In finding no Fourth Amendment violation, the Western District of Washington noted that "in order for [] prospective user[s] to use the Tor network they must disclose information, including their IP addresses, to unknown individuals running Tor nodes, so that their communications can be directed toward their destinations." Id. at *2. The Western District of Washington noted that under "such a system, an individual would necessarily be disclosing his identifying information to complete strangers."
Sounds like it makes sense to me
Thus, hacking resembles the broken blinds in Carter. 525 U.S. at 85. Just as Justice Breyer wrote in concurrence that a police officer who peers through broken blinds does not violate anyone's Fourth Amendment rights, jd. at 103 (Breyer, J., concurring), FBI agents who exploit a vulnerability in an online network do not violate the Fourth Amendment. Just as the area into which the officer in Carter peered - an apartment - usually is afforded Fourth 52 Case 4:16-cr-00016-HCM-RJK Document 90 Filed 06/23/16 Page 52 of 58 PageID# 1134 Amendment protection, a computer afforded Fourth Amendment protection in other circumstances is not protected from Government actors who take advantage of an easily broken system to peer into a user's computer. People who traverse the Internet ordinarily understand the risk associated with doing so
Well yeah if you don't patch your system, you know you're going to get hacked right? So, boohoo, you got hacked by the gov should have been surfing kiddy porn
"Furthermore, the Court FINDS suppression unwarranted because the Government did not need a warrant in this case. Thus, any potential defects in the issuance of the warrant or in the warrant itself could not result in constitutional violations".
This language is particularly specific and narrows the ruling to this case and only this case. The fact that the FBI got a warrant to allow them to run remote exploit code on an individual's computers that had downloaded the exploit (which was only available on PlayPen) means that they didn't need a warrant.
The individual was exposing himself to this exploit of his own actions, and thus didn't require a warrant. Let me put it this way, the FBI takes over a drug dealer, and has him continue sale, but under the new watchful eye of cameras that collect identifying photos of individuals who purchase drugs. (Not only that, but the person has to go into a room that specifically says, “illegal drugs” on it in order to even end up on camera.)
Do law enforcement REALLY need a warrant when the person is incriminating themselves?
This is like arguing that law enforcement had no right to put a tracker in the cash bag of a bank that they took. It's BS. It required active agency in acquiring the exploit code, and a clear intent to obtain child pornography.
a) You do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy when you're committing a crime, and b) if you walk into someone else's house and demonstrate direct intent to commit a crime without knowing that you're identifying yourself to police, well, TOO BAD
The site was actually protected by the Tor network (and despite an error in configuration allowing it to be accessed outside of Tor for a bit) was only available through the Tor network.
They then attached the callback program to trigger upon downloading known child porn, and voila your computer happily reports to the FBI that you've just downloaded child porn.
This is actually pretty solid law, and entirely reasonable warrant and execution of that warrant
It looks like (so far, I'm only part way through the actual ruling) one of the chief objections is that the warrant identified the website with the wrong type of logo. The text on that logo, had however stayed the same. This is not a good argument for why a warrant shouldn't be valid
Even though the warrant authorized the FBI to deploy the NIT as soon as a user logged into Playpen, SA Alfin testified that the Government did not deploy the NIT against Mr. Matish in this particular case until after someone with the username of "Broden" logged into Playpen, arrived at the index site, went to the bestiality section - which advertised prepubescent children engaged in sexual activities with animals - and clicked on the post titled "Girl 11YO, with dog." In other words, the agents took the extra precaution of not deploying the NIT until the user first logged into Playpen and second entered into a section of Playpen which actually displayed child pornography. At this point, testified SA Alfin, the user apparently downloaded child pornography as well as the NIT to his computer. Thus, the FBI deployed the NIT in a much narrower fashion than what the warrant authorized.
