It's called wrongful termination and the civil lawsuit consequences
And if his employment was 'at-will'? If so then he has just as big of a leg to stand on as if he were fired because wore a green shirt to work on a Tuesday... none.
So long as you are not dismissed in violation of an employment agreement (which are usually worded in favor of the employer), in violation of law, or you can make a compelling case that you are a member of a protected class & that was actually the reason... you aren't going to win such a battle.
Does the place you work have two or more completely separate networks with no access between the inside & outside ones, requiring you two have two PCs on your desk, one for searching Google for how an API works or posting to/., and another you do your sensitive work work on? Probably not.
After 9/11 there was talk about setting up federal systems this way... clearly that still hasn't happened as once you breach a single PC inside of the corporate network, even if that PC doesn't have access to your target data, it and it's users permissions can be used to climb the ladder to find someone who does have data and use them.
The % of the background check that is the self-volunteered information isn't important, but the fact it exists and can be very compelling in the wrong hands.
Sony must not have been either when oodles of data got pulled out of them... or those detection measures were not enough.
Even if you are looking for mass uploads or downloads, there is no reason the bad guy wouldn't be willing to have the ex-filtration take a bit longer by spreading it between multiple offsite servers with smaller packages of data and over a longer bit of time.
It's not that clearing your browsing history, throwing out old logs/emails or flushing your toilet are inherently illegal, it's when you use them and why.
If the cops are knocking at your door and you decide to flush the drugs, that's obstruction, if you just hacked someone's system and then wiped all of the local logs on your machine to hide the evidence, that's obstruction. If however you have as a routine process... not to retain any email older than say... 30 days and purge pretty regularly (either manually or automatically), that's not obstruction, that's just good cleanliness, and if some incriminating evidence happens to be wiped out on day 30, it's a lot harder to prove that you were doing so to hide your wrongdoing rather than simply not wanting to have to keep around old Amazon offers which clutter your inbox.
You realize the last "Media Center Edition" was XP... right? Media Center was built into the higher SKUs of Vista & 7 and available as a quick and relatively cheap add in ($15?) for 8... free keys for which they gave away for quite a while.... or are you saying that XP was crap?... which would be an unusual view on/. these days.
Hell, I even played with scripting text to speech alerting just to see if I could, and it was really easy!
I know a guy who did that with a telephony system which calls him when something goes wrong then accepts voice input for what to do next... including executing a limited # of PS commands.
I've not seen the code, but like you said, I'm told it's pretty easy.
PowerShell primary commands are formatted Verb-Noun. This is awfully convenient, as a PowerShell user can guess hundreds of commands just by learning a few verbs and a few nouns.
Not to mention built in tab completion for arguments where you can read the man page after finding the cmdlet to know which arguments you will have to use, or just quickly tab through to what you know is going to be there.
After a three-week trial in New York City, Mr. Ulbricht was found guilty in February of seven criminal charges, including conspiracies to sell drugs, launder money and hack computers.
Except for that you are speaking of what really amount to common carriers which transport bits without much worry about what they are.
Now if Comcast was in the business of advertising they have the best internet pipe for looking for slaves, chemical weapons or terrorists for hire... you might have a point.
There is a big difference between something legitimate being used for illegitimate purposes and something being built explicitly for illegitimate purposes... this is why guns tend to be legal while building a bomb is not.
There is also the issue of noise in the signal and filtering of it.
While a good radar system is probably able to pick up a bird or a drone flying about, that also means it could probably see a baseball, a kite, or someone throwing a 12"x12" piece of aluminum foil into the air... and that in addition to general noise which may get picked up.
Rather than have all such items show up on an operators radar, there is likely a threshold that only objects over a certain size or moving at a certain speed (or both) end up being 'visible'.
So your best/only response is to accuse me of being a paid shill?
Truly now we see the depth of your intellect... though I doubt even a new born could drown in such waters if one were to try.
Never can it be that someone on their own might had a different opinion, no, never that.
Or would you like to cite specific and tangible EVIDENCE of what you claimed? I hear lots of claims of the NSA being involved yet so little to back it up... that must be part of why the judge (another NSA shill?) rejected those claims.
First off, even getting that laptop was fruit of the poisoned tree because they got it using evidence the NSA gathered through illegal wiretapping programs.
Citation?
Even then, Ulbreit admitted he built the site. He just didn't run it during the period in question. The entire point of the name "Dread Pirate Roberts" is that anyone can use it.
So he admitted buying the gun and evidence puts him at the murder scene... but you are still going to fight the idea that he pulled the trigger? You can be an accessory to a crime without directly taking part.
But then lets just ignore the other evidence on his laptop which did show him being a more active runner of the site than you suggest.
Besides, the site did use Tor correctly.
Really? So you've personally audited it and certified that in your capacity as an AC Tor expert?
