Oooo I never thought of that. Anybody have a pointer to more relevant legal response information than what I plagiarized and bastardized?
Intrusion Detection and the Law for the Net/Sys Admin 101? SDC ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 7:33 PM Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Reacting to a server compromise > On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 01:38 am, Jennifer Bradley wrote: > > > If this happens again, I would probably make a copy of the hard drive, Then Saturday, August 02, 2003 7:33 PM [EMAIL PROTECTED] responded: > Under most jurisdictions, an ordinary disk image produced by Norton Ghost etc > using standard hardware is completely inadmissible in court, as it is > impossible to make one without possibly compromising the integrity of the > evidence. The police etc use specialised hardware for making such copies, > which ensures that the disk can't have been altered. > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html > _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
