Likes Likes:  0
Resultaten 1 tot 2 van de 2
Geen
  1. #1
    Jason Coombs
    Careless Law Enforcement Computer Forensics Lacking InfoSec Expertise
    Gast
    n/a Berichten
    Berichten zijn liked



    Thread Starter

    Careless Law Enforcement Computer Forensics Lacking InfoSec Expertise

    34 people have killed themselves in the U.K. after being accused of
    purchasing child pornography using their credit card numbers on the Web
    between 1996 and 1999; and thousands have been imprisoned around the
    world for allegedly doing the same. Two of the first, and still ongoing,
    large-scale investigations of credit card purchases of child pornography
    through the Internet are known as Operation Ore (U.K.) and Operation
    Site Key (U.S.) -- tens of thousands of suspects' credit card numbers
    were found in the databases used by the alleged e-commerce child porn
    ring, and law enforcement's careless misunderstanding of the Internet
    and infosec (circa 1999) resulted in every single one of the suspects
    being investigated and thousands have so far been prosecuted and convicted.

    Was your credit card number in the Operation Ore / Operation Site Key
    database? How would you know unless and until you've been arrested?

    Over the last few years I have seen numerous cases in which the computer
    forensic evidence proves that a third party intruder was in control of
    the suspect's computer. More often there is simply no way to know for
    sure what might have happened between 1996 and 1999 with respect to the
    computer seized by law enforcement at the time of arrest years later.

    If security flaws, porn spyware, or mistakes by an unskilled end user
    resulted, over the years, in some child pornography being downloaded to
    a suspect's hard drive, even in 'thumbnail' graphic formats and
    recovered only using forensic data recovery tools that carve files out
    of unallocated clusters, then the suspect is routinely charged, since
    the presence of child pornography on a hard drive owned by a person who
    is accused of purchasing child pornography is the best evidence law
    enforcement has to prove guilt of these so-called 'electronic crimes
    against children' -- crimes that are proved by the mere existence of
    data, where it matters not that a suspect did not and could not have
    known that the data existed on a hard drive that was in their possession.

    I ask you this question: why doesn't law enforcement bother to conduct
    an analysis of the computer evidence looking for indications of
    third-party intrusion and malware? Some people have indicated to me that
    sometimes law enforcement actually does do post-intrusion forensics;
    though this decision is entirely up to the prosecutor or forensic lab
    director, and if they don't put in the time to do this they still get
    their conviction so there is presently no incentive to spend hundreds of
    hours analyzing large hard drives searching for evidence of intrusion
    just in case one might have occurred.

    A substantial factor in the answer to this question is that it is nearly
    impossible to know what might have happened to a computer over the
    years, and most computers are used by more than end user to begin with.
    Not only is there no way to differentiate

    Every person convicted of an electronic crime against a child based only
    on evidence recovered from a hard drive that happened to be in their
    possession should be immediately released from whatever prison they are
    now being held.

    Law enforcement must be required to obtain Internet wiretaps, use
    keyloggers and screen capture techniques, and conduct other
    investigations of crimes-in-progress, because the current approach to
    computer forensics being taught by vendors such as Guidance Software
    (www.encase.com) and others (who just happen to sell products designed
    to analyze and search hard drives) makes the outrageous assertion that a
    person can be proven guilty of a crime based only on data that is found
    on a hard drive in their possession.

    There is simply no way for law enforcement to know the difference
    between innocent and guilty persons based on hard drive data
    circumstantial evidence. Something must be done to correct this misuse
    of computer evidence, and whatever that something is, it is clear that
    only an information security organization is going to be able to explain
    it to law enforcement and legislators.

    Regards,

    Jason Coombs
    jasonc@science.org

    --

    http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/leg...icle316391.ece

    30 September 2005 21:24

    No evidence against man in child porn inquiry who 'killed himself'
    By Ian Herbert
    Published: 01 October 2005

    The credibility of a major investigation into child pornography came
    under renewed scrutiny yesterday after an inquest into the death of a
    naval officer who was suspended by the Royal Navy despite a lack of
    evidence against him.

    The Navy suspended Commodore David White, commander of British forces in
    Gibraltar, after police placed him under investigation over allegations
    that he bought pornographic images from a website in the US. Within 24
    hours he was found dead at the bottom of the swimming pool at his home
    in Mount Barbary.

    The inquest into his death heard that computer equipment and a camera
    memory chip belonging to Commodore White had yielded no evidence that he
    downloaded child pornography, and a letter was written by Ministry of
    Defence police to Naval Command on 5 January this year indicating that
    there were "no substantive criminal offences" to warrant pressing
    charges. But the Second Sea Lord, Sir James Burnell-Nugent, feared that
    the media would report the case and on 7 January removed him from his
    post anyway.

    Despite accepting the news in a "steady fashion", the commodore was dead
    the next day. His brother Rupert told the inquest that the news of his
    removal had caused his "mental collapse", and that he was in "a state of
    catatonic shock".

    The head of the Royal Navy, the First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West,
    expressed his "deep regret" over Commodore White's death yesterday,
    after the inquest recorded an open verdict.

    The coroner, Charles Pitto, said there was insufficient evidence to
    conclude whether the commodore's death was accidental or suicide. If it
    was suicide, it would have taken to 34 the total number of people who
    have killed themselves after being identified as suspects by Operation
    Ore, Britain's biggest child-sex probe. The nationwide police
    investigation was launched three years ago after a list of 7,200 British
    suspects was handed to British police by US authorities. The men on the
    list are accused of using credit cards to pay for child porn through
    Landslide, a sex website that operated in Texas from 1996-99.