I dunno, that's pretty compelling reasonable suspicion there for a warrant which is what they actually had
The Court FINDS, for the reasons stated herein, that probable cause supported the warrant's issuance, that the warrant was sufficiently specific, that the triggering event occurred, that Defendant is not entitled to a Franks hearing, and that the magistrate judge did not exceed her jurisdiction or authority in issuing the warrant
So you think supporting the validity of a warrant that was issued prior to the search to be subversive?
To any sane person, if they need a warrant to come through your door to seize the data, they need a warrant to seize the data over the wire.
Let's examine that, let's see
The Court FINDS, for the reasons stated herein, that probable cause supported the warrant's issuance, that the warrant was sufficiently specific, that the triggering event occurred, that Defendant is not entitled to a Franks hearing, and that the magistrate judge did not exceed her jurisdiction or authority in issuing the warrant
Some of this article is outright wrong. Specifically, that Type 1 Diabetics over-produce glucagon. http://www.diabetesselfmanagem... Also, a common factor in T2D individuals is that their muscles are starting to store fat. Your link fails to account for any of that. Now, as for how it's wrong about T1D (I should know, I am one):
Glucagon is prescribed as an emergency injection for hypoglycemia. If the body of a T1D would be consistently putting out glucagon, then glucagon would be worthless as an emergency injection of it.
Now, that said, T1D react differently when insulin levels are low (which since they are not making any/enough of their own, means not injecting any/enough.) As a result of low insulin, the body stops being able to use the glucose that is available. The body cannot recognize a difference between too little insulin, and too little glucose. As a result, the body starts starving, even though the body is full of glucose. As a result the body starts responding as would any starving person: upregulation of glucagon to have the liver produce more glucose, to meet the body's needs.
But remember, the body already has plenty of glucose, just no insulin to make use of it. So thus, the liver just keeps dumping more and more glucose into the system, which isn't being used, and it builds up. At the same time, it's making ketones for other fuel. As the glucose and ketone levels rise, it starts to make the body acidic, which is buffered by bicarb, until the bicarb stores are depleted, and then the body starts going in to acidosis.
There are some T1D who regulate their glucose levels with a ketogenic diet. After the glycogen levels in the liver are depleted, it can't raise the BG in response to starvation, which leads to an easier to manage BG level. However, for these individuals, glucagon injections will not help them with a hypo. But since their body normally has largely switched over to ketone metabolism, they're unlikely to experience hypos anyways.
Well, really anything that breaks the cycle works great. But yeah, keto is a good choice because it specifically reduces carb intake, which leaves the liver as the only source of glucose in the body.
This definitely can rest the insulin response and help reset it.
Eh... this is more of a “we look forward to F/OSS developers developing ways of ensuring region coding matches the installing firmware.”
They're not really locking anything, they're just adding a region-locking value that must match before the image is flashed. Honestly, you could just work around this by providing the same image with all the different region-codes.
But I think they're hoping that the F/OSS community will develop a way of ensuring that specific region-codes get a specific firmware that ensures it complies with the RF transmission regulations of that region.
One should be aware that different countries have different regulations. Often those regulations concern RF transmitters and the like.
Unless someone or something tells you that your RF transmitting device will work in a foreign country, you should presume that it either a) won't. or b) would be against their regulations.
As I noted on the FB page, Type 2 Diabetes tends to be caused by a feedback loop of insulin insensitivity increasing insulin secretion causing increased insensitivity.
Just a little nudge out of that feedback loop can do incredible amounts of good. All you have to do is just break that cycle, and you can potentially walk away from having to constantly worry about your blood sugar. (But of course, much like weight loss, T2D requires a lifestyle change to keep away. It's not a 'take this pill, you're cured!' it's more of a 'pay more attention to your diet regardless, and eat better for the rest of your life.'... which as the argument I've seen goes, it's a question of which is better or worse.
This reminds me that a T1D can get a pancreas implant, and then no/reduced need of insulin for years... but then you have to take antirejection drugs and all the wonderful side effects of transplants... so which is worse, the cure or the chronic pedantic busy work being your own pancreas...
