"I'm your average sysadmin and I know (as many of you do) that DHCP requests can be spoofed from the client side, even to the point of forging the MAC address so that the wrong link between IP and MAC gets logged, that a DHCP client can be given an IP by a rogue DHCP server and that not all DHCP servers have accurate to not speak of the non-existant logging on some machines."
This was to common people. If the information is there you believe it. Are you telling me, that as a sys_admin, if you say someone attacking your network from this IP, Mac Address and Time, you would not block them because it could very well be "spoofed." Yes it is not 100% definable proof, but looking at that PLUS all the other evidence, it points to the answer which the jury saw.
And trust me, he worked with a copy. I am sorry that NOT EVERYTHING is stated. And the idea of proving the files were shared was something the judge ruled as not something the prosecution has to approve.
Nate Evans
Iowa State University
PHD Canidate
Maybe what you need to realize is that when you are in a distance education class, the professor needs to teach to the 30 OTHER students not there also... If he has no knowledge, how did he build ISEAGE? How are the CyberDefense Competitions at ISU such a National thing?
Nate Evans
Iowa State University PHD Candidate
Computer Engineering
You state that there are a bunch of areas where his depositions where "mind-blowingly incompetent"? Do you mind listing a couple of those? The author of the paper above only found one, and that one could very well be argued many different ways.
Plus I mean look at the author of this paper? You guys are complaining about Dr. Jacobson being paid by the RIAA to give this testimony (of which I assure you he is not), look at this authors background? Founder of P2P networking? I think he has a vested interest in it continuing.
Overall though, the court admitted him as a "expert witness" and that process is not simple nor untested. A group of our peers found his testimony convincing and found the defendant guilty. Did you read about the trial? This lady was just stupid!
Dr. Jacobson testified that there was no legal evidence of Kazza on her machine because there wasn't. She had the HD replaced and then was stupid enough to copy her music back onto the drive (saying she ripped the music from cds). "Yes I can rip CDs this fast and yes I did it for 1.5 days straight without even getting up to go to the bathroom?" BS. Her Kazza name was the same as her e-mail, AIM and about 10 other sites.
You want to trounce someone's creditability, look at hers? Her deposition and what she states in court are almost complete opposites. There would of been much stronger cases to go to trial with the RIAA on...
Nate Evans
Iowa State PHD Candidate
Computer Engineering
Slashdot Mirror
"I'm your average sysadmin and I know (as many of you do) that DHCP requests can be spoofed from the client side, even to the point of forging the MAC address so that the wrong link between IP and MAC gets logged, that a DHCP client can be given an IP by a rogue DHCP server and that not all DHCP servers have accurate to not speak of the non-existant logging on some machines." This was to common people. If the information is there you believe it. Are you telling me, that as a sys_admin, if you say someone attacking your network from this IP, Mac Address and Time, you would not block them because it could very well be "spoofed." Yes it is not 100% definable proof, but looking at that PLUS all the other evidence, it points to the answer which the jury saw. And trust me, he worked with a copy. I am sorry that NOT EVERYTHING is stated. And the idea of proving the files were shared was something the judge ruled as not something the prosecution has to approve. Nate Evans Iowa State University PHD Canidate
Wow way to complete your sentences...
Maybe what you need to realize is that when you are in a distance education class, the professor needs to teach to the 30 OTHER students not there also... If he has no knowledge, how did he build ISEAGE? How are the CyberDefense Competitions at ISU such a National thing?
Nate Evans
Iowa State University PHD Candidate
Computer Engineering
You state that there are a bunch of areas where his depositions where "mind-blowingly incompetent"? Do you mind listing a couple of those? The author of the paper above only found one, and that one could very well be argued many different ways. Plus I mean look at the author of this paper? You guys are complaining about Dr. Jacobson being paid by the RIAA to give this testimony (of which I assure you he is not), look at this authors background? Founder of P2P networking? I think he has a vested interest in it continuing. Overall though, the court admitted him as a "expert witness" and that process is not simple nor untested. A group of our peers found his testimony convincing and found the defendant guilty. Did you read about the trial? This lady was just stupid! Dr. Jacobson testified that there was no legal evidence of Kazza on her machine because there wasn't. She had the HD replaced and then was stupid enough to copy her music back onto the drive (saying she ripped the music from cds). "Yes I can rip CDs this fast and yes I did it for 1.5 days straight without even getting up to go to the bathroom?" BS. Her Kazza name was the same as her e-mail, AIM and about 10 other sites. You want to trounce someone's creditability, look at hers? Her deposition and what she states in court are almost complete opposites. There would of been much stronger cases to go to trial with the RIAA on... Nate Evans Iowa State PHD Candidate Computer Engineering