    The results have seemed impressive. Nearly 4,000 people have been
    arrested, some 1,600 have been charged and 1,200 convicted. But the
    operation has placed some apparently innocent individuals under
    suspicion. In one case at Hull Crown Court last year, a distinguished
    hospital consultant was acquitted after it emerged that hackers had used
    his credit card on Landslide. The judge dismissed some police evidence
    as "utter nonsense".

    Robert Del Naja, frontman of the group Massive Attack, was also wrongly
    accused of downloading child pornography. His arrest in 2003 was leaked
    to the media, but the case was dropped. The Who guitarist Pete
    Townshend, the most high-profile name to emerge so far from the Ore
    list, was not charged because he had not downloaded any pictures, and
    said he had been doing research for a book about child abuse.

    The inquest heard Commodore White had reached the peak of his military
    career. During the 1990s he was on the military staff at Nato HQ in
    Brussels and was promoted to Captain in 1997, when he became the
    assistant director for naval operations during the Kosovo conflict. In
    2001, he was appointed captain of the Second Submarine Squadron, and was
    in charge of Trafalgar class submarines. He never married, but was seen
    as very sociable.

    The credibility of a major investigation into child pornography came
    under renewed scrutiny yesterday after an inquest into the death of a
    naval officer who was suspended by the Royal Navy despite a lack of
    evidence against him.

    The Navy suspended Commodore David White, commander of British forces in
    Gibraltar, after police placed him under investigation over allegations
    that he bought pornographic images from a website in the US. Within 24
    hours he was found dead at the bottom of the swimming pool at his home
    in Mount Barbary.

    The inquest into his death heard that computer equipment and a camera
    memory chip belonging to Commodore White had yielded no evidence that he
    downloaded child pornography, and a letter was written by Ministry of
    Defence police to Naval Command on 5 January this year indicating that
    there were "no substantive criminal offences" to warrant pressing
    charges. But the Second Sea Lord, Sir James Burnell-Nugent, feared that
    the media would report the case and on 7 January removed him from his
    post anyway.

    Despite accepting the news in a "steady fashion", the commodore was dead
    the next day. His brother Rupert told the inquest that the news of his
    removal had caused his "mental collapse", and that he was in "a state of
    catatonic shock".

    The head of the Royal Navy, the First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West,
    expressed his "deep regret" over Commodore White's death yesterday,
    after the inquest recorded an open verdict.

    The coroner, Charles Pitto, said there was insufficient evidence to
    conclude whether the commodore's death was accidental or suicide. If it
    was suicide, it would have taken to 34 the total number of people who
    have killed themselves after being identified as suspects by Operation
    Ore, Britain's biggest child-sex probe. The nationwide police
    investigation was launched three years ago after a list of 7,200 British
    suspects was handed to British police by US authorities. The men on the
    list are accused of using credit cards to pay for child porn through
    Landslide, a sex website that operated in Texas from 1996-99.

    The results have seemed impressive. Nearly 4,000 people have been
    arrested, some 1,600 have been charged and 1,200 convicted. But the
    operation has placed some apparently innocent individuals under
    suspicion. In one case at Hull Crown Court last year, a distinguished
    hospital consultant was acquitted after it emerged that hackers had used
    his credit card on Landslide. The judge dismissed some police evidence
    as "utter nonsense".

    Robert Del Naja, frontman of the group Massive Attack, was also wrongly
    accused of downloading child pornography. His arrest in 2003 was leaked
    to the media, but the case was dropped. The Who guitarist Pete
    Townshend, the most high-profile name to emerge so far from the Ore
    list, was not charged because he had not downloaded any pictures, and
    said he had been doing research for a book about child abuse.

    The inquest heard Commodore White had reached the peak of his military
    career. During the 1990s he was on the military staff at Nato HQ in
    Brussels and was promoted to Captain in 1997, when he became the
    assistant director for naval operations during the Kosovo conflict. In
    2001, he was appointed captain of the Second Submarine Squadron, and was
    in charge of Trafalgar class submarines. He never married, but was seen
    as very sociable.


  2. #2
    Stefano Zanero
    Careless Law Enforcement Computer Forensics Lacking InfoSec Expertise
    Gast
    n/a Berichten
    Berichten zijn liked



    Thread Starter

    Re: Careless Law Enforcement Computer Forensics Lacking InfoSec Expertise

    Jason Coombs wrote:
    > 34 people have killed themselves in the U.K. after being accused of
    > purchasing child pornography using their credit card numbers on the Web


    I know of at least one similar case in Italy.

    > the presence of child pornography on a hard drive owned by a person who
    > is accused of purchasing child pornography is the best evidence law
    > enforcement has to prove guilt of these so-called 'electronic crimes
    > against children' -- crimes that are proved by the mere existence of
    > data,


    I would add that in some cases even "sharing" these files on
    peer-to-peer networks can be an innocent act, for instance if you
    bulk-download them from a user, and before inspecting their content
    someone downloads them from your shared folder.

    In Italy, "trading" this type of material is a distinct charge from
    "owning" it.

    > I ask you this question: why doesn't law enforcement bother to conduct
    > an analysis of the computer evidence looking for indications of
    > third-party intrusion and malware?


    I have asked the same question to law enforcement personnel, but with no
    satisfactory answers for now.

    > There is simply no way for law enforcement to know the difference
    > between innocent and guilty persons based on hard drive data
    > circumstantial evidence.


    I agree, from my own experience as a forensics consultant.

    --
    Cordiali saluti,
    Ing. Stefano Zanero
    ---------------------------
    Secure Network S.r.l.
    www.securenetwork.it

Webhostingtalk.nl

Contact

  • Rokin 113-115
  • 1012 KP, Amsterdam
  • Nederland
  • Contact
© Copyright 2001-2026 Webhostingtalk.nl.
Web Statistics