I've tried to find an article about this recently, but haven't been able to find the article that I read. But it turns out Google actually has your data collection lie to Google on a regular occasion. They get enough data that the lies shift out in the statistics, and in addition, no one at Google can actually trust specific data that you've sent Google...
So, I looked up the SMTP RFC, and yeah, the "local-part" (as it is determined) is to be treated as opaque by everyone BUT the domain in the address. Meaning that everyone must treat the addresses differently regardless of how GMail or anyone else interprets the semantics...
AND THEN, it turns out that while things are required to be case-insensitive, things are ALSO required to be case-sensitive. Basically, no one should ever assume that the local-part of the email address can be treated as caseless.
So, there you go, if Amazon doesn't let you sign up as both smith@example.com and Smith@example.com, then they're totally out of spec...
But to the deeper part, why would Amazon not disable an account when someone with a local-part semantic collision calls in to object to getting the emails? "These two addresses are treated as semantically identical by my email provider, please figure out how to fix the other person's account," doesn't seem like a horribly unreasonable request... I'm sure they'd do it for Smith@example.com coming from smith@example.com...
Bitching about the RFCs and complaining that GMail is the problem is entirely misreading the RFC, and misreading reality in fact...
You want some harsh criticism? And some direct, blunt communication?
People don't scare quote "hetero", because it's the antonym of "homo-". So why the hell are you scare quoting "cis-" when it's the antonym of "trans-"? This is basic Latin, and if you didn't take Latin, then it's basic Chem, and if you didn't take basic Chem, then GET OFF MY INTERNET.
Unless you're going to argue that transgendered/transsexual people don't exist, then stop scare quoting "cis-" like it's some sort of boogie word. It's the natural choice for referring to individuals who are not "trans-". And if "trans" is a word, then "cis" is a word. Just like "hetero" and "homo".
So, you mean the fact that I wrote a c-intercal parser that used obscure opcodes to actually perform the interweave and or and xor isn't a good thing to put on my resume?
Also, my favorite obscure language is LIRL, and that has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH ME BEING THE AUTHOR... rather, it's an interesting concept of, "what if Perl raped LISP and LISP was forced by the republican state government to carry that baby to term?"
The answer is: implied parentheses. To be clear, the language is absolutely context sensitive...
Are you aware, that companies that produce lead-free solder in Europe, must have their product labeled with "may contain lead" in California?
Because California's lead restrictions are something like 9X (1 part per billion) where as Europe's standard is at 6X (1 part per million)... even though both of them can be described best and most easily with homeopathic dilution values...
Usually the problem is something like, "it isn't giving me the newest driver" or simply the poor quality of the drivers in the first place. (For awhile there, if I clicked on the start button, it would cause my screen to reset!) And a lot of "your driver stopped responding so we turned it off, then back on again."
In some ways, I like that the drivers are being pushed to me automatically, but at the same time, if I'm doing multiple reinstalls in a single day, I've already downloaded the drivers... I don't need them to be downloaded YET AGAIN, every install...
At Facebook, it's memcached, with an HDD backup, eventually put onto tape...
At Google, it's a ramdisk, backed up to SSD/HDD, eventually put onto tape...
For anyone who can't afford half a petabyte of RAM with the commensurate number of computers? I have no good ideas... except maybe RAM cache of SSD, cache of HDD, backed up on tape...
Using something like HDFS to store your data in a Hadoop cluster of file requests, is likely the best F/OSS solution you're going to get for that...
Slashdot Mirror
In finding no Fourth
Amendment violation, the Western District of Washington noted that "in order for [] prospective
user[s] to use the Tor network they must disclose information, including their IP addresses, to
unknown individuals running Tor nodes, so that their communications can be directed toward
their destinations." Id. at *2. The Western District of Washington noted that under "such a
system, an individual would necessarily be disclosing his identifying information to complete
strangers."
