Registrant: BUYUKKOKTEN, ORKUT (UHGFNCTSOD)
2400 W El Camino Real, Apt 419
MOUNTAIN VIEW, CA 94040-1680
US
Domain Name: ORKUT.COM
Administrative Contact:
BUYUKKOKTEN, ORKUT (OBD36) orkut@cs.stanford.edu
2400 W El Camino Real, Apt 419
MOUNTAIN VIEW, CA 94040-1680
US
650 888 5822 fax: 123 123 1234
Technical Contact:
Network Solutions, Inc. (HOST-ORG) customerservice@networksolutions.com
13200 Woodland Park Drive
Herndon, VA 20171-3025
US
1-888-642-9675 fax: 571-434-4620
Record expires on 08-Dec-2006.
Record created on 08-Dec-2002.
Database last updated on 23-Jan-2004 15:09:01 EST.
This doesn't seem as big news as it could be. It's not a major project of Google, but something one of the engineers built during company time when instructed to work on a personal project. It's not branded "Google Friends" afterall.
The UPC number still could be placed on the labels without a bar code, or maybe they'll still spend the square inch of the label on the barcode even if it's rarely used.
Customers like to pay less bottom line for food and clothing most of the time. They don't really care how the store achives that low price, just that it is the best deal as far as the customer knows.
- These Australians are not the only ones asking...
- Hey Australia, if you see any proof, let us know, we've been looking for it too.
- Just one firm? I thought more would be questioning.
- Are those enquiries actually from people intrested in buying, or just wanting the proof...
- So they've finally run out of Americans to bother?
- Time to short SCOX!
Pity the lawbreaking travel agent or car dealer whose fax advertisement happens to appear on a fax machine belonging to one Ben Livingston of Seattle, Wash.
That's nice, if you never care about being promoted. Maybe it's not soon, but someday your boss will leave the company somehow. When that happens, would you like to be considered in the running to move up? Show that you can interact with and understand the managers, and you'll have a ticket to be considered to join them...
A good admin/support person should have the ability to at his desk and goof off on his computer. When caught doing so, and asked what actual work I was doing, I point to the support hotline phone and the fact that it isn't ringing. If nothing was broken and my routine maintainance was up-to-date, the only reason why I have left to not call it a day the day is because I need to be on call in the hopefully unlikely event something causes that phone to ring.
No it doesn't. It gives them the permission to search the entire disk, but only for the stated purpose. If they discover a new purpose, they need a new warrant. The good news is, such an open-and-shut warrant comes absolutely instantly... it's just a matter of waking up the judge on call that night.
"On the coffee table" would fall into "plain sight" which means that they could grab that bag, and then go back to the judge and quickly get another warrant to search for more based on the first discovery.
They can also go after absolutely anything that it looks like somebody's trying to destroy... that creates an emergency that doesn't give them time to get the warrant, and therefore cause to grab immediately.
a) What countermeasures/damages can you persue Usually none. If you're wrongly caught up in an investigation, you're not owed anything on that alone. You have to prove an abuse of power, that the government wasn't mislead, but knowlingly followed a wrong path to get anything.
b) If your computers are for business use, can you sue for lost revenue? Yes, but you have a responsibilty to limit the damages to the best of your ability. You can't just shut down the business and throw your hands in the air. You likely have the abilty to run out to a store and buy at least one or two computers on which your business can limp along, and your employees likely can work from home on their own equipment. Yeah, you might have the claim for the revenue your really lost, but most businesses hit with these things lose everything because they gave up, not because the FBI truely disabled them.
c) If they find something illegal (who doesn't have a "hack for program x" or keygen etc), but it is found that they came after you mistakenly, are your computers still lost? Yep. So long as they were acting in good faith when they stumbled into it, they can go back an get a revised warrant to dig further into that crime. Just like how they go after teflon mobsters, they catch them on tax evasion... if they can't get you for the big crime, they might go for a little one.
d) You got no card, how can you call to find out about your stuff? Call the main switchboard at the local office, the FBI and Secret Service both have numbers in the phone book whereever they are. You don't need an exact name, "that pretty blond woman who was on the team that raided my house" is enough identifying infromation for them to know who you were talking about.
e) 9 computers, decent chance one is a server. How about if the server was hacked (cmon, if they hack valve wouldn't they redirect through dummy servers) That's still evidence... and this goes to the agents strong suggestion that you come clean with anything you do know. If you didn't do it but let somebody route through you to hide their tracks, you better turn over anything you know about that person. If you think you have been hacked, you'd better tell anything you know or suspect about the hacking right away... coming up with that story later will be less credible.
