Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy • Hacker News Board

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#11

Post by cpncrunch » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 5:47 AM UTC

HexagonalKitten wrote: post #7

This is a pretty bad article. Their expert isn't: "Butler, at the University of Florida, said making an IP address that appears to come from elsewhere isn't that complicated." And the legal analysis is weak, but that's apparent from the title: "Experts: evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy" Yes, search warrants are to search for evidence. If the evidence wasn't flimsy they'd have had an ar…

>This is a pretty bad article.

The main problem I have with the article is that it's factually incorrect about it being easy to spoof an ip address in a situation like this. It's easy to send off a fake ip address if [1] your ISP permits spoofed ips (which it shouldn't) and [2] you don't care about a response. But in this case the user had to actually log into the system, which is pretty tricky to do with ip spoofing. (There is some debate about it potentially just requiring an email to be sent to a mailing list, but even SMTP requires various responses).

Given the level of technical difficulty to do this, it seems extremely implausible that someone would go to all that effort just to send out this message.

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#12

Post by aaomidi » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 5:51 AM UTC

cpncrunch wrote: post #9

gruez wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>She didn't have all the facts, and she then incorrectly assumed that the data was being censored. So the solution is to raid her house? How about we raid the people that allege that biden fraudulently won the election?

That's a ridiculous illogical comment. I was not commenting on the raid at all.

And so is your comment.

Why does why she was fired relevant? Also your article goes literally against what you said.

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#13

Post by cpncrunch » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 5:55 AM UTC

jeremysalwen wrote: post #10

cpncrunch wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>She refused to bend the knee to a conservative administration while people were dying, and the political machine decided to lash out. Nope, that isn't what happened at all. The facts [1] show that she got the wrong end of the stick when the state epidemiologist asked to temporary remove one data field in order to validate the data (according to the emails seen). She didn't have all the facts, and she then incorrectl…

Your claims are not supported by the article linked.

If you look at the first article, you will see that it does in fact support the facts I presented:

[1] The state epidemiologist asked her supervisor to temporily remove the data: "“Per Dr. Blackmore, disable the ability to export the data to files from the dashboard immediately. We need to ensure that dates (date fields) in all objects match their counterpart on the PDF line list published,”"

[2] Rebekah assumed this was censorship: “This is the wrong call,”

[3] Her supervisor asked her to re-instate the data one hour later: "Then, just after 6 p.m., the I.T. director emailed both Jones and Dr. Blackmore. “Re-enable for now please.”"

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#14

Post by cpncrunch » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 5:59 AM UTC

aaomidi wrote: post #12

cpncrunch wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a ridiculous illogical comment. I was not commenting on the raid at all.

And so is your comment. Why does why she was fired relevant? Also your article goes literally against what you said.

>Why does why she was fired relevant?

It's not. I never even mentioned that. The article was supporting my comment above by showing the emails between the state epidemiologist and her dept. I havent found any better source for those emails.

>Also your article goes literally against what you said.

No, it doesn't, if you read the article you will see it supports the facts I gave (see my other comment in this thread).

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#15

Post by watwut » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 6:23 AM UTC

cpncrunch wrote: post #13

jeremysalwen wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your claims are not supported by the article linked.

If you look at the first article, you will see that it does in fact support the facts I presented: [1] The state epidemiologist asked her supervisor to temporily remove the data: "“Per Dr. Blackmore, disable the ability to export the data to files from the dashboard immediately. We need to ensure that dates (date fields) in all objects match their counterpart on the PDF line list published,”" [2] Rebekah assumed this…

And the raid? Supervisor sent the raid you claim?

