Live data from Hacker News

The FBI stole an Instapaper server in an unrelated raid

blog.instapaper.com

11–20 of 263 posts

Re: The FBI stole an Instapaper server in an unrelated raid

#11
post #6

I'm trying to think of an analogy which can explain why this might be reasonable from the FBIs perspective. Suppose you were using a shared storage space (shared servers, or server farm) with several other dudes. One of them is a drug dealer. One day the police/FBI decide to raid the storage space since the drug dealer has been using it to store illegal drugs. Is it not reasonable to consider this collateral damage (…

No. Even if it was shared space, it should be possible to, through software and IT, extract the necessary data and bar it from further operation.

I think it's always important to remember that the first order of business in a raid is to preserve evidence against deletion or modification. This means that their first task is to remove the hardware from anybody's hands but theirs. At which point they can peruse the data as they are able.

Why did they take an entire rack, instead of a few servers? I can think of a couple of potential reasons. - VM's, which could potentially live on any physical server in a VM pool - Insufficient information on which physical servers belong to their suspects - They just don't trust the colo operators to not be involved, and thus limit the suspect data to the servers they provide.

While I wholly agree that it's unfortunate that Instapaper and Pinboard were affected, it's not an unexpected consequence of having your servers alongside (or on the same physical machines) of people you don't know.

Re: The FBI stole an Instapaper server in an unrelated raid

#12
post #6

I'm trying to think of an analogy which can explain why this might be reasonable from the FBIs perspective. Suppose you were using a shared storage space (shared servers, or server farm) with several other dudes. One of them is a drug dealer. One day the police/FBI decide to raid the storage space since the drug dealer has been using it to store illegal drugs. Is it not reasonable to consider this collateral damage (…

It seems like either the FBI didn't pay attention to the information given to them by DigitalOne or DigitalOne had poor information about where their servers are located.

The picture painted here is that the FBI came in and hastily took a bunch of equipment without making sure they were taking the right stuff. If that is accurate, then it's likely they might have missed a server with data on it that they needed for their case. Moving quickly and causing collateral damage in a relatively safe environment where you actually have the time to triple check your work is inexcusable on all fronts.

Re: The FBI stole an Instapaper server in an unrelated raid

#13
post #6

I'm trying to think of an analogy which can explain why this might be reasonable from the FBIs perspective. Suppose you were using a shared storage space (shared servers, or server farm) with several other dudes. One of them is a drug dealer. One day the police/FBI decide to raid the storage space since the drug dealer has been using it to store illegal drugs. Is it not reasonable to consider this collateral damage (…

It is not reasonable if the FBI does not have a warrant for your servers(/storage space). Instapaper is completely right to call this "theft".

If his servers are included in the warrant because they were suspected of housing whatever it is the FBI was after, and the court granted the FBI the right to seize them, then yeah, it's reasonable.

If he was sharing a physical machine with the bad guys, then yeah, sorry, that's collateral damage. However, if he was on his own separate leased machine, there is absolutely no reason for the FBI to seize it. It'd be like them executing a seizure warrant on one of those self-storage spaces, and seizing the contents of all the adjoining compartments (which the person being investigated would have had no access to) just because.

Re: The FBI stole an Instapaper server in an unrelated raid

#16
I think it may be prudent to begin encrypting all data on disk that can reasonably be encrypted while being able to set up the server remotely so that no one can just snatch your server and get all your data.

This could work by encrypting your database in a truecrypt volume that must be mounted by entering the password. Thus, the data is only ever saved on disk in encrypted form, and the key to access the data is not saved on the disk. Of course, it is still in principle possible for anyone to access that information if they have physical access to the computer while it's running, but at least this makes that much harder.

Re: The FBI stole an Instapaper server in an unrelated raid

#17
I think the OP was unreasonably harsh on DigitalOne (never heard of them let alone have any interests). It is very possible that they are consumed with FBI questioning, gag orders or who knows what else. I would give them a pass for a few days until more detail comes out.

Re: The FBI stole an Instapaper server in an unrelated raid

#18
Surely there is a legal precedent which provides at least some framework for what can or cannot be seized during a warrant search? This can't be the first time government agents have mistakenly seized property in an otherwise lawful search.

Also, while I completely understand Instapaper's unwillingness to pursue this through the courts, that is the way our legal system is structured. If you believe you have been harmed in some way by a government action, the courts are the avenue through which you must obtain recourse.

(Not a lawyer, so if I'm wrong about any of the above please correct me.)

Re: The FBI stole an Instapaper server in an unrelated raid

#19

The more I think about it, the more I think this should be treated the same as any of the other thefts of data information to have happened in the past few months. Sony, Toyota, Sega, etc. A potentially hostile group now has a ton of personal info. People should know.

A potentially hostile group that also has much greater resources at its disposal than LulzSec, and much more ambiguous motivations.

Re: The FBI stole an Instapaper server in an unrelated raid

#20
Hmm. I've built something similar to instapaper for myself. (Using a native OS X app). People were making jokes at me how I was re-inventing the wheel.

Now I'm somewhat happy having done the extra work. At least the FBI doesn't have my "read later" bookmarks. (Which often consist of the words 'hack', 'malware' and 'reverse engineering'.)

I guess I will reinvent the wheel instead of using cloud services more often in the future.

Post reply on HN