I don't know what's worse, that I visited the anti-slash website, or that I punched it into a new browser window so it wouldn't look like I clicked the link she/he/they presented me with.
Or how about this one, Police, being smarter than given credit for, know whose computer were stolen and a general idea of what was on them, and call aol and say "Fred", or rather "Peter Gascoyne had his computer stolen from work, when his AOL account gets signed on give us a call." That being said...
"SBC and AOL privacy policies both say information can be shared with law-enforcement officials." - LAZARUS AT LARGE, "Arrest in Wells Fargo data theft Net surfing tips cops to stolen computer, customer records" - San Fransisco Chronicle / SF Gate - [http://www.sfgate.com]
and again
"White said investigators had asked AOL as a routine precaution to watch for any log-ons in Gascoyne's name. He said the world's biggest online service had reported a hit earlier this month but then dragged its feet in providing information about the phone line used in the connection." - Same Source
Maybe it isn't perhaps guessing on how they may have gone about getting this information but just not trusting one source, that repeated a generic Associated Press story as many papers have. Maybe alls it takes is a quick google here or a quick lexisnexis there to come up with all the information needed to stop our little minds from concocting more "Fred" theories.
Oh yea, and the same source also reads,
" 'We ended up taking a while with search warrants,' White said. 'Part of the difficulty was the lack of cooperation among various entitis.' "
So I guess search warrants were needed. But the thing that matters is they got em, right?
Slashdot Mirror
You linux users have been saying that for years. Off-topic: This is the most I've ever posted, I bet they all get modded-down
I thought www.ctrl-alt-del.com but when I pushed ctrl-alt-del alls it did was bring up the Task Manager
I don't know what's worse, that I visited the anti-slash website, or that I punched it into a new browser window so it wouldn't look like I clicked the link she/he/they presented me with.
Or how about this one, Police, being smarter than given credit for, know whose computer were stolen and a general idea of what was on them, and call aol and say "Fred", or rather "Peter Gascoyne had his computer stolen from work, when his AOL account gets signed on give us a call." That being said...
"SBC and AOL privacy policies both say information can be shared with law-enforcement officials." - LAZARUS AT LARGE, "Arrest in Wells Fargo data theft Net surfing tips cops to stolen computer, customer records" - San Fransisco Chronicle / SF Gate - [http://www.sfgate.com]
and again
"White said investigators had asked AOL as a routine precaution to watch for any log-ons in Gascoyne's name. He said the world's biggest online service had reported a hit earlier this month but then dragged its feet in providing information about the phone line used in the connection." - Same Source
Maybe it isn't perhaps guessing on how they may have gone about getting this information but just not trusting one source, that repeated a generic Associated Press story as many papers have. Maybe alls it takes is a quick google here or a quick lexisnexis there to come up with all the information needed to stop our little minds from concocting more "Fred" theories.
Oh yea, and the same source also reads,
" 'We ended up taking a while with search warrants,' White said. 'Part of the difficulty was the lack of cooperation among various entitis.' "
So I guess search warrants were needed. But the thing that matters is they got em, right?