumling · · Score: 1

    So do you think our old-media friends will ever point out when a Facebook or other tracking/logging program proves someone wasn't committing a crime because he was at home at the time of the incident?

    --
    "Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
    1. Re:Facebook Logging a good thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Evidence making you look guilty is always real. Only that which proves your innocence could be (and probably is) fake.

    2. Re:Facebook Logging a good thing? by tbird81 · · Score: 1

      Are you saying this guy was framed?

      Why can't people on this site realise that there are burglars, muggers, rapists and murderers in this world - they're not all framed by the cops and courts. Nearly all of them did the crime.

    3. Re:Facebook Logging a good thing? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Are you saying this guy was framed?

      No, he wasn't. Why would you jump to that conclusion?

    4. Re:Facebook Logging a good thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they're not all framed by the cops and courts. Nearly all of them did the crime.

      Look up Josiah Sutton. When it came down to it, a woman was raped by two guys, two guys' DNA was retrieved, neither matched him.

      The DA was certain that DNA evidence didn't count when it didn't say what he wanted it to say.

      I'm sure very few people are framed by the cops. But what the AC said is exactly how they act.

    5. Re:Facebook Logging a good thing? by tbird81 · · Score: 1

      Are you that AC? How do you know what he was saying?

    6. Re:Facebook Logging a good thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AC here. I was just trolling by being overly cynical, suggesting that evidence that makes you look guilty is always considered real despite the multitude of cases where people are able that police evidence is unreliable and escape conviction for crimes that they committed.

      I find this technique of trolling works for most articles, and is quickly modded up.

      Other examples are:
        - the insurance troll: "once insurance companies get this information there'll be trouble"
        - the tracking troll: "advertisers are going to use this to track our every move"
        - the information selling troll: "Company X is going to sell information to the highest bidder."
        - the surveillance troll: "malls having video cameras means our every move will be tracked."

    7. Re:Facebook Logging a good thing? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      It's that "nearly" that bothers me a bit.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  15. How to download by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is there a way to download the whole document? At the moment all I can do is look at individual pages.

  16. less verbose than I thought by mindcandy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Compared to what some of the European folks that were using DPA to harass Facebook and getting reams of data, this seems pretty tame .. perhaps it's because FB was just responding the subpoena as written?

    Nothing in TFA should surprise anyone that has any experience in enterprise IT .. think about your average webserver and what it logs by default.

    1. Re:less verbose than I thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Likewise - where's the search history?

      Can you explain what the last 5 or 6 pages of text are for a layperson? Is that him viewing various pages and profiles?

    2. Re:less verbose than I thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're not concerned all the "deleted" stuff is still present?

    3. Re:less verbose than I thought by Magic5Ball · · Score: 2

      The last few pages appear to be a log of every FB page he viewed. The search history you can grab for yourself from those logs. Requests for /search.php are searches (e.g. on 2009-02-17 19:31:10 shows a search for an individual named tom, and then a minute later for someone named kainlin, both followed by viewing of those individuals' profiles).

      --
      There are 1.1... kinds of people.
  17. Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is a gross violation of privacy. The material was clearly only disclosed in connection with a criminal investigation and at least on Facebook's part, clearly marked confidential and not for release. Then a public agency releases it! Dead or not, the entire family has been smeared by this release, apparently including dead ones. This is a violation of something and if it is not in itself criminal, it should be. However I think it is.

    JJ

    1. Re:Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENT"

      Hurr durr, we don't need it anymore. Let's just upload it to some random internet cloud..

  18. Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! by Pf0tzenpfritz · · Score: 0

    Agreed. Leaves some interesting questions to think about. Like what Samarkand might have become.

    --
    Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!
  19. Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! by Pf0tzenpfritz · · Score: 0

    Does it fart loudly?

    --
    Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!
  20. Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And it's still more coherent than Timothy's summaries.

  21. From the Wall: by tbird81 · · Score: 2

    Friends/family:
    "How's Boston going for you? How's Bean Town?"

    Phil M:
    "Well, I've got a rheumatology exam, and I pulled a black 9mm Luger pistol, not far inside the door. Began to bind her hands with white plastic flexcuffs, but before I could complete this, she fought back. In our subsequent struggle I hit her in the skull with my gun, causing injuries I'd describe as serious but not fatal. I then shot her three times. One bullet lodged in her hip, while two bullets went straight through her, piercing her heart and lung. It's also quite cold here at the moment."

    Friends/family:
    "Really? I heard that it sometimes rains in Boston? I got an oncology exam coming up myself."

    Phil M:
    "Lol, sometimes. About 55 here I think."

    1. Re:From the Wall: by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      I don't care if this guy had an IQ of 145. He's still a dumbshit for posting that. Imagine the follow up.

      Friends/family:
      "So how's your day? Still working overtime?"

      COP:
      "I shot an animal today. First round made him a bit twitchy, second finished the job.

      Friends/family:
      "That's never good. I hope you feel better"

      COP:
      "Drinking my problems away much like I always do. Good thing my ex-wife left me. I would have done the same in her place"

      And we sacrifice for humanity for...what? Scum of the Earth and the effects they have on others lives?

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
  22. lol +1! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lol +1!

  23. No password? by TClevenger · · Score: 1

    Interesting that there doesn't seem to be a password in that report. Since a lot of people use the same password for everything, you would think that would be demanded.

    Or maybe they actually hash the passwords like they should.

    1. Re:No password? by karlm · · Score: 1

      Following the large number of very public password disclosures in the past couple of years, failure to hash passwords (salted by username, user ID and/or random nonce) should be considered gross negligence.

