Has anyone actually read the warrant application? The allegations were made by a close acquaintance of the accused who directly observed him changing grades for students and cracking into other systems; the emails in question were traced back to the accused's hostname.
The EFF article completely mischaracterizes a 90% legitimate warrant.
Changing grades is basically the only possible crime listed in that warrant, everything else listed is a civil matter at best, and mostly scaremongering due to his technical abilities.
>> he has "fixed" computers so that they cannot be scanned by any system for detection of illegal downloads and illegal internet use, "jail breaks" cell phones, possibly stolen ones, for people so that the phones can be used on networks other than they are meant for
He expects full control over his property and doesn't just do what he's told? We're obviously dealing with a loose cannon here!
Indeed.. but if grades were actually changed, I think the IT Director of Security at BC (mentioned in the warrant) would've stated or advised that they were changed. Yet, he only advises and assists the detective with regard to the subject of mass emailing. And even this I question- it appears as if they don't understand the point of a mailing-list... like they don't understand the reasoning behind email propagation to a list- duh, this is how it happens. That's the purpose of a mailing list- so that those that are subscribed receive the content therein (content to be argued about separately) What's shady is that given this is a warrant application, a number is not even approximated at for the amount of emails supposedly sent - they only use the term "mass email" and in some cases they use the singular version, "the email" referring to originate from his machine. All they prove is that they can trace an email- big whoop, nothing a log file can't show them.
LOL - saw your edit; how dare he want to actually own his property! :) I'd argue that the governing body that wishes to achieve the goal of nothing else (where a crime was not committed) but scanning his computer, is conducting an illegal act!
Yes. Though, allegations are allegations and what weight do they hold, especially in this case? I argue they don't hold much- it looks more like a civil dispute between two former friends. Plus, keep in mind, 10% is more than enough reasonable doubt- especially in a case where the law and the police are still considered noobs to the game.
But this part kills me:
"Mr. Calixte has access into ""'s computer as he set it up for him when they were friends and he knows the password. The computer has been looked at by several experts and none of them can resolve the problem."
WOW- maybe Mr. Calixte is the ultimate cryptographer and completely disguised his activity so stealthy that the so-called 'experts' cannot find the problem! NO. The problem is that there is no problem. And what the hell is wrong with the computer owner? Someone needs a lesson in password management 101.
This is a dead topic I think, so not sure this will post, but I'll try to answer.
About 20 years ago, I was driving home from work (Atlanta). I was still in college and was a co-op student at "big blue". Great job, I worked 7 days a week and actually slept under my desk at times. This one night I was driving home around 2am. I think it was a Thursday, could have been Friday. A cop in Decatur (That's home to Emory) pulls me over in front of the courthouse for a having a broken headlight. Fair enough, I was a poor college student, but I'll take the ticket. Not good enough for him, he was trolling for drunk drivers. He spent a lot of time asking me questions and after shining a flashlight throughout my car asked me if he could search my trunk. I told him "no sir, I don't think that has anything to do with a broken headlight". The next words from him were "get out of the car, boy". It went downhill from there. It was a very abusive next 30 minutes...he was careful to tell me it was only him and me out there, no witnesses, until he finally searched my trunk anyway (which he could do now that I was arrested)...in the end, the judge sent me home knowing full well what happened and didn't so much as admonish the police.
Since this happened to me, I've been careful to notice the stories of others. There are some great police officers throughout America; they deserve our respect. Unfortunately, the "brotherhood" protects the bad ones as well.
rather than "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" (which is what is needed for a criminal conviction) and definitely is at a level such that sometimes places are searched or items are seized that never end up resulting in a criminal prosecution. The case mentioned in this thread involved a search warrant affidavit mentioning facts that made reasonable a belief that the items seized should be looked at as possibly related to a crime.
I think the popularity of this article has more in common with the popularity of the "how to care for your introvert" article. Basically the group is trying to define itself, and persecution is one of those very common rallying points. People with beautiful and misunderstood introverted abilities are being singled out by the man. If you enjoy this kind of thing there are sites like reddit which are perfect for expressing it.
It may be true that they're trying to define themselves, but if so I'd say it's because they're exploiting an opportunity they've found with regard to so many holes in the investigation. But more importantly, I disagree that this is more suited for Reddit discussion (if that was your point). Here at HN as I'm sure you're aware, we have a record of intelligent, coherent and stimulating debate about a wide range of important topics and being that the warrant and the topic are in fact hacker related it was a good choice to post it here.
Its not that I think it doesn't belong here, the reception the article has gotten worries me a little. These rallying articles that provoke this strong sense of identity in a community can actually swamp the real character of the site. The mutual outrage and sense of purpose is compelling but its superficial. Legal action, especially at the initial stages when police are involved, is particularly inflammatory because everyone jumps to conclusions. The justice system takes time to process, but this sense of mutual outrage has no patience.
Yup, the short summary is: a guy behaves like an ass and a former friend notifies the police of his illegal activities. In these days, you'd better not fuck your friends over, because they may alert the police to your stack of pirated movies.
The EFF article completely mischaracterizes a 90% legitimate warrant.
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/inresearchBC/EXHIBIT-A.pdf