The proper thing to do would be once they stumble into the first signs that there's likely to be a trove of kiddie porn on a general hacking suspect's computer would be to run back to the judge and basically say: "While we were searching for X, we opened up the C:\ drive icon on the system and discovered a folder labelled 'kiddie porn'. Based on that label at face value, it's highly likely that illegal child pornography is in that directory. Can we have an expanded scope to go looking into that?" New warrant gets issued... and everything's clean...
A weblog isn't fact, but it's first person testimony to the public. The FBI hasn't exactly come out contesting the thing, so it's pretty likely that some sort of morning raid did take place... and it seems like a pretty by the book one at that.
IANAL, but here's the basics of the rules of evidence...
As long as where they've gotten where they are on investigation X legally, and they just happen to stumble into something that starts investigation Y, it's fair play.
They can't go breaking down doors for no good reason and looking for a dead body. However, if they had a legal reason to be in the house, and there's a rug over what looks like the shape of a dead body, they do have the ability to look at what's under the rug even if that wasn't in their original warrant... such a thing is just too big to have ignored.
So, I doubt they're going to do a low-level scan for kiddie porn since kiddie porn has absolutely nothing to do with the investigation they're doing. However, if they find a kiddie porn image as his main desktop image or as part of a screen saver... that's just too big to miss and they're going to then start looking deeper at that. I doubt he's that stupid, so he'll get his PCs back in a few months.
And if you're a network admin on a network with valuable content that you don't want the outside world to have, any external IP address that you haven't met and whitelisted should stick out like a sore thumb. It might not lead directly to the people responsible for the break-in, but it is the first place you have to go in order to start tracking the path...
Sure, whatever the FBI has right now isn't enough to fly in court. Their actions say that loud and clear because they didn't slap the cuffs on the guy when they were there.
In order to be able to grab every device with a hard drive in the house, the FBI has to make some statement to the judge about what they're going to look for on the drive. Clearly, one thread to go on is to search for any logs that mention the internal IP address, and see what follows. Yeah, there's a pretty good chance that there could be a machine on his own home network that has the same internal IP as the machine the break-in happened at Valve, and those are going to be useless matches that are going to have to be thrown out... what the FBI is hoping to find is some communciations program that associates that IP address with a description of "Valve Code Server" or such... that'd be incriminating.
Yep, the FBI's going fishing. However, they have a right to since they went to a judge and got a warrant. He's clearly a suspect... of course, suspects aren't always guilty, but they're the ones being investigated like they might be...
Having the IP address on a DNS cache not very incriminating, but what they're basically saying is that they know remote contact with Valve's IP space was involved in the crime, so they want any device in his house capable of keeping any IP-based log to see if anything incriminating turns up there...
The FBI came with a blonde woman agent carrying the warrent and trying to be as nice as they can to a suspect. Let's face it, that's what this guy, and his entire group, appears to be right now.
You don't need to be proven guilty by any standard to become a suspect. To get a warrant, they do need to present something to a judge, but what that something is usually remains sealed. That's how the system works, there was a due process for taking his property.
So, the good news for him is so far that the FBI's just fishing on his machines right now. If they find what they're looking for, or anything else very illegal to have, then they'll be back with the cuffs.
Apple's real start in 1984 in front of the public came in the form of the now famous Super Bowl ad. Now, 20 years removed, will there be another big ad during the game?
EA is also the virtual god as well. They get to set the laws of physics and nature in the virutal world, and are free to issue exceptions as they want. Therefore, even if the virtual government finds someone EA dislikes "not guilty", EA can smite the character with a well-placed virtual lightning bolt.
I don't see any way around it... EA has to be the real source of power in their virtual world. Any player-government would be just as ineffective as a student council in a school... they can organize the prom and other social events, but they can't change the school policies.
And what that equates to is a "virtual death penality" for somebody who spoke out against the "virtual government". Yes, EA has a right to do that.
However, this is a rather interesting decision... rather than fight the "crimes" he pointed out, they decided to silence the critic. That makes it seem like they're starting to become a virtual police state, which surely they didn't have in mind when this thing started. How can EA keep order in the community without becoming so oppressive that they also kill the fun of being there?