      Are there any proposals to standardize a password column type for SQL databases? If the column is write-only but comparable for equality against a varchar/string then the implementation details of hash algo and salting are hidden. The sad thing is that proper password storage could be made a lot more intuitive, even for the "just learned XYZ in 24 days/hourse" crowd.

      --
      Copyright Violation:"theft, piracy"::Anti-Trust Violation:"thermonuclear price terrorism"<-Overly dramatic language.
    2. Re:No password? by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      Or maybe they actually hash the passwords like they should.

      You're suggesting Facebook did something to protect user privacy?

    3. Re:No password? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I'm damn sure they do. Think about it, if any Joe Random Hacker could get that info, what would they have left to sell?

      In a nutshell, I'm sure they want to make sure their assets are protected.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:No password? by u38cg · · Score: 1

      I suppose the problem is, who the hell wants to take on responsibility for implementing that? Plus if you did, it presents a massive attack surface for anyone that comes up with an exploit...

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
  24. It looks like this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    . ,

  25. Wish I had mod points by turing_m · · Score: 1

    Perfectly said.

    --
    If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
  26. Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! by Ihmhi · · Score: 0

    the statement that "God is a dog's anus farting loudly"

    lol, sounds like someone really, really, really horribly misinterpreted a Buddhist riddle or something.

    "What is the sound of a dog's anus farting loudly? Within that, you will find god."

    --
    Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
  27. Re:God says... by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

    50 years from now, we're gonna find that Chinese and Russian agents have secretly been passing messages in seemingly nonsense posts on Slashdot.

    Taking bets. My guess is this one is about a Russian sub off the coast of Beijing.

    --
    Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
  28. Black rectangles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That guy must have a huge black rectangle fetish to have filled his account with so many of them.

  29. Duverger's Law by gd2shoe · · Score: 2

    Parent is AC troll.

    For those who think he might have a point, look up Duverger's law. We have a two party system due to the math of our election system, not because we fail to exercise free will. It's math, not principle that is at issue.

    --
    I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
  30. Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! by Reality+Master+301 · · Score: 5, Funny

    This calls for a new alternative mod point, "+1 Poetic"

  31. [Decrypted] by shiftless · · Score: 1

    Yes. Ivan reports a malfunctioning urinal and is requesting repair parts.

  32. Re:God says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, but who you gonna call?

    A priest replies...
    the imputation Sigurd's laudable shyest redouble shanghaiing Lome shagged Novembers mop
    gazpacho temblores kielbasa satiny ickier filches shanghaiing outgrows superior Lieberman's execrate imperilling shanghaiing
    the jilts graphologists Melisande's Moira
    closeout's the
    larks Newark shyest shagged outbursting worryings eyewitnesses the coppicing invitations hearings oath's
    benchmark's dhoti's redistributes gazpacho the brochure's jeopardizing

    c6b99275b5bbcd737714f9fb5c854e31

    (This one should be easy for the crypto nerds, pretty weak)

  33. He worked for facebook? by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 2

    I'm fairly certain he worked for facebook at the time his account was last checked into, since 172.23.*.* is not routed on the Internet, being RFC 1918 compliant. Or did facebook log in to his account themselves?

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
    1. Re:He worked for facebook? by pikine · · Score: 1

      His IP address is seen starting at page 55 of the document, 24.60.152.212, which is indeed a comcast address.

      --
      I once had a signature.
  34. Serious business by ZeRu · · Score: 1

    Looks like Facebook is a serious business...folks, time to update your memes.

    --
    If you post as an AC, don't expect me to spend a mod point on you.
  35. Facebook should allow me to use the site this way! by Zoinky · · Score: 3, Funny

    The one thing that struck me is how much easier it is to navigate that profile in their subpoena response than it would if I was looking at it when using Facebook through a browser. They should really consider adding a "Subpoena view" view on their website, kind of like a "Print view", but even better yet!

  36. Redundant? by cultiv8 · · Score: 2

    This post was marked as redundant? Dear dog's anus farting loudly...

    --
    sysadmins and parents of newborns get the same amount of sleep.
  37. Are they certain? by PPH · · Score: 2

    The man committed suicide, which meant the police didn't care if the Facebook document was published elsewhere, after robbing two women and murdering a third.

    I don't know about this case. But there have been those who were falsely accused. And now the real perp. gets a look at what the cops know (and don't know). So he's got a chance to move the other bodies.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Are they certain? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the police didn't care if the Facebook document was published elsewhere, after robbing two women and murdering a third.

      It may be time to investigate the police.

  38. Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! by Mr+44 · · Score: 1

    Hmmm, interesting to puzzle out the references:
    Samarkand is a city in Uzbekistan.
    Levodopa is a psychiatric drug
    Corinth city in Greece.

    His previous postings are not quite as good, and this gem sheds some light on his... condition...

  39. Presumption of Innocense == Reason by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    If you're not a lawyer, a judge, or a juror, you have no obligation to maintain an artificial neutrality with regards to someone's guilt or innocence.

    If you believe in reason, then you have an obligation to not believe random things until being shown proof without holes. Doesn't matter if it's a journal article on nuclear chemistry or an accusation of a crime. Show us the proof, don't bullshit us if the data is inconclusive.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:Presumption of Innocense == Reason by bostongraf · · Score: 1

      Evidence that is not admissible in a court of law may very well be admissible in the court of common sense.

      I do agree with the general position of listening to the courts to determine if someone is guilty or innocent, but that is not always the best place to look. The best example, IMHO, is the MLB steroids debacle. Nobody was convicted in a court of law of steroid use, but I know damn well that a large number of MLB players are guilty of that crime. And there are multiple reports to point out which ones.

  40. THE Craigslist Killer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many are there? I've never heard of THIS one.