Sounds like it makes sense to me
Thus, hacking resembles the broken blinds in Carter. 525 U.S. at 85. Just as Justice
Breyer wrote in concurrence that a police officer who peers through broken blinds does not
violate anyone's Fourth Amendment rights, jd. at 103 (Breyer, J., concurring), FBI agents who
exploit a vulnerability in an online network do not violate the Fourth Amendment. Just as the
area into which the officer in Carter peered - an apartment - usually is afforded Fourth
52
Case 4:16-cr-00016-HCM-RJK Document 90 Filed 06/23/16 Page 52 of 58 PageID# 1134
Amendment protection, a computer afforded Fourth Amendment protection in other
circumstances is not protected from Government actors who take advantage of an easily broken
system to peer into a user's computer. People who traverse the Internet ordinarily understand the
risk associated with doing so
Well yeah if you don't patch your system, you know you're going to get hacked right? So, boohoo, you got hacked by the gov should have been surfing kiddy porn
"Furthermore, the Court FINDS suppression unwarranted because the Government did not need a warrant in this case. Thus, any potential defects in the issuance of the warrant or in the warrant itself could not result in constitutional violations".
This language is particularly specific and narrows the ruling to this case and only this case. The fact that the FBI got a warrant to allow them to run remote exploit code on an individual's computers that had downloaded the exploit (which was only available on PlayPen) means that they didn't need a warrant.
The individual was exposing himself to this exploit of his own actions, and thus didn't require a warrant. Let me put it this way, the FBI takes over a drug dealer, and has him continue sale, but under the new watchful eye of cameras that collect identifying photos of individuals who purchase drugs. (Not only that, but the person has to go into a room that specifically says, “illegal drugs” on it in order to even end up on camera.)
Do law enforcement REALLY need a warrant when the person is incriminating themselves?
This is like arguing that law enforcement had no right to put a tracker in the cash bag of a bank that they took. It's BS. It required active agency in acquiring the exploit code, and a clear intent to obtain child pornography.
a) You do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy when you're committing a crime, and b) if you walk into someone else's house and demonstrate direct intent to commit a crime without knowing that you're identifying yourself to police, well, TOO BAD
The site was actually protected by the Tor network (and despite an error in configuration allowing it to be accessed outside of Tor for a bit) was only available through the Tor network.
They then attached the callback program to trigger upon downloading known child porn, and voila your computer happily reports to the FBI that you've just downloaded child porn.
This is actually pretty solid law, and entirely reasonable warrant and execution of that warrant
It looks like (so far, I'm only part way through the actual ruling) one of the chief objections is that the warrant identified the website with the wrong type of logo. The text on that logo, had however stayed the same. This is not a good argument for why a warrant shouldn't be valid
Even though the warrant authorized the FBI to deploy the NIT as soon as a user logged
into Playpen, SA Alfin testified that the Government did not deploy the NIT against Mr. Matish
in this particular case until after someone with the username of "Broden" logged into Playpen,
arrived at the index site, went to the bestiality section - which advertised prepubescent children
engaged in sexual activities with animals - and clicked on the post titled "Girl 11YO, with dog."
In other words, the agents took the extra precaution of not deploying the NIT until the user first
logged into Playpen and second entered into a section of Playpen which actually displayed child
pornography. At this point, testified SA Alfin, the user apparently downloaded child
pornography as well as the NIT to his computer. Thus, the FBI deployed the NIT in a much
narrower fashion than what the warrant authorized.
I dunno, that's pretty compelling reasonable suspicion there for a warrant which is what they actually had
The Court FINDS, for the reasons stated herein, that probable cause supported
the warrant's issuance, that the warrant was sufficiently specific, that the triggering event
occurred, that Defendant is not entitled to a Franks hearing, and that the magistrate judge did not
exceed her jurisdiction or authority in issuing the warrant
So you think supporting the validity of a warrant that was issued prior to the search to be subversive?
To any sane person, if they need a warrant to come through your door to seize the data, they need a warrant to seize the data over the wire.