FYI: Posting to Stackoverflow with your own name when trying to learn how to setup a Tor hidden service isn't the brightest thing when you are trying to not have the site tied to you.
It didn't help because the NSA has infiltrated Tor, which should surprise no one, because it was originally built by the US DOD anyway.
Like many, I'm still waiting to see/hear of these secret backdoors in Tor that were somehow inserted not through rouge check-ins... but through large checks to the Tor foundation.
Secret evidence, discovery denied for obvious things...
When you get a hold of the accused laptop which is logged in and has ample evidence of being an administrator of the site in question... what exculpatory evidence do you think existed that could have gotten him off that he was denied?
And they proved Tor is not secure; arguments to the contrary are just not convincing anymore.
Tor is secure if you use it right... many do not. Bitcoin however we did find is far from anonymous and the evidence in the blockchain could be used against you years or even decades after your illicit purchase.
Exactly... and even if they happened to create a perfect system on day one, the training required to get the average person to be able to use it would be herculean task.
It's hard enough convincing many of our parents not to type in their username & password to just everywhere "Look for the lock icon in the address bar" we used to say, until malicious sites started setting the icon of the site to a lock.
PKI is fantastic when it's largely automated and transparent... and I trust my parents web browser and OS's binary signature checking far more than I do their ability to learn how to actively participate in such a system.
We are talking about the same national government that couldn't rollout a website with major issues, on time or for a reasonable cost... why do you think a national PKI would be any easier or efficient to implement & rollout?
Now OS/2 I'll grant you, IBM fumbled hard on that one...
For the kids in the room you'll need to be more explicit, or I can.
One of it's biggest failings was claiming that it was "a better DOS than DOS and a better Windows than Windows"... which is all fine and dandy except for it helps to remove the motivation to build much of anything specifically targeting for OS/2, rather than Windows... and being an 'also runs' OS doesn't get you much traction for adoption.
Because there are those who believe that voting today is just to gosh darn hard.
Too hard to find your polling place and go there during election hours.
Too hard to request an absentee ballot if you don't be able to make it on election day.
Too hard to come up with a photo id to prove you are who you say you are.
Here in Washington state we ignore all three of those and mail the ballot straight to your house and give you 3 weeks to return it to be counted. No possibility of fraud there!
Sometimes its not ser by the channel, but by the cable provider.
Up here near Seattle a few years back Frontier Communications acquired the Verizon FIOS they changed a few things, including the DRM settings for ALL channels they carried except for the must carry ones to the point that could only view a recording on the same PC that recorded it... So boycotting the channel isn't always feasible.
I don't know if this is still the case as a short time later I moved and now have the joy that is Comcast *rolls eyes *
Slashdot Mirror
And if his employment was 'at-will'? If so then he has just as big of a leg to stand on as if he were fired because wore a green shirt to work on a Tuesday... none.
So long as you are not dismissed in violation of an employment agreement (which are usually worded in favor of the employer), in violation of law, or you can make a compelling case that you are a member of a protected class & that was actually the reason... you aren't going to win such a battle.
Does the place you work have two or more completely separate networks with no access between the inside & outside ones, requiring you two have two PCs on your desk, one for searching Google for how an API works or posting to /., and another you do your sensitive work work on? Probably not.
After 9/11 there was talk about setting up federal systems this way... clearly that still hasn't happened as once you breach a single PC inside of the corporate network, even if that PC doesn't have access to your target data, it and it's users permissions can be used to climb the ladder to find someone who does have data and use them.
The % of the background check that is the self-volunteered information isn't important, but the fact it exists and can be very compelling in the wrong hands.
Sony must not have been either when oodles of data got pulled out of them... or those detection measures were not enough.
Even if you are looking for mass uploads or downloads, there is no reason the bad guy wouldn't be willing to have the ex-filtration take a bit longer by spreading it between multiple offsite servers with smaller packages of data and over a longer bit of time.
The summary is poorly worded.
It's not that clearing your browsing history, throwing out old logs/emails or flushing your toilet are inherently illegal, it's when you use them and why.
If the cops are knocking at your door and you decide to flush the drugs, that's obstruction, if you just hacked someone's system and then wiped all of the local logs on your machine to hide the evidence, that's obstruction. If however you have as a routine process... not to retain any email older than say... 30 days and purge pretty regularly (either manually or automatically), that's not obstruction, that's just good cleanliness, and if some incriminating evidence happens to be wiped out on day 30, it's a lot harder to prove that you were doing so to hide your wrongdoing rather than simply not wanting to have to keep around old Amazon offers which clutter your inbox.
You realize the last "Media Center Edition" was XP... right? Media Center was built into the higher SKUs of Vista & 7 and available as a quick and relatively cheap add in ($15?) for 8... free keys for which they gave away for quite a while. ... or are you saying that XP was crap? ... which would be an unusual view on /. these days.
