6 ms·
if the emails are fake, it should be easy for Facebook to demonstrate that. How? It's easy for FB to demonstrate that the emails are real, but not the opposite
by zyfo 16y ago
if the emails are fake, it should be easy for Facebook to demonstrate that.
How? It's easy for FB to demonstrate that the emails are real, but not the opposite. Even if Zuckerberg didn't Delete the emails himself, it is in the interest of FB to show no trace of emails.
Suppose FB shows no trace of emails, what does it matter? If Ceglia can show that the emails are indeed real, then that trumps FB. Or am I missing something here?
- lotusleaf1987 16y ago|Suppose FB shows no trace of emails, what does it matter? If Ceglia can show that the emails are indeed real, then that trumps FB. Or am I missing something here? If Ceglia can and does prove that the emails are real and FB is left claiming they couldn't find the emails, it's going to look to most like FB knew it had something to lose all along and that will immediately give Ceglia's claim is more validity. Learn from Nixon, the coverup is usually worse than the offense. Facebook should be as open as they can.
- pkteison 16y agoWhy? One of my big problems with society these days is that honesty often doesn't appear to pay. Upside of successful coverup: Facebook saves billions. Downside of failed coverup: Facebook loses billions. Downside of being honest: Facebook loses about the same amount of billions as if they failed at a coverup.
- mbreese 16y agoAnother downside: being convicted of fraud. Governments tend to not like it when you lie to them. People go to jail, lose legal licenses, etc... Society may not care about honesty, but the courts certainly do.
- showerst 16y agoIt may be in the interest of FB to show no trace, but it would require a fair number of people breaking a bunch of laws. As the article pointed out, they've already done discovery/forensic analysis on these drives. Tampering with that would be a MAJOR crime by everyone involved.
- ErrantX 16y agoHuh? They could just do another analysis to show email from that time. Although proving the lack of something is a lot more difficult that proving the existence of something. So it doesn't always serve much for them to say "nope, can't find them". However, I am sure they will be eager to analyse Ceglia's computers for evidence
- bantic 16y agoHonest question: How might one prove that an email is real?
- 16s 16y agoA bigger question might be, who sent it? Was it really the person you claim it is? It's easy to show the receipt of an email and where it came from (especially when you have full headers). But unless the sender bothers to GPG or S/MIME sign the email, in theory, it could have been sent by another person who had access to the account. Or, it could have been spoofed, etc.
- neuroelectronic 16y agoRTFA "Facebook almost certainly has a forensic analysis of Mark Zuckerberg's hard drives and email boxes from this period, because these drives would have been the same ones analyzed in the Winklevoss lawsuit," writes Blodget. "Perhaps the drives show different versions of the emails in question--or no emails at all."
- bantic 16y agoYes but what does that mean? One can create and "backdate" (touch -t) any file. So how does one prove that an email is real and not created and backdated today?
- wallflower 16y agoIf there is a copy of the purported Ceglia emails other than in Ceglia's imagination (e.g. in the verified forensic analysis previously done for the twins), then they truly do exist. It would be interesting if a web email provider was used. Doubtful they have any decent retention strategies after you hit delete.
- anigbrowl 16y agoOn one's own server, sure. On hotmail.com or some other 3rd party email provider, not so much.
- 16y ago