Let's examine that, let's see
The Court FINDS, for the reasons stated herein, that probable cause supported
the warrant's issuance, that the warrant was sufficiently specific, that the triggering event
occurred, that Defendant is not entitled to a Franks hearing, and that the magistrate judge did not
exceed her jurisdiction or authority in issuing the warrant
Oh, they did have a warrant.
Some of this article is outright wrong. Specifically, that Type 1 Diabetics over-produce glucagon. http://www.diabetesselfmanagem... Also, a common factor in T2D individuals is that their muscles are starting to store fat. Your link fails to account for any of that. Now, as for how it's wrong about T1D (I should know, I am one):
Glucagon is prescribed as an emergency injection for hypoglycemia. If the body of a T1D would be consistently putting out glucagon, then glucagon would be worthless as an emergency injection of it.
Now, that said, T1D react differently when insulin levels are low (which since they are not making any/enough of their own, means not injecting any/enough.) As a result of low insulin, the body stops being able to use the glucose that is available. The body cannot recognize a difference between too little insulin, and too little glucose. As a result, the body starts starving, even though the body is full of glucose. As a result the body starts responding as would any starving person: upregulation of glucagon to have the liver produce more glucose, to meet the body's needs.
But remember, the body already has plenty of glucose, just no insulin to make use of it. So thus, the liver just keeps dumping more and more glucose into the system, which isn't being used, and it builds up. At the same time, it's making ketones for other fuel. As the glucose and ketone levels rise, it starts to make the body acidic, which is buffered by bicarb, until the bicarb stores are depleted, and then the body starts going in to acidosis.
There are some T1D who regulate their glucose levels with a ketogenic diet. After the glycogen levels in the liver are depleted, it can't raise the BG in response to starvation, which leads to an easier to manage BG level. However, for these individuals, glucagon injections will not help them with a hypo. But since their body normally has largely switched over to ketone metabolism, they're unlikely to experience hypos anyways.
Well, really anything that breaks the cycle works great. But yeah, keto is a good choice because it specifically reduces carb intake, which leaves the liver as the only source of glucose in the body.
This definitely can rest the insulin response and help reset it.
Eh... this is more of a “we look forward to F/OSS developers developing ways of ensuring region coding matches the installing firmware.”
They're not really locking anything, they're just adding a region-locking value that must match before the image is flashed. Honestly, you could just work around this by providing the same image with all the different region-codes.
But I think they're hoping that the F/OSS community will develop a way of ensuring that specific region-codes get a specific firmware that ensures it complies with the RF transmission regulations of that region.
One should be aware that different countries have different regulations. Often those regulations concern RF transmitters and the like.
Unless someone or something tells you that your RF transmitting device will work in a foreign country, you should presume that it either a) won't. or b) would be against their regulations.
As I noted on the FB page, Type 2 Diabetes tends to be caused by a feedback loop of insulin insensitivity increasing insulin secretion causing increased insensitivity.
Just a little nudge out of that feedback loop can do incredible amounts of good. All you have to do is just break that cycle, and you can potentially walk away from having to constantly worry about your blood sugar. (But of course, much like weight loss, T2D requires a lifestyle change to keep away. It's not a 'take this pill, you're cured!' it's more of a 'pay more attention to your diet regardless, and eat better for the rest of your life.' ... which as the argument I've seen goes, it's a question of which is better or worse.
This reminds me that a T1D can get a pancreas implant, and then no/reduced need of insulin for years... but then you have to take antirejection drugs and all the wonderful side effects of transplants... so which is worse, the cure or the chronic pedantic busy work being your own pancreas...
1us = 1000ns = 100000 ps
You missed a 0 here. Not complaining, just point it out.
I've tried to find an article about this recently, but haven't been able to find the article that I read. But it turns out Google actually has your data collection lie to Google on a regular occasion. They get enough data that the lies shift out in the statistics, and in addition, no one at Google can actually trust specific data that you've sent Google...
So, I looked up the SMTP RFC, and yeah, the "local-part" (as it is determined) is to be treated as opaque by everyone BUT the domain in the address. Meaning that everyone must treat the addresses differently regardless of how GMail or anyone else interprets the semantics...