Well, there's some laws that need not apply to a virtual world. Virtual "theft" may or may not be legal depending on which game you're in... some may consider it part of the game, others may consider that running a con scheme to get somebody's stuff is an offense that leads to a virtual death penalty... deletion of your character.
Basically, the TOS has to respect real laws, but the "rules of the game" does not.
Slashdot Mirror
This doesn't seem as big news as it could be. It's not a major project of Google, but something one of the engineers built during company time when instructed to work on a personal project. It's not branded "Google Friends" afterall.
The UPC number still could be placed on the labels without a bar code, or maybe they'll still spend the square inch of the label on the barcode even if it's rarely used.
Customers like to pay less bottom line for food and clothing most of the time. They don't really care how the store achives that low price, just that it is the best deal as far as the customer knows.
If Darl wants to get support, he'll have to do the same ; strip and get dunked.
Do we really want to see that?
Isn't that...
SCO: American for fraud
??
- These Australians are not the only ones asking... - Hey Australia, if you see any proof, let us know, we've been looking for it too. - Just one firm? I thought more would be questioning. - Are those enquiries actually from people intrested in buying, or just wanting the proof... - So they've finally run out of Americans to bother? - Time to short SCOX!
They don't quite seem to understand why a law stands in the way of an ad-based business model...
Pity the lawbreaking travel agent or car dealer whose fax advertisement happens to appear on a fax machine belonging to one Ben Livingston of Seattle, Wash.
That's nice, if you never care about being promoted. Maybe it's not soon, but someday your boss will leave the company somehow. When that happens, would you like to be considered in the running to move up? Show that you can interact with and understand the managers, and you'll have a ticket to be considered to join them...
A good admin/support person should have the ability to at his desk and goof off on his computer. When caught doing so, and asked what actual work I was doing, I point to the support hotline phone and the fact that it isn't ringing. If nothing was broken and my routine maintainance was up-to-date, the only reason why I have left to not call it a day the day is because I need to be on call in the hopefully unlikely event something causes that phone to ring.
No it doesn't. It gives them the permission to search the entire disk, but only for the stated purpose. If they discover a new purpose, they need a new warrant. The good news is, such an open-and-shut warrant comes absolutely instantly... it's just a matter of waking up the judge on call that night.
"On the coffee table" would fall into "plain sight" which means that they could grab that bag, and then go back to the judge and quickly get another warrant to search for more based on the first discovery.
They can also go after absolutely anything that it looks like somebody's trying to destroy... that creates an emergency that doesn't give them time to get the warrant, and therefore cause to grab immediately.
If you are found innocent...
a) What countermeasures/damages can you persue
Usually none. If you're wrongly caught up in an investigation, you're not owed anything on that alone. You have to prove an abuse of power, that the government wasn't mislead, but knowlingly followed a wrong path to get anything.
b) If your computers are for business use, can you sue for lost revenue?
Yes, but you have a responsibilty to limit the damages to the best of your ability. You can't just shut down the business and throw your hands in the air. You likely have the abilty to run out to a store and buy at least one or two computers on which your business can limp along, and your employees likely can work from home on their own equipment. Yeah, you might have the claim for the revenue your really lost, but most businesses hit with these things lose everything because they gave up, not because the FBI truely disabled them.
c) If they find something illegal (who doesn't have a "hack for program x" or keygen etc), but it is found that they came after you mistakenly, are your computers still lost?
Yep. So long as they were acting in good faith when they stumbled into it, they can go back an get a revised warrant to dig further into that crime. Just like how they go after teflon mobsters, they catch them on tax evasion... if they can't get you for the big crime, they might go for a little one.
d) You got no card, how can you call to find out about your stuff?
Call the main switchboard at the local office, the FBI and Secret Service both have numbers in the phone book whereever they are. You don't need an exact name, "that pretty blond woman who was on the team that raided my house" is enough identifying infromation for them to know who you were talking about.
e) 9 computers, decent chance one is a server. How about if the server was hacked (cmon, if they hack valve wouldn't they redirect through dummy servers)
That's still evidence... and this goes to the agents strong suggestion that you come clean with anything you do know. If you didn't do it but let somebody route through you to hide their tracks, you better turn over anything you know about that person. If you think you have been hacked, you'd better tell anything you know or suspect about the hacking right away... coming up with that story later will be less credible.
