On Wednesday, May 2, 2001, at 10:12 PM, Anonymous wrote:
At 11:00 PM 05/01/2001 -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Has anyone given any though to how log files could be accepted as
evidence in the first place? They're just text files, and exceedingly
trivial to alter, forge, erase, whatever.
Tim May wrote:
The asymmetry arises this way: almost _never_ does an ISP/operator
benefit from having logs, but prosecutors can use logs to prove various
crimes and thoughtcrimes.
Well, that's not quite true -- logs are pretty useful, in fact even
necessary, for a number of things.
At 10:12 PM 5/2/01 -0700, Anonymous wrote:
Seems to me that secure digital timestamps on the logs
would be really interesting to anyone wanting to preserve
their usefulness as evidence.
If you protected some logs (say, local user logins) really well,
and left other logs (say HTTP) unprotected
--
At 06:05 PM 5/2/2001 -0400, Faustine wrote:
Yep, good points. But still, fake framework and all, it can be useful if it
gets you to clarify and articulate your own assumptions.
We have clarified and articulated our assumptions some considerable time
ago. You came in late.
--digsig
Faustine wrote:
Too true. But if we want to actually reach people who *would* care if only
they
knew, it's important to talk about it without coming across like a full-bore
paranoid. It seems like a bad idea to risk losing credibility with careless
rhetoric and sloppy thinking. More than
At 11:36 AM 5/2/01 -0700, Greg Broiles wrote:
In any scenario, it seems like a few points are likely to be crucial -
1. Was the logging foreseeable at the time the statement/promise
regarding no logging was made?
If there was no intentional misrepresention, pretty much everything except
Review: Filtering a dim life
Chance encounters with new ideas broaden the mind. What, then, of technology
that filters out the unfamiliar?
Published: May 2 2001 17:55GMT | Last Updated: May 3 2001 10:28GMT
Patti Waldmeir Financial Times
The US constitution protects freedom of speech. Does it
At 8:54 AM -0700 5/3/01, David Honig wrote:
At 01:35 AM 5/3/01 -0400, An Metet wrote:
[I wonder if our more unpopular Federal agencies house their mainframes in
facilities that are shielded from this sort of attack]
Simple RF Weapon Can Fry PC Circuits
J
Scientists show device that could make
Tim May wrote:
Information Warfare is again being trotted out in the context of
currently-deteriorating relations between the U.S.G. and the P.R.C.
(China). Wanna bet we start seeing recycled reports about plans to
knock out the stock exchanges, with Chinese info-terrorists
replacing the IRA
At 07:45 AM 05/02/2001 -0700, David Honig wrote:
Yeah but is there a (contract etc.) *law* being broken or is this a
legally-null claim? After all, if click-through EULAs are legally binding...
Maybe a real lawyer could tell you. The answer may depend on whether
there's valuable consideration
10 matches
Mail list logo
