k wrote:
I wouldn't bet on it. What bullshit. I'd like to believe there was a good reason, such as a credible threat or lead, but these days, I really just don't have that much faith in our government or legal system.

Its highly likely that this is actionable. Its not generally legal to shut down websites in police raids in the United States. Its approximately equivelent to shutting down a newspaper printing press. Unless the whole thing is pretty much devoted to illegal content they cannot pull the plug on it. In this case they probably didn't realize they were taking out a shared hosting server. However, each and every one of those people who runs a website that was impacted and wasn't the target of the investigation can press criminal charges against the police agency involved if they get a hold a knowledgable lawyer.

See this link and this one.

It shall be unlawful for a government officer or employee, in connection with the investigation or prosecution of a criminal offense, to search for or seize any work product materials possessed by a person reasonably believed to have a purpose to disseminate to the public a newspaper, book, broadcast, or other similar form of public communication, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce.

(The exception in this act for child pornography cases is close enough to litigate but Congress did not envision shared hosting websites when they crafted this exception. I think there is a strong arguement that the exception does not apply when the majority of the people using the printing press in question have nothing to do with the crime being investigated. The government CAN be more granular in their seizure and respect for this rule requires it.)

RE: The Department of Homeland Security Has Shut Us Down

Our popular culture, our dirt-ball street culture teaches us from childhood that the CIA is listening to *all* of our telephone calls and reading *all* of our email anyway.

I keep seeing that in the lower discourse of the Internet, people saying, "Oh, they're doing it anyway." In some way our culture believes that, and it's a real problem, because evidently they haven't been doing it anyway, and now that they've started, we really need to pay attention and muster some kind of viable political response.

Boing Boing: William Gibson on NSA wiretapping

A new bill called DOPA (Deleting Online Predators Act) will require schools and libraries that receive federal funding to block access to social networking sites like MySpace and FaceBook, and is written so broadly that it plausibly could encompass blogs, mailing lists, and sites like Flickr.

All this news is trite in relation to the NSA revelation, but if you're looking for more bullshit, consider warrantless searches for individuals crossing borders with pirate DVDs.

Boing Boing: Proposed law requires schools to censor MySpace, LJ, blogs, Flickr

MemeStreams user terratogen has dropped prices on all Muhammad merchandise in response to recent activity on the Flickr post of his famous Muhammad comic. T-Shirts, pillows, coffee mugs, beer steins, teddy bears, tote bags, stickers, refrigerator magnets, and much much more is available branded with depictions of the prophet. Support the troops in the cartoon war!

These t-shirts will not get you laid, but they might get your head sawed off.

This video clip is amazing. Its a FoxNews segment of a new "force field" technology for destroying inbound RPGs.

Force Field!

Hank Sheinkopf, a Democratic political consultant who worked on Bill Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign, said the alliance makes sense for both Mrs Clinton and Mr Murdoch. "She's not going any place. The only place she goes after this is the White House. Why not have a friend? That's a smart move for Mr Murdoch to make." He acknowledged that "there are some on the left who will feel that this is not a good thing".

I never would have predicted a Clinton/Murdoch alliance..

FT - Hillary Clinton defends link with Murdoch

Is Bush going to write him back? Ahmadinejad and Bush should become pen pals.

Dear President Bush...

Time lapse radar track of FedEx aircraft arriving into the Memphis hub during area thunderstorms.

Airline Pilot Central - FedEx arrivals during Thunderstorms

The following is from Scott Moulton, who was at the HTCIA meeting in Atlanta on Monday. A full copy of this can be found on forensiclicensing.com.

This meeting yesterday was somewhat contradictory. On one hand, the meeting was started by claiming that none of the people in the room were affected by this new law and that we are not PI's. But that seemed to change within a few minutes to all of us being affected and that it does apply to us.