The proper thing to do would be once they stumble into the first signs that there's likely to be a trove of kiddie porn on a general hacking suspect's computer would be to run back to the judge and basically say: "While we were searching for X, we opened up the C:\ drive icon on the system and discovered a folder labelled 'kiddie porn'. Based on that label at face value, it's highly likely that illegal child pornography is in that directory. Can we have an expanded scope to go looking into that?" New warrant gets issued... and everything's clean...
A weblog isn't fact, but it's first person testimony to the public. The FBI hasn't exactly come out contesting the thing, so it's pretty likely that some sort of morning raid did take place... and it seems like a pretty by the book one at that.
IANAL, but here's the basics of the rules of evidence...
As long as where they've gotten where they are on investigation X legally, and they just happen to stumble into something that starts investigation Y, it's fair play.
They can't go breaking down doors for no good reason and looking for a dead body. However, if they had a legal reason to be in the house, and there's a rug over what looks like the shape of a dead body, they do have the ability to look at what's under the rug even if that wasn't in their original warrant... such a thing is just too big to have ignored.
So, I doubt they're going to do a low-level scan for kiddie porn since kiddie porn has absolutely nothing to do with the investigation they're doing. However, if they find a kiddie porn image as his main desktop image or as part of a screen saver... that's just too big to miss and they're going to then start looking deeper at that. I doubt he's that stupid, so he'll get his PCs back in a few months.
And if you're a network admin on a network with valuable content that you don't want the outside world to have, any external IP address that you haven't met and whitelisted should stick out like a sore thumb. It might not lead directly to the people responsible for the break-in, but it is the first place you have to go in order to start tracking the path...
Sure, whatever the FBI has right now isn't enough to fly in court. Their actions say that loud and clear because they didn't slap the cuffs on the guy when they were there.
In order to be able to grab every device with a hard drive in the house, the FBI has to make some statement to the judge about what they're going to look for on the drive. Clearly, one thread to go on is to search for any logs that mention the internal IP address, and see what follows. Yeah, there's a pretty good chance that there could be a machine on his own home network that has the same internal IP as the machine the break-in happened at Valve, and those are going to be useless matches that are going to have to be thrown out... what the FBI is hoping to find is some communciations program that associates that IP address with a description of "Valve Code Server" or such... that'd be incriminating.
Yep, the FBI's going fishing. However, they have a right to since they went to a judge and got a warrant. He's clearly a suspect... of course, suspects aren't always guilty, but they're the ones being investigated like they might be...
Having the IP address on a DNS cache not very incriminating, but what they're basically saying is that they know remote contact with Valve's IP space was involved in the crime, so they want any device in his house capable of keeping any IP-based log to see if anything incriminating turns up there...
The FBI came with a blonde woman agent carrying the warrent and trying to be as nice as they can to a suspect. Let's face it, that's what this guy, and his entire group, appears to be right now.
You don't need to be proven guilty by any standard to become a suspect. To get a warrant, they do need to present something to a judge, but what that something is usually remains sealed. That's how the system works, there was a due process for taking his property.
So, the good news for him is so far that the FBI's just fishing on his machines right now. If they find what they're looking for, or anything else very illegal to have, then they'll be back with the cuffs.
Apple's real start in 1984 in front of the public came in the form of the now famous Super Bowl ad. Now, 20 years removed, will there be another big ad during the game?
EA is also the virtual god as well. They get to set the laws of physics and nature in the virutal world, and are free to issue exceptions as they want. Therefore, even if the virtual government finds someone EA dislikes "not guilty", EA can smite the character with a well-placed virtual lightning bolt.
I don't see any way around it... EA has to be the real source of power in their virtual world. Any player-government would be just as ineffective as a student council in a school... they can organize the prom and other social events, but they can't change the school policies.
And what that equates to is a "virtual death penality" for somebody who spoke out against the "virtual government". Yes, EA has a right to do that.
However, this is a rather interesting decision... rather than fight the "crimes" he pointed out, they decided to silence the critic. That makes it seem like they're starting to become a virtual police state, which surely they didn't have in mind when this thing started. How can EA keep order in the community without becoming so oppressive that they also kill the fun of being there?
Well, there's some laws that need not apply to a virtual world. Virtual "theft" may or may not be legal depending on which game you're in... some may consider it part of the game, others may consider that running a con scheme to get somebody's stuff is an offense that leads to a virtual death penalty... deletion of your character.
Basically, the TOS has to respect real laws, but the "rules of the game" does not.