5 ms·

Should set some interesting precedent. If this isn't child pornography, spying, unlawful wiretapping, etc... then I don't know what is.

by tibbon 17y ago

cgranade 17y ago
Given the role that schools have played in destroying the lives of some children by getting authorities involved in "sexting" cases, it would be especially ironic if this spying program produced child pornography charges. After all, in many cases, intent isn't required-- people have been arrested for having malware download child porn without the user's authorization or knowledge. Given that precedent, doing something like this and accidentally gathering child porn by taking an irresponsible and already likely illegal action would seem to be enough for the courts. Not being a lawyer, I don't know if this intuition is correct, but it would be an interesting precedent, no doubt.
- ErrantX 17y ago
  > reople have been arrested for having malware download child porn without the user's authorization or knowledge Do you have a citation for that, out of interest. It's considered something of a myth within LE and I wasn't aware a case like that actually existed.
  - cgranade 17y ago
    Sadly, I don't have the citation off the top of my head. For all I know, I could've fallen for an urban legend. If I have, sorry for being gullible!
    - ErrantX 17y ago
      It's cool - I do believe you. [You'll always get suspicion over that story because it is the #1 most common defence (and ironically easy to disprove)] I'd always be interested to see if it actually happened though - it would be useful research.
      - cx01 17y ago
        How is it easy to disprove? The trojan could delete itself after downloading CP. Should be impossible to reconstruct what happened exactly.
        ErrantX 17y ago
        Of course there is an upper limit to how provable it is. But that is fairly elaborate malware your describing (because if that is all it did it should be fairly apparent - it also has to fake fairly extensive use as well). Mostly it is very easy to see the CP activity (dont forget were not just talking about images on the HDD here but actual activity indicative of behavior). If it were downloaded all together, with no references in, say, web history etc, no thumbnails and nothing in the cache files (which are FULL of rich information) then it would ring alarm bells :) Eventually even the most elaborate malware will make a mistake with activity that is not "normal" - and the investigation is intensive enough to pick this up.
        cx01 17y ago
        I don't think it would be hard. Just create a Windows application that hosts an IE ActiveX control and hides its main window. Or even better: When the user's screen saver is running, start a full-blown IE window and control it through Window messages. The traces would be identical to the case in which the user used IE himself.
  - aplusbi 17y ago
    Here is one such case: http://www.scmagazineus.com/malware-to-blame-for-porn-on-state-workers-laptop/article/111407/ http://www.scmagazineus.com/malware-to-blame-for-porn-on-sta... I also recall a case of a teacher whose school computer had malware that ended up displaying porn in the classroom who was arrested and faced up to 40 years in jail. I'm pretty sure she was acquitted.
    - ErrantX 17y ago
      Interesting. Do you know how/if I can get hold of the court documents relating to that?
    - protomyth 17y ago
      If I remember right, she was forced to give up her teacher's license.
      - hga 17y ago
        Search on teacher virus porn, e.g. http://www.daniweb.com/news/story219946.html http://www.daniweb.com/news/story219946.html After the initial conviction was set aside, after 4 delays in sentencing, "[...] facing health problems, Amero pleaded guilty to one count of misdemeanor disorderly conduct, paying a $100 fine and losing her teaching license, just to settle the case."
olliesaunders 17y ago
Since when did surveillance == pornography? Is CCTV pornography? This story isn't even about pornography. Why are we talking about pornography?!
- andrewcooke 17y ago
  because child porn laws - or at least the perception of them - have become so disconnected from basic ideas like victim and intention that they appear completely arbitrary, associated with little more than unauthorised pictures of minors.
- electromagnetic 17y ago
  I believe it's because you basically handed a remotely activated camera to a teenager in the implicit knowledge that said remotely activated camera will be taken into the teenagers room where they're going to at some point be naked. Placing a camera in someone's room is akin to placing it in a bathroom, because at some point someone's getting naked and how a group of adults didn't comprehend this speaks worlds about the quality of education provided by the school in question. There's also the very concerning matter that 50% of the students are likely male, and ~90% of males access porn through the internet. This means that 45% of students likely used this computer to look at porn, which likely means at some point 45% of the students had their penis' out in front of the laptop in question, which has a remotely activated camera on it. This isn't even discussing the 1/3 of women who access porn via the internet. This isn't even discussing the fact that a percentage of these students likely used the cameras for video-sex with their partners (personal experience on that one). I'm sorry this is either gross ignorance that should be as severely punished as possible or it's exactly as bad as this thread of comments has taken it, and it should be as severely punished as possible. Regardless the potential was there to use the system for child pornography, and if there are no records that any compromising pictures were taken, then the school and its board members got exceptionally lucky.
- Daniel_Newby 17y ago
  "Since when did surveillance == pornography?" Since the camera was issued to accompany the student throughout their daily life: bedroom, changing the diaper of a toddler they are babysitting, bathroom, etc.

