# The FBI is either apallingly stupid or abominably malicious (re: pedophile hunts) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 21, 2008, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200 "2008-03-21T06:06:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![buttonjockey308](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@buttonjockey308](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buttonjockey308)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2008, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/41 "2008-03-21T16:33:13Z")
[QUOTE=Zebra] I’m pretty sure you know the answer to that question better than I. But… I would think a person would have to have been at the bogus site for sometime, perhaps browsing through several layers in an attempt to get at the site. This would weed out any ‘accidental’ views. Plus, it seems that the FBI and the Judge are not fully up to speed on internet tech. (like net accelators) You know as well as I do that even being suspected of a sex crime against a minor is a very serious ordeal. It can involve loss of employment, being ostrichised, and even violence against the person suspected. Even if they are not charged, or convicted. I hope the government is very careful in bringing this sort of charge against any person. This feels more like a ‘lets stop all traffic to see if anyone is drunk’ sort of operation to me. This sort of ‘wide net’ program just does not seem a like a good use of government resources to me. [/QUOTE] Search warrants are a dime a dozen any more. Once you convince the judge, (who is usually not only NOT up on technology, half of 'em aren’t even up on the law) that THEREZ KIDDIE PRON ON THAT MACHINE! You’re in. The 4th amendment is a shell of what it used to be in this country. ---
**Author:** ![flight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbce88/32.png) [@flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flight)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2008, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/42 "2008-03-21T16:33:20Z")
[QUOTE=Projammer] No. WEP is a severely compromised technology these days. Given a couple of hours and the proper software I can be surfing from any “secure” wireless network in this town. Yes, I am familiar with the software and equipment necessary to do so. It’s part of my job to be up to date on this kind of thing. [/QUOTE] What about WPA with MAC filtering? ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2008, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/43 "2008-03-21T16:33:44Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] … What net accelerator works by pre-loading every link on a page? … [/QUOTE] [Fasterfox](http://fasterfox.mozdev.org/faq.html#What_is_prefetching), one of the [top twenty most popular extensions](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/browse/type:1/cat:all/sort:popular?show=20) for Firefox. > [@](#): > > … Since prefetching is basically the same as clicking on a link, and clicking on a dynamic link can perform some action such as “logging you out” or “emptying your cart”, only static content is prefetched by Fasterfox. > > On top of the Mozilla prefetching limitations which are outlined here: [Mozilla Link Prefetching FAQ](http://www.mozilla.org/projects/netlib/Link_Prefetching_FAQ.html) > > Fasterfox further limits prefetching such that only files with the extension **.gif, .htm, .html, .jpeg, .jpg,**.pdf, .png, .text, .txt, and .xml are prefetched. … from the Op’s link, > [@](#): > > … In a legal brief filed on March 6, his attorney argued that the two thumbnails were in a hidden “thumbs.db” file automatically created by the Windows operating system. The brief said that there was no evidence that Vosburgh ever viewed the full-size images–which were not found on his hard drive–and the thumbnails could have been created by receiving an e-mail message, copying files, or innocently visiting a Web page. > > From the FBI’s perspective, clicking on the illicit hyperlink and having a thumbs.db file with illicit images are both serious crimes. … If having a thumbs.db file with illicit images is a serious crime then what do ya think having .gifs, .jpgs and whole web pages is? [QUOTE=threemae] … clicking on a link will not get someone arrested, … [/QUOTE] > [@](#): > > … Vosburgh faced four charges: **clicking on an illegal hyperlink** … From the FBI’s perspective, **clicking on the illicit hyperlink** and having a thumbs.db file with illicit images are both **serious crime** s. … Federal prosecutors wrote: "The jury found that defendant knew exactly what he was trying to obtain when he **downloaded the hyperlinks** … Clicking on a hyperlink can land your ass in jail! CMC +fnord! ---