It seemed apparent from the meeting yesterday they intend to push this PI bill though again. Many of the items in the PI bill are good for other reasons. Just not for anyone that practices any kind of "investigation" that is we did not consider a PI. Very graciously John Villines and Calvin Hill agreed to work with a committee from "our community" to get the correct verbiage in the bill with regards to our industry. Their point seemed to be that the PI bill was going to include us and that we would all somehow still have to be PI's but kind of be on our own terms if we help with the verbiage. Further questioning did not seem to clarify this. It seems that adding computer components to the PI exams was considered a "specialty" and was opposed when suggested to John C. Villines and Calvin Hill. It seemed clear that the qualifications for what it takes to become a PI were going to stay in place with regards to testing, training and educational hours. They stated that items for new laws need to be complete around the September time frame so that they can be submitted in February for new laws to be considered and that they were going to go ahead with this and submit it again. Our choice was to work with them on the wording.

It was also very apparent from statements made that under the current law that the misdemeanour still stands and that they were not offering any way to indemnify anyone during this time period that these issues need to be worked out and the law rewritten. They did claim that it was very unlikely anyone would be sought out for this issue being that it is a misdemeanour.

When it was suggested that we could create our own Professional Licensing board, it was pointed out to us that it would probably never happen. It was suggested by, I believe Calvin Hill, that we pick a board we fit best under and work with that board to get established and regulated under that board, and that it was unlikely with the current political system we have that we would be successful in setting up our own board.

RESEARCH ON "INVESTIGATOR"
The word "Investigator or investigation" seems to be a very big issue with PI's. Calling anything Forensic Investigation or a Computer Forensic Investigation are words that are subject to scrutiny as if Private Investigators as if PI's own the word investigate.

As matter... [ Read More (0.5k in body) ]

Scott Moulton's report of the HTCIA Meeting

The following quotes are from a reported posted to the Atlanta Linux Enthusasts mailing list by Greg Freemyer.

First some opinions (JV = John Villanes CH = Calvin Hill)

1) (JV) As it stands any third party that collects evidence for use in a criminal/civil suit is subject to the existing PI licensing law. The penalty is a misdemeaner and a relatively small fine. ie. a few hundred dollars I believe. They are starting to get complaints about Computer Forensic professionals not having there PI license.

Some more background on this would be useful. What is the basis of the complaints? And who is making them?

2) (CH) There is intense pressure on the legislature to regulate individuals with access to sensitive data.

From who? What is considered "access to sensitive data"?

3) (JV/CH) There is pressure to stop abuse of the GA PI law that allows PI companies to face minimal sanctions if they employ felons and allow them to carry guns. This is apparently the driver that caused HB 1259 to upgrade the offense of vialoting the PI license to be a felony.

They should handle this issue in a bill separate from any attempting to regulate the information security industry. This appears to have been the main driver, so handle it on its own. We don't need issues with felons carrying guns effecting the information security industry. These are issues that don't connect.

4) (JV/CH) HB 1259 will be back next near in some way shape or form.

See my above comment...

5) (JV) The PI Board has a written regulation (IIRC) that individuals covered by other GA licensing boards will not be covered by the PI board. (I'm not sure what this means if you are arrested. i.e You are still breaking the law, it is just a regulation that says that MDs/CPAs/Engineers/etc. are not required to have their PI license.)

This is one of the core problems that needs to be addressed. If you are a CPA, doctor, engineer, or information security expert, you should not be breaking the law in the process of practicing your craft in good faith.

6) (JV) My interpretation of what he said is that a IT consultant responding to a client issue that intentionally gathers evidence for potential use at a criminal/civil trial needs to be a PI today, and needs to be regulated in some manner in the future. His question was "Why not the PI board?"

7) (JV/CH) Employees of the violated company do not need to have a license. ie. If you are part of an inhouse IT security group you don't need a PI license, it is only if you are an outside consultant or work for a 3rd party (IT) security firm that you need a PI license.

Well, now a few reasons are being presenting as to why the PI board isn't th... [ Read More (0.2k in body) ]

[ale] IT Security (Evidence Collection) and HB 1259