Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

To keep Tor hack source code secret, DOJ dismisses child porn case

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 142 posts

Re: To keep Tor hack source code secret, DOJ dismisses child porn case

#51

Post by ENOTTY »

hackuser wrote: post #49

Why is an exploit against a Tor user so valuable? Assuming the attackers can access the server, which for the FBI seems a reasonable assumption (they can seize the server, operate it as a honeypot, etc.), all they need is a browser vulnerability. Perhaps they did use a valuable exploit in this case, or they used something not legal (such as something not covered by their warrant or NSA surveillance).

They might be actively using it in other investigations that might be compromised if this exploit were fixed.

Re: To keep Tor hack source code secret, DOJ dismisses child porn case

#52

Post by devwastaken »

Huffers2 wrote: post #14
woolly wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the majority of it probably isn't 'how the world should be', a man is going free because (we speculate) that the evidence against him was gathered illegally. This bit probably is 'how the world should be'.

I've never understood this. If I gather evidence against somebody illegally, and it proves their guilt, shouldn't we both go to jail?

There's multiple problems with that idea. Firstly, it incentivizes 'working around the system' for enforcement to go after people. Enforcement is not inherenetly out there for the 'good', many times they're there for their own agenda, while looking like they're enforcing the law. This can create a mixture of criminal/enforcement culture, and lead to a further increase of 'bad cops'.

Secondly, when gathering evidence illigally, it may be that the evidence is purely out of context, shaped to make the person look guilty, or that the methods of doing so are not reliable. Courts still have a problem with reliability of evidence, even 'lie-detectors' are still seen as legitimate, but there is no evidence of their ability.

Re: To keep Tor hack source code secret, DOJ dismisses child porn case

#53

Post by knieveltech »

CapitalistCartr wrote: post #50
mcbits wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way the system is now, if you gather evidence by "torture" (remembering it's just an analogy) and fail to come up with a convincing cover story for how you gathered the evidence, then the case is dismissed and everyone goes home. "Welp, it was worth a try!" It's this current system that's at risk of legitimizing torture as yet another illegal-but-oh-well tool for investigation.

Not if the victim of torture can afford our legal system. A (most likely Federal) judge would deny qualified immunity to those responsible, and they'd be held accountable at least in civil court, possibly criminal, although doubtful, given the way state prosecutors crawl up the police butt.

A federal judge deny qualified immunity? I'm struggling to contain my incredulity. There are instances where cops shot people who were unarmed and attempting to comply, where filmed doing it from multiple angles, and the cops still walked.

Re: To keep Tor hack source code secret, DOJ dismisses child porn case

#54

Post by inlined »

woolly wrote: post #12
moomin wrote: post #9

So, let's see now: a man is going free who should probably be going to jail for a long time, because the state doesn't want to disclose the methods of gathering evidence against him, which we can speculate are because they are illegal or sourced from non-law-enforcement agencies. A case with near-identical facts and the same judge _is_ going to trial and, not content with tapping your email, the state now wants to pu…

While the majority of it probably isn't 'how the world should be', a man is going free because (we speculate) that the evidence against him was gathered illegally. This bit probably is 'how the world should be'.

I don't completely understand how demonstrating the chain of investigation should require the disclosure of the vulnerability. I really hope the execution of the law isn't going to depend on 12 random people understanding the finer points of cryptanalysis.

I wish there were some way to get a private but independent verification that X technique allowed IP addresses to be collected if they did action Y (e.g. logging onto playpen). Then the investigation could be questioned without the government disclosing their vulnerability, which seems like a standard we wouldn't hold most to. If someone were on trial for copyright infringement could they subponea for the full source of FairPlay as a coercion to get the case dropped?

Re: To keep Tor hack source code secret, DOJ dismisses child porn case

#55

Post by caf »

angry_octet wrote: post #34
caf wrote: post #10

I don't quite see why they can't use the same method they use in espionage cases in this situation - if there's classified evidence, the defence lawyers need to get security clearances and are under the same obligation not to further disclose the information as anyone else (even to their own client).