**Author:** ![Moirai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/96bed5/32.png) [@Moirai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moirai)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2008, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/44 "2008-03-21T16:36:58Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] How would you describe what evidence is enough for a warrant? [/QUOTE] One’s ability to convince a judge to sign it? I seem to recall a warrant being issued in CA for a suspected hydroponic marijuana-growing operation on the following criteria- 1. Resident puts out trashcans at the last minute the morning of the trash pick-up, rather than the night before. 2. Resident has a spike in electricity usage. :eek: The trash can thing seems to be something that cops look at a lot, when they suspect illegal activity. I guess they figure the resident is trying to minimize the time someone could look through their trash? ETA- forgot to add- why would this surprise anybody? This is the society we live in today- warrantless wiretaps, people being held indefinitely without hearing or legal representation, suspension of _habeus corpus_… welcome to the “bastion of freedom.” :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Projammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/projammer/32/559_2.png) [@Projammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Projammer)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2008, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/45 "2008-03-21T16:50:50Z")
[QUOTE=flight] What about WPA with MAC filtering? [/QUOTE] WPA is a much better option and what we’re preparing to transition to where I work. MAC filtering is good, but by no stretch of the imagination should it be considered secure. There are many wireless adapters that you can configure to present any MAC you specify. And just a few minutes of sniffing an active network will net you several valid MACs to use. ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2008, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/46 "2008-03-21T17:11:48Z")
[QUOTE=Lightnin’] Many people rely on their home computers for their livelihood. The first thing the FBI does in situations like this is they seize the computers- and it’s notoriously difficult to get the hardware back in any reasonable amount of time. It would be a major disruption to my career- to others, it might very well mean the difference between paying that month’s rent or not. Thirty minutes, while it was enough for Vosburgh to destroy a hard drive, would not be enough time for me to gather all of my files and programs. I’d be screwed. If I was working on a contract job at the time, I’d have no way to continue the job. And don’t forget- they take ALL computers, all computer hardware, telecommunications gear, and even utility bills… all because you clicked on a link. I think the only thing that would slap some sense into the FBI and other law enforcement agencies would be to show them just how easy it is for someone to plant inappropriate images onto a computer. [/QUOTE] What he said. **Bricker** , if you’re seriously implying with your patented rhetorical gotcha game that the mere clicking of a link provides sufficient grounds for one’s life to be destroyed for six months _at minimum_ while the fathanded feds poke through every last molecule of one’s world, then maybe it really is time to tear everything down and rebuild it from scratch. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2008, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/47 "2008-03-21T20:30:12Z")
If it was good enough for the Secret Service in Operation Sundevil, it’s good enough for Child Porn now. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2008, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/48 "2008-03-21T20:50:37Z")
**Bricker** , you know law but I know technology. The FBI is playing with things it obviously does not understand. _ **There is no authentication in any of the protocols.** _ No layer, from Ethernet up to HTTP, makes any serious attempt to verify who you are. Yes, some of them can be encrypted. That not only doesn’t provide authentication, it is also beyond the capacity of the average non-technical user. Furthermore, the Internet isn’t just used by humans clicking links in web browsers. It’s used by [programs like this one](http://www.jwz.org/webcollage/) running this page, that trawl the web automatically and grab whatever images they find. Is running a program like that now _prima facie_ evidence that I have an intent to look at child pornography? Finally, of course, there is the problem of spyware: A compromised machine can do anything. Right now, they mainly send spam. In the future, with this policy in place, they could become a positive danger to life and property. The evidence is a joke. Any competent computer expert not actually committing perjury would be honor-bound to poke holes in it until it was like unto flimsy swiss cheese. The invasions and the accusations and the lives destroyed are worse than a joke. The mere accusation of pedophilia is equivalent to a conviction in the public eye, and every honest person knows it. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2008, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/49 "2008-03-21T21:24:42Z")
[QUOTE=Derleth] [The evidence is a joke. Any competent computer expert not actually committing perjury would be honor-bound to poke holes in it until it was like unto flimsy swiss cheese. The invasions and the accusations and the lives destroyed are worse than a joke. The mere accusation of pedophilia is equivalent to a conviction in the public eye, and every honest person knows it. [/QUOTE] absolutely. THere was a local case a couple of years ago, a special ed teacher was accused of attempted child molestation. Prosecutor held a frigging news conference, named names, showed picture, school, of course, immediately suspended the man. Problem was, the ‘evidence’ was a fucking joke. It consisted of emails sent to the child. Prosecutors and police didn’t even check the trail to see where the fucking emails were sent from. They just looked at the goddam **name** on the email. It was a bogus free account, set up by and sent by a friend of the accusor. A few days after the news conference, the same set of folks had to hold another one saying “oopsie”. The accused? Died of stress related heart attack a short time later. Keep in mind that the ‘criminal geniuses’ who came up with this scheme and managed to get by the prosecutors and cops were underaged special ed kids. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2008, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/50 "2008-03-22T02:50:06Z")
