4 ms·

Remember she had a housemate who had it in for her. And MAC addresses can be spoofed. And when attempts were made to contact that person, the person refused to

by natch 8y ago

Remember she had a housemate who had it in for her. And MAC addresses can be spoofed. And when attempts were made to contact that person, the person refused to respond. The housemate's scheme didn't have to be elaborate in order for the spoofed MAC address to provide a smoking gun. It's dead simple. Beyond that, Tufts' theories are elaborate, or maybe a better word is torturous, but that's on them.

mindslight 8y ago
Focusing on cloning a MAC is a red herring, which we've unfortunately been pushed into from having to continually rebut this persistent nonsensical idea that it's some kind of fixed identifier. The more likely scenario is a straightforward remote-access trojan installed by a housemate. Every other detail then falls out socially. Ultimately, prosecution of computer tampering continues to reek of "burn the witch!". With emotionally charged terms simultaneously used to focus blame by ascribing superpowers to the defendant, while deflecting any competing theories as too complex for anyone but the witch.
- chatmasta 8y ago
  School networks tend to emphasize MAC addresses as an identifier, simply as a historical consequence of when those networks developed. A MAC address used to be more meaningful than it is now. For example, at my boarding school around 2008, the internet shut off at 11pm, unless you set your MAC address to the same as a library computer... Point is, I can easily imagine a grumpy and misinformed IT person placing an unrealistic amount of confidence in a piece of evidence drawn from a MAC address.
- natch 8y ago
  Yep that's also a very likely scenario, I agree.
- Spooky23 8y ago
  It works that way defendants too. I was on a jury for a case where a guy plead manslaughter down to reckless driving because IT supporting various police agencies was inept or working with ancient junk and a expert witness was unable to explain how NTP works. The defense attorney was able to dazzle and jive his way to dismissing the evidence. This happens because the issues are complex and the practice of IT is so poor.
  - LeftTurnSignal 8y ago
    /might be related I've seen something similar in regards to a normal DUI case. The defense lawyer talking about 1970's RADAR tech in airplanes, NTFS filesystems, Windows Server, "md5 hashing protocols" and other items "related" to the case. The judge was all sorts of confused and "phoned a trustworthy friend who worked in a fortune 500 company" for clarity. That guy got out of a DUI after 5 x 2-3 hour sessions in court. 10+ hours of court to get out of a couple hundred dollar ticket, if that. I really wonder what the lawyer fees were though. No way was he doing that for free or cheap. It was his first offense and this state is very lenient on DUIs. Showed me exactly why I never want to be in court, on either side. /leaving a lot of details out, but man, was it depressing to watch.
    - darkpuma 8y ago
      DUIs can be a lot more serious than just a few hundred dollar fine. They can result in the loss of your license (and consequently your ability to work), possibly several months in jail, and bar you for life from some countries (Canada won't let you visit if you've gotten a DUI.) Spending many thousands of dollars on lawyer fees to get yourself out of a DUI can make a lot of sense unless you're in a jurisdiction that doesn't take DUI seriously. Of course it makes a lot more sense to only drive when bone dry sober.
      - LeftTurnSignal 8y ago
        Trust me, I know they can be serious, but >> jurisdiction that doesn't take DUI seriously That describes where this was at perfectly. Which is why I had put >> It was his first offense and this state is very lenient on DUIs. I probably should have used a different word than lenient, but it is what it is.
        jessaustin 8y ago
        I would propose "rational". The level of animosity and punishment directed at checkpoint victims in most of USA is really quite amazing, and totally out of proportion to any reasonable understanding of the risks of automobile travel.

by natch 8y ago

mindslight 8y ago

Focusing on cloning a MAC is a red herring, which we've unfortunately been pushed into from having to continually rebut this persistent nonsensical idea that it's some kind of fixed identifier. The more likely scenario is a straightforward remote-access trojan installed by a housemate. Every other detail then falls out socially. Ultimately, prosecution of computer tampering continues to reek of "burn the witch!". With emotionally charged terms simultaneously used to focus blame by ascribing superpowers to the defendant, while deflecting any competing theories as too complex for anyone but the witch.

chatmasta 8y ago
School networks tend to emphasize MAC addresses as an identifier, simply as a historical consequence of when those networks developed. A MAC address used to be more meaningful than it is now. For example, at my boarding school around 2008, the internet shut off at 11pm, unless you set your MAC address to the same as a library computer... Point is, I can easily imagine a grumpy and misinformed IT person placing an unrealistic amount of confidence in a piece of evidence drawn from a MAC address.
natch 8y ago
Yep that's also a very likely scenario, I agree.
Spooky23 8y ago
It works that way defendants too. I was on a jury for a case where a guy plead manslaughter down to reckless driving because IT supporting various police agencies was inept or working with ancient junk and a expert witness was unable to explain how NTP works. The defense attorney was able to dazzle and jive his way to dismissing the evidence. This happens because the issues are complex and the practice of IT is so poor.
- LeftTurnSignal 8y ago
  /might be related I've seen something similar in regards to a normal DUI case. The defense lawyer talking about 1970's RADAR tech in airplanes, NTFS filesystems, Windows Server, "md5 hashing protocols" and other items "related" to the case. The judge was all sorts of confused and "phoned a trustworthy friend who worked in a fortune 500 company" for clarity. That guy got out of a DUI after 5 x 2-3 hour sessions in court. 10+ hours of court to get out of a couple hundred dollar ticket, if that. I really wonder what the lawyer fees were though. No way was he doing that for free or cheap. It was his first offense and this state is very lenient on DUIs. Showed me exactly why I never want to be in court, on either side. /leaving a lot of details out, but man, was it depressing to watch.
  - darkpuma 8y ago
    DUIs can be a lot more serious than just a few hundred dollar fine. They can result in the loss of your license (and consequently your ability to work), possibly several months in jail, and bar you for life from some countries (Canada won't let you visit if you've gotten a DUI.) Spending many thousands of dollars on lawyer fees to get yourself out of a DUI can make a lot of sense unless you're in a jurisdiction that doesn't take DUI seriously. Of course it makes a lot more sense to only drive when bone dry sober.
    - LeftTurnSignal 8y ago
      Trust me, I know they can be serious, but >> jurisdiction that doesn't take DUI seriously That describes where this was at perfectly. Which is why I had put >> It was his first offense and this state is very lenient on DUIs. I probably should have used a different word than lenient, but it is what it is.
      - jessaustin 8y ago
        I would propose "rational". The level of animosity and punishment directed at checkpoint victims in most of USA is really quite amazing, and totally out of proportion to any reasonable understanding of the risks of automobile travel.