3 ms·

I mean, a motion was filled, but has that actually caused any real issues? Scattershot motions get filed constantly as the process of law unfolds. My understa

I mean, a motion was filled, but has that actually caused any real issues? Scattershot motions get filed constantly as the process of law unfolds. My understanding was these sorts of tools have case law around them that they're de facto trusted barring some proof that their defects actually impacted your case. It'd be like going in and saying that someone could reprogram the red light camera to superfluously give out tickets and record incorrect data. Almost certainly true (there's no way these systems are anywhere near secure), but try that argument in front of a judge and I believe you'll find it won't get you anywhere.

bigiain 6y ago
> It'd be like going in and saying that someone could reprogram the red light camera to superfluously give out tickets and record incorrect data. Over here a guy got a speeding camera fine thrown out because the authority running the cameras couldn't prove the MD5 hash they were using was adequate to verify the evidence. I can't quickly find a detailed explanation, but here's a reference: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/08/the_md5_defense.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/08/the_md5_defen... If my memory serves, the actual argument was that the MD5 hash was only covering the photograph, and that the speed/date/time stamps weren't included in the hashed data and therefore _could_ have been tampered with.