[QUOTE=Derleth] **Bricker** , you know law but I know technology. The FBI is playing with things it obviously does not understand. _ **There is no authentication in any of the protocols.** _ No layer, from Ethernet up to HTTP, makes any serious attempt to verify who you are. Yes, some of them can be encrypted. That not only doesn’t provide authentication, it is also beyond the capacity of the average non-technical user. [/quote] Again, though, the issue is probable cause. Nothing more. Your objection seems to be that the execution of a search warrant and the seizure of computer equipment, with no other action taken, is the equivalent of a criminal charge and conviction, or is at least so onerous that more than simple probable cause should be required to undertake it. I don’t agree with that analysis. Nor do the courts that have considered the issue. Now, you may gnash your teeth at this truth, but that’s the bottom line. That’s the state of the law in this country right now. ---
**Author:** ![atomicbadgerrace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e7dd6/32.png) [@atomicbadgerrace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/atomicbadgerrace)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2008, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/51 "2008-03-22T03:10:41Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] Again, though, the issue is probable cause. Nothing more. Your objection seems to be that the execution of a search warrant and the seizure of computer equipment, with no other action taken, is the equivalent of a criminal charge and conviction, or is at least so onerous that more than simple probable cause should be required to undertake it. I don’t agree with that analysis. Nor do the courts that have considered the issue. Now, you may gnash your teeth at this truth, but that’s the bottom line. That’s the state of the law in this country right now. [/QUOTE] I’m sure the first person to get screwed by this – Joe User who just clicks on a random link and gets a search warrant served against him – will not agree that this is enough probable cause to seize his equipment. Many will follow, I imagine. Just because it _is_ does not mean it _should be_. I don’t think anyone’s arguing the legality of the situation in the thread; we’re rallying against the reasoning behind making it legal. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2008, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/52 "2008-03-22T03:19:23Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] Again, though, the issue is probable cause. Nothing more. Your objection seems to be that the execution of a search warrant and the seizure of computer equipment, with no other action taken, is the equivalent of a criminal charge and conviction, or is at least so onerous that more than simple probable cause should be required to undertake it. I don’t agree with that analysis. Nor do the courts that have considered the issue. Now, you may gnash your teeth at this truth, but that’s the bottom line. That’s the state of the law in this country right now. [/QUOTE] What’s probable cause exactly? I think people are saying this is “probable cause” only in the sense that teenagers hanging out in a mall constitute “probable cause” that they’re stealing something. -FrL- ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2008, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/53 "2008-03-22T03:47:28Z")
I guess we rather expected you to gnash your teeth as well, given the evidence above. That is, that in this particular regard the law is an ass. If the law, in all its majestic wonder, should declare that a kangaroo is a lizard, it still isn’t. Perhaps as a legal technicality, “probable cause” is a valid category for this sort of flimsy inference, but as reasonable people we are not bound to accept it simply because a berobed maroon sez so. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2008, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/54 "2008-03-22T14:59:40Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] I guess we rather expected you to gnash your teeth as well, given the evidence above. [/QUOTE] When was the last time that happened? **Bricker** , for all of his personal likeability\*, has never posted about the law using his own personal opinion of the morality/practicality of said law. If he’s posting about the law, he’s posting as Attorney Richard X, not poster **Bricker**. Thus has been the state of things since time immemorial. \*and I do like him, because he is a reasonable and personable individual when he’s posting as **Bricker** the man, rather than Attorney Richard X. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2008, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/55 "2008-03-22T15:03:15Z")