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#16

Post by passwordreset » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 6:26 AM UTC

cpncrunch wrote: post #11

HexagonalKitten wrote: post #7

This is a pretty bad article. Their expert isn't: "Butler, at the University of Florida, said making an IP address that appears to come from elsewhere isn't that complicated." And the legal analysis is weak, but that's apparent from the title: "Experts: evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy" Yes, search warrants are to search for evidence. If the evidence wasn't flimsy they'd have had an ar…

>This is a pretty bad article. The main problem I have with the article is that it's factually incorrect about it being easy to spoof an ip address in a situation like this. It's easy to send off a fake ip address if [1] your ISP permits spoofed ips (which it shouldn't) and [2] you don't care about a response. But in this case the user had to actually log into the system, which is pretty tricky to do with ip spoofing…

The original text from the parent post is "Butler, at the University of Florida, said making an IP address that appears to come from elsewhere isn't that complicated."

There is no specific mention of IP Spoofing, so I wouldn't assume that. By far the easiest method of making an IP address appear to come from somewhere else would be a proxy, but it's never precisely claimed, because that's not how rules of evidence work. The burden of proof is on the prosecutor, and we don't know exactly what is being alleged, nor how it will be defended. I assume that the search warrant is somewhere on the Internet, but without at least the warrant to add context, we fart into the wind.

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#17

Post by craftinator » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 6:30 AM UTC

cpncrunch wrote: post #11

HexagonalKitten wrote: post #7

This is a pretty bad article. Their expert isn't: "Butler, at the University of Florida, said making an IP address that appears to come from elsewhere isn't that complicated." And the legal analysis is weak, but that's apparent from the title: "Experts: evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy" Yes, search warrants are to search for evidence. If the evidence wasn't flimsy they'd have had an ar…

>This is a pretty bad article. The main problem I have with the article is that it's factually incorrect about it being easy to spoof an ip address in a situation like this. It's easy to send off a fake ip address if [1] your ISP permits spoofed ips (which it shouldn't) and [2] you don't care about a response. But in this case the user had to actually log into the system, which is pretty tricky to do with ip spoofing…

> Given the level of technical difficulty to do this, it seems extremely implausible that someone would go to all that effort just to send out this message.

I agree. I think the two most plausible scenarios are that she too technologically illiterate to know that IP addresses are logged by ISPs and login systems, or the Governor has it out for her and hired someone to do it. I think both scenarios are totally feasible, though it's really hard to imagine she'd never heard of IP addresses before...

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#18

Post by heisenbit » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 6:32 AM UTC

How can the state claim the access was unauthorized when it shared password between users and also published it on a document on its website? The former may be irresponsible but is commonly excused but the latter?

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#19

Post by colechristensen » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 6:32 AM UTC

x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #3

Everyone knows the evidence and information supporting the raid was nonsense. She refused to bend the knee to a conservative administration while people were dying, and the political machine decided to lash out.

Everyone?

Having not read the court filing that granted the search warrant I know nothing about the information supporting the seizure.

I know that she tried to make an emotional appeal on social media, I know that she has been accused of really sketchy behavior with a coworker, and I know that people who read her messaging are going to jump to conclusions about her being wronged with no information besides her being fired by republicans.

What evidence was presented which got the warrant granted? Why was it nonsense, and what led the judge to grant it anyway?

Why did she delay officers executing a legally granted search warrant for twenty minutes, hanging up on them and refusing to answer the door?

It very much strikes me as a “more than meets the eye” kind of situation that jumping to conclusions based on political affiliation does not do justice.

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#20

Post by cpncrunch » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 6:34 AM UTC

passwordreset wrote: post #16

cpncrunch wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is a pretty bad article. The main problem I have with the article is that it's factually incorrect about it being easy to spoof an ip address in a situation like this. It's easy to send off a fake ip address if [1] your ISP permits spoofed ips (which it shouldn't) and [2] you don't care about a response. But in this case the user had to actually log into the system, which is pretty tricky to do with ip spoofing…

The original text from the parent post is "Butler, at the University of Florida, said making an IP address that appears to come from elsewhere isn't that complicated." There is no specific mention of IP Spoofing, so I wouldn't assume that. By far the easiest method of making an IP address appear to come from somewhere else would be a proxy, but it's never precisely claimed, because that's not how rules of evidence wo…

But a proxy would have the proxy server ip, unless Rebekah was hosting a tor node or some other proxy at her home. Even in that case the ip is still at her home.