The Seventeenth Amend disagrees... unfortunately.
Or the statute of limitations for the crime the allegations point to has expired.
Oh? How much do you think he was making through donations for PuTTY?
I know a guy who did that with a telephony system which calls him when something goes wrong then accepts voice input for what to do next... including executing a limited # of PS commands.
I've not seen the code, but like you said, I'm told it's pretty easy.
Not to mention built in tab completion for arguments where you can read the man page after finding the cmdlet to know which arguments you will have to use, or just quickly tab through to what you know is going to be there.
From the WSJ:
So a gun, knife or rope manufacturer should be label anytime someone misuses their products?
You forgot "9/11 was an inside job"
Except for that you are speaking of what really amount to common carriers which transport bits without much worry about what they are.
Now if Comcast was in the business of advertising they have the best internet pipe for looking for slaves, chemical weapons or terrorists for hire... you might have a point.
There is a big difference between something legitimate being used for illegitimate purposes and something being built explicitly for illegitimate purposes... this is why guns tend to be legal while building a bomb is not.
There is also the issue of noise in the signal and filtering of it.
While a good radar system is probably able to pick up a bird or a drone flying about, that also means it could probably see a baseball, a kite, or someone throwing a 12"x12" piece of aluminum foil into the air... and that in addition to general noise which may get picked up.
Rather than have all such items show up on an operators radar, there is likely a threshold that only objects over a certain size or moving at a certain speed (or both) end up being 'visible'.
So your best/only response is to accuse me of being a paid shill?
Truly now we see the depth of your intellect... though I doubt even a new born could drown in such waters if one were to try.
Never can it be that someone on their own might had a different opinion, no, never that.
Or would you like to cite specific and tangible EVIDENCE of what you claimed? I hear lots of claims of the NSA being involved yet so little to back it up... that must be part of why the judge (another NSA shill?) rejected those claims.
Citation?
So he admitted buying the gun and evidence puts him at the murder scene... but you are still going to fight the idea that he pulled the trigger? You can be an accessory to a crime without directly taking part.
But then lets just ignore the other evidence on his laptop which did show him being a more active runner of the site than you suggest.
Really? So you've personally audited it and certified that in your capacity as an AC Tor expert?
FYI: Posting to Stackoverflow with your own name when trying to learn how to setup a Tor hidden service isn't the brightest thing when you are trying to not have the site tied to you.
Like many, I'm still waiting to see/hear of these secret backdoors in Tor that were somehow inserted not through rouge check-ins... but through large checks to the Tor foundation.
Lemme guess... 9/11 was an inside job?
When you get a hold of the accused laptop which is logged in and has ample evidence of being an administrator of the site in question... what exculpatory evidence do you think existed that could have gotten him off that he was denied?
Tor is secure if you use it right... many do not. Bitcoin however we did find is far from anonymous and the evidence in the blockchain could be used against you years or even decades after your illicit purchase.
Exactly... and even if they happened to create a perfect system on day one, the training required to get the average person to be able to use it would be herculean task.
It's hard enough convincing many of our parents not to type in their username & password to just everywhere "Look for the lock icon in the address bar" we used to say, until malicious sites started setting the icon of the site to a lock.
PKI is fantastic when it's largely automated and transparent... and I trust my parents web browser and OS's binary signature checking far more than I do their ability to learn how to actively participate in such a system.
We are talking about the same national government that couldn't rollout a website with major issues, on time or for a reasonable cost... why do you think a national PKI would be any easier or efficient to implement & rollout?
For the same reason you still have plenty of humans working to build cars... the auto & rail labor unions are rather strong.
For the kids in the room you'll need to be more explicit, or I can.
One of it's biggest failings was claiming that it was "a better DOS than DOS and a better Windows than Windows"... which is all fine and dandy except for it helps to remove the motivation to build much of anything specifically targeting for OS/2, rather than Windows... and being an 'also runs' OS doesn't get you much traction for adoption.
Because there are those who believe that voting today is just to gosh darn hard.
Too hard to find your polling place and go there during election hours.
Too hard to request an absentee ballot if you don't be able to make it on election day.
Too hard to come up with a photo id to prove you are who you say you are.
Here in Washington state we ignore all three of those and mail the ballot straight to your house and give you 3 weeks to return it to be counted. No possibility of fraud there!
Sometimes its not ser by the channel, but by the cable provider.
Up here near Seattle a few years back Frontier Communications acquired the Verizon FIOS they changed a few things, including the DRM settings for ALL channels they carried except for the must carry ones to the point that could only view a recording on the same PC that recorded it... So boycotting the channel isn't always feasible.
I don't know if this is still the case as a short time later I moved and now have the joy that is Comcast *rolls eyes *