What about the actual policy issue? Why is the government setting up kiddie porn sites in order to entrap people? Is this really serving the public? I seem to recall that prior to the Internet age, I read an article stating that the federal government was, practically speaking, the sole significant publisher of kiddie porn, all done in the name of stamping it out. I am curious about Bricker’s thoughts on the policy question here. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2008, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/56 "2008-03-22T15:39:09Z")
[QUOTE=jayjay] posting as Attorney Richard X… [/QUOTE] The long-lost brother of Speed Lawyer? ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2008, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/57 "2008-03-22T15:46:33Z")
[QUOTE=wring] absolutely. THere was a local case a couple of years ago, a special ed teacher was accused of attempted child molestation. Prosecutor held a frigging news conference, named names, showed picture, school, of course, immediately suspended the man. Problem was, the ‘evidence’ was a fucking joke. It consisted of emails sent to the child. Prosecutors and police didn’t even check the trail to see where the fucking emails were sent from. They just looked at the goddam **name** on the email. It was a bogus free account, set up by and sent by a friend of the accusor. A few days after the news conference, the same set of folks had to hold another one saying “oopsie”. The accused? Died of stress related heart attack a short time later. Keep in mind that the ‘criminal geniuses’ who came up with this scheme and managed to get by the prosecutors and cops were underaged special ed kids. [/QUOTE] Frankly, we need a few heads of these Nifong-types publicly displayed on spikes, as an encouragement to the others to behave. (I mean that figuratively, but literally would be fine, too. [Practices the Vir Finger Wave].) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2008, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/58 "2008-03-22T15:47:07Z")
[QUOTE=acsenray] What about the actual policy issue? Why is the government setting up kiddie porn sites in order to entrap people? Is this really serving the public? I seem to recall that prior to the Internet age, I read an article stating that the federal government was, practically speaking, the sole significant publisher of kiddie porn, all done in the name of stamping it out. I am curious about Bricker’s thoughts on the policy question here. [/QUOTE] I’d certainly like to see a more sympathetic defendant than a guy who, when the FBI knocks on his door, spends 27 minutes frantically smashing hard drives and thumb drives. But yeah, I’m not persuaded that this is the most efficient approach. I wouldn’t mind the initial technique only to develop a lead, but it seems to my eye that we’d be better served with a more drawn-out investigation… not because we flout constitutional rights otherwise, but because a stronger case, getting more people, could be developed over time. Seriously, though: we’re talking about people who create a paying market for four-year-olds to be sexually penetrated and the act memorialized for all time by movie and photography. The FBI is not making a poor choice by targeting this kind of crime. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2008, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/59 "2008-03-22T16:11:01Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] Your objection seems to be that the execution of a search warrant and the seizure of computer equipment, with no other action taken, is the equivalent of a criminal charge and conviction, or is at least so onerous that more than simple probable cause should be required to undertake it. [/quote] In the case of pedophilia there _must_ be a higher standard. Lives are ruined by the mere mention of pedophilia. It isn’t a law: It’s a cultural category. > [@](#): > > Now, you may gnash your teeth at this truth Which forum is this in, again? > [@](#): > > but that’s the bottom line. That’s the state of the law in this country right now. But that isn’t the whole story. There is another aspect you are ignoring entirely that is pervading all law in this country, to the detriment of personal liberty and respect for the rule of law: The government no longer understands the fundamentals of technology. There is no indication the FBI even realized that the evidence from this sting would be so suspect to even moderately computer-literate people. I wouldn’t suspect such blatant ignorance if other parts of the government hadn’t done things like legalize software patents and then proceed to allow companies to patent obvious techniques with plenty of prior art. Or create the DMCA, which mainly outlaws competition in the world of digital media. Or pass a bill that, if taken at face value, outlaws trolling (and, indeed, a goodly amount of all Internet social interaction). Track record matters here, and the government’s track record with regard to any telecommunications technology more advanced than television is somewhere between pitiful and willfully obtuse. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2008, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200/60 "2008-03-22T16:11:35Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] …The FBI is not making a poor choice by targeting this kind of crime. [/QUOTE] I take your point, of course, and hereby abandon my previous pro-kiddyporn stance. Clealy, those wrongly accused should be afforded a Letter of Apology, and perhaps enrollment into a witness protection program. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-fbi-is-either-apallingly-stupid-or-abominably-malicious-re-pedophile-hunts/442200.md?page=4)