It isn't a national security issue so there is no justification for those measures. In criminal cases there is a strong constitutional and natural justice basis for the accused being able to examine and attempt to rebut the evidence.

As I understand it those issues are covered by the accused's lawyers being able to examine the evidence on behalf of the accused, which would extend to having it examined by an expert witness who can attempt to impeach it.

Re: To keep Tor hack source code secret, DOJ dismisses child porn case

#56

Post by SomeStupidPoint »

caf wrote: post #55
angry_octet wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't a national security issue so there is no justification for those measures. In criminal cases there is a strong constitutional and natural justice basis for the accused being able to examine and attempt to rebut the evidence.

As I understand it those issues are covered by the accused's lawyers being able to examine the evidence on behalf of the accused, which would extend to having it examined by an expert witness who can attempt to impeach it.

It reads straight out of Kafka you can't be present at your own trial, because the evidence against you is secret.

I might be willing to grant that legitimate cases of national security warrant this, but routine criminal proceedings? Fuck no. That kind of exclusion of the accused is terrifying and delegitimizes the proceedings in my eyes. The state can't try you in secret just because they don't want to talk about the evidence, and we know the state routinely abuses secrecy laws to cover malfeasance.

Re: To keep Tor hack source code secret, DOJ dismisses child porn case

#57

Post by beardog »

hackuser wrote: post #49

Why is an exploit against a Tor user so valuable? Assuming the attackers can access the server, which for the FBI seems a reasonable assumption (they can seize the server, operate it as a honeypot, etc.), all they need is a browser vulnerability. Perhaps they did use a valuable exploit in this case, or they used something not legal (such as something not covered by their warrant or NSA surveillance).

This is what that is.

Re: To keep Tor hack source code secret, DOJ dismisses child porn case

#58

Post by hackerboos »

ENOTTY wrote: post #51
hackuser wrote: post #49

Why is an exploit against a Tor user so valuable? Assuming the attackers can access the server, which for the FBI seems a reasonable assumption (they can seize the server, operate it as a honeypot, etc.), all they need is a browser vulnerability. Perhaps they did use a valuable exploit in this case, or they used something not legal (such as something not covered by their warrant or NSA surveillance).

They might be actively using it in other investigations that might be compromised if this exploit were fixed.

But can't those cases just be dismissed also? Unless they decide that case is worth the release of information.

Re: To keep Tor hack source code secret, DOJ dismisses child porn case

#59

Post by [deleted] »

snailletters wrote: post #48
endgame wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snarky, mostly. So often the people who want to ram through additional surveillance will do so using "think of the children" rhetoric, as though they were the most important thing in the world. And now we find that when it comes time to actually use these tools to protect the children, the secrecy of the tools is more important.

From the Wikipedia article, "Community, Space and Online Censorship (2009) argued that classifying children in an infantile manner, as innocents in need of protection, is a form of obsession over the concept of purity." I believe I see what you mean, however in a case of child pornography do you not think that it's in a human's best interest to keep something from abuse of naivety?

[deleted]

Re: To keep Tor hack source code secret, DOJ dismisses child porn case

#60

Post by gpm »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #21
Huffers2 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood this. If I gather evidence against somebody illegally, and it proves their guilt, shouldn't we both go to jail?

The structure is to keep police officers honest which is more important than a particular person going to jail. The operating principle is that a dishonest police force is more dangerous than a criminal who was caught using illegal evidence. Typically the criminal will commit another crime and if you get evidence against them legally, then you can prosecute them for the new crime.

The "we both go to jail" policy would probably do even betting at keeping police officers honest. The threat of the officer going to jail being significantly worse than the threat of allowing the criminal to walk free.

The details are sketchy, who prosecutes the police/prosecutors? But in principle I think it makes sense.

Post reply on HN