Should set some interesting precedent. If this isn't child pornography, spying, unlawful wiretapping, etc... then I don't know what is.

by tibbon 17y ago

Should set some interesting precedent. If this isn't child pornography, spying, unlawful wiretapping, etc... then I don't know what is.

cgranade 17y ago

Given the role that schools have played in destroying the lives of some children by getting authorities involved in "sexting" cases, it would be especially ironic if this spying program produced child pornography charges. After all, in many cases, intent isn't required-- people have been arrested for having malware download child porn without the user's authorization or knowledge. Given that precedent, doing something like this and accidentally gathering child porn by taking an irresponsible and already likely illegal action would seem to be enough for the courts. Not being a lawyer, I don't know if this intuition is correct, but it would be an interesting precedent, no doubt.

ErrantX 17y ago
> reople have been arrested for having malware download child porn without the user's authorization or knowledge Do you have a citation for that, out of interest. It's considered something of a myth within LE and I wasn't aware a case like that actually existed.
- cgranade 17y ago
  Sadly, I don't have the citation off the top of my head. For all I know, I could've fallen for an urban legend. If I have, sorry for being gullible!
  - ErrantX 17y ago
    It's cool - I do believe you. [You'll always get suspicion over that story because it is the #1 most common defence (and ironically easy to disprove)] I'd always be interested to see if it actually happened though - it would be useful research.
    - cx01 17y ago
      How is it easy to disprove? The trojan could delete itself after downloading CP. Should be impossible to reconstruct what happened exactly.
      - ErrantX 17y ago
        Of course there is an upper limit to how provable it is. But that is fairly elaborate malware your describing (because if that is all it did it should be fairly apparent - it also has to fake fairly extensive use as well). Mostly it is very easy to see the CP activity (dont forget were not just talking about images on the HDD here but actual activity indicative of behavior). If it were downloaded all together, with no references in, say, web history etc, no thumbnails and nothing in the cache files (which are FULL of rich information) then it would ring alarm bells :) Eventually even the most elaborate malware will make a mistake with activity that is not "normal" - and the investigation is intensive enough to pick this up.
        cx01 17y ago
        I don't think it would be hard. Just create a Windows application that hosts an IE ActiveX control and hides its main window. Or even better: When the user's screen saver is running, start a full-blown IE window and control it through Window messages. The traces would be identical to the case in which the user used IE himself.
- aplusbi 17y ago
  Here is one such case: http://www.scmagazineus.com/malware-to-blame-for-porn-on-state-workers-laptop/article/111407/ http://www.scmagazineus.com/malware-to-blame-for-porn-on-sta... I also recall a case of a teacher whose school computer had malware that ended up displaying porn in the classroom who was arrested and faced up to 40 years in jail. I'm pretty sure she was acquitted.
  - ErrantX 17y ago
    Interesting. Do you know how/if I can get hold of the court documents relating to that?
  - protomyth 17y ago
    If I remember right, she was forced to give up her teacher's license.
    - hga 17y ago
      Search on teacher virus porn, e.g. http://www.daniweb.com/news/story219946.html http://www.daniweb.com/news/story219946.html After the initial conviction was set aside, after 4 delays in sentencing, "[...] facing health problems, Amero pleaded guilty to one count of misdemeanor disorderly conduct, paying a $100 fine and losing her teaching license, just to settle the case."

olliesaunders 17y ago

Since when did surveillance == pornography? Is CCTV pornography? This story isn't even about pornography. Why are we talking about pornography?!

andrewcooke 17y ago
because child porn laws - or at least the perception of them - have become so disconnected from basic ideas like victim and intention that they appear completely arbitrary, associated with little more than unauthorised pictures of minors.
electromagnetic 17y ago
I believe it's because you basically handed a remotely activated camera to a teenager in the implicit knowledge that said remotely activated camera will be taken into the teenagers room where they're going to at some point be naked. Placing a camera in someone's room is akin to placing it in a bathroom, because at some point someone's getting naked and how a group of adults didn't comprehend this speaks worlds about the quality of education provided by the school in question. There's also the very concerning matter that 50% of the students are likely male, and ~90% of males access porn through the internet. This means that 45% of students likely used this computer to look at porn, which likely means at some point 45% of the students had their penis' out in front of the laptop in question, which has a remotely activated camera on it. This isn't even discussing the 1/3 of women who access porn via the internet. This isn't even discussing the fact that a percentage of these students likely used the cameras for video-sex with their partners (personal experience on that one). I'm sorry this is either gross ignorance that should be as severely punished as possible or it's exactly as bad as this thread of comments has taken it, and it should be as severely punished as possible. Regardless the potential was there to use the system for child pornography, and if there are no records that any compromising pictures were taken, then the school and its board members got exceptionally lucky.
Daniel_Newby 17y ago
"Since when did surveillance == pornography?" Since the camera was issued to accompany the student throughout their daily life: bedroom, changing the diaper of a toddler they are babysitting, bathroom, etc.