AND THEN, it turns out that while things are required to be case-insensitive, things are ALSO required to be case-sensitive. Basically, no one should ever assume that the local-part of the email address can be treated as caseless.
So, there you go, if Amazon doesn't let you sign up as both smith@example.com and Smith@example.com, then they're totally out of spec...
But to the deeper part, why would Amazon not disable an account when someone with a local-part semantic collision calls in to object to getting the emails? "These two addresses are treated as semantically identical by my email provider, please figure out how to fix the other person's account," doesn't seem like a horribly unreasonable request... I'm sure they'd do it for Smith@example.com coming from smith@example.com...
Bitching about the RFCs and complaining that GMail is the problem is entirely misreading the RFC, and misreading reality in fact...
So, much like the WMF flaw, "working as intended"?
I just got the brilliant notion of using Hololens to do all the dungeon and minifig stuff that has previously been just on the board...
That would be pretty freaking cool... unnecessary, but WHO CARES IT'S COOL!
You want some harsh criticism? And some direct, blunt communication?
People don't scare quote "hetero", because it's the antonym of "homo-". So why the hell are you scare quoting "cis-" when it's the antonym of "trans-"? This is basic Latin, and if you didn't take Latin, then it's basic Chem, and if you didn't take basic Chem, then GET OFF MY INTERNET.
Unless you're going to argue that transgendered/transsexual people don't exist, then stop scare quoting "cis-" like it's some sort of boogie word. It's the natural choice for referring to individuals who are not "trans-". And if "trans" is a word, then "cis" is a word. Just like "hetero" and "homo".
Don't like it? TOUGH! That's how language works.
Comment rejected: insufficiently polite.
Avoid INTERCAL job postings at all costs.
So, you mean the fact that I wrote a c-intercal parser that used obscure opcodes to actually perform the interweave and or and xor isn't a good thing to put on my resume?
Also, my favorite obscure language is LIRL, and that has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH ME BEING THE AUTHOR... rather, it's an interesting concept of, "what if Perl raped LISP and LISP was forced by the republican state government to carry that baby to term?"
The answer is: implied parentheses. To be clear, the language is absolutely context sensitive...
I ended up booting into DOS directly for most of these reasons.
Oddly, I barely even use 95... went straight from 3.x to 98. Where I still booted into DOS to do my gaming.
Ah... back in the day... I had to tetris my drivers to make sure I had enough conventional and XMS memory for the game I wanted to play... BOTH WAYS!
Are you aware, that companies that produce lead-free solder in Europe, must have their product labeled with "may contain lead" in California?
Because California's lead restrictions are something like 9X (1 part per billion) where as Europe's standard is at 6X (1 part per million)... even though both of them can be described best and most easily with homeopathic dilution values...
So what? I had a gigabit home network back in 2001...
Paper doesn't scale to the level required. Trust me, I've attended presentations from ex-Googlers on the topic.
Especially, when the paper weighs so much that it started deforming a building...
Usually the problem is something like, "it isn't giving me the newest driver" or simply the poor quality of the drivers in the first place. (For awhile there, if I clicked on the start button, it would cause my screen to reset!) And a lot of "your driver stopped responding so we turned it off, then back on again."
In some ways, I like that the drivers are being pushed to me automatically, but at the same time, if I'm doing multiple reinstalls in a single day, I've already downloaded the drivers... I don't need them to be downloaded YET AGAIN, every install...
At Facebook, it's memcached, with an HDD backup, eventually put onto tape...
At Google, it's a ramdisk, backed up to SSD/HDD, eventually put onto tape...
For anyone who can't afford half a petabyte of RAM with the commensurate number of computers? I have no good ideas... except maybe RAM cache of SSD, cache of HDD, backed up on tape...
Using something like HDFS to store your data in a Hadoop cluster of file requests, is likely the best F/OSS solution you're going to get for that...