5 ms·

I am a foremost Internet expert on this sort of thing..........As an expert in such topics as sniffing passwords.........As an expert, I know the Tarbell declar

by snowy 12y ago

I am a foremost Internet expert on this sort of thing..........As an expert in such topics as sniffing passwords.........As an expert, I know the Tarbell declaration is gibberish. As an expert reading the configuration and logs........ HA!

Luc 12y ago
It is somewhat comical, but he's not lying. At least he's not hiding the fact that he's arguing from authority (his own).
- jessaustin 12y ago
  Arguments from authority might be a bad thing on internet fora where everyone is assumed to have infinite time (and ability) to dig into details. In society as a whole, and especially in the courts, however, these arguments are a useful short-cut.
- chc 12y ago
  There is nothing inherently wrong with making judgments based on one's expertise. That's pretty much what expertise is good for.
snowy 12y ago
I was quoting from the original article http://blog.erratasec.com/2014/10/reading-silk-road-configuration.html#.VC5yZR_0-kB http://blog.erratasec.com/2014/10/reading-silk-road-configur... Which has since been changed to http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/10/silk-road-lawyers-poke-holes-in-fbis-story/ http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/10/silk-road-lawyers-poke-ho...
dthunt 12y ago
It may help to rewrite those in your head to, "as an experienced systems administrator who knows how these particular config files work" or perhaps "how config files work in general". These are all questions of basic fact and they are all easily testable. What do courts do when this situation comes up? Do they play warring experts, when (at least) one side definitely wants to perform a test, because they are confident that their interpretation is correct? (ed: 'questions of basic fact' like, whether a server with this configuration is hittable from non-allowed IPs)
- bitJericho 12y ago
  That's the judge's job to figure out what the truth is. If needed I've heard a court can hire their own impartial expert.

by snowy 12y ago

Luc 12y ago

It is somewhat comical, but he's not lying. At least he's not hiding the fact that he's arguing from authority (his own).

jessaustin 12y ago
Arguments from authority might be a bad thing on internet fora where everyone is assumed to have infinite time (and ability) to dig into details. In society as a whole, and especially in the courts, however, these arguments are a useful short-cut.
chc 12y ago
There is nothing inherently wrong with making judgments based on one's expertise. That's pretty much what expertise is good for.

snowy 12y ago

I was quoting from the original article http://blog.erratasec.com/2014/10/reading-silk-road-configuration.html#.VC5yZR_0-kB http://blog.erratasec.com/2014/10/reading-silk-road-configur... Which has since been changed to http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/10/silk-road-lawyers-poke-holes-in-fbis-story/ http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/10/silk-road-lawyers-poke-ho...

dthunt 12y ago

It may help to rewrite those in your head to, "as an experienced systems administrator who knows how these particular config files work" or perhaps "how config files work in general". These are all questions of basic fact and they are all easily testable. What do courts do when this situation comes up? Do they play warring experts, when (at least) one side definitely wants to perform a test, because they are confident that their interpretation is correct? (ed: 'questions of basic fact' like, whether a server with this configuration is hittable from non-allowed IPs)

bitJericho 12y ago
That's the judge's job to figure out what the truth is. If needed I've heard a court can hire their own impartial expert.