LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Latest LQ Deals
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 06-08-2021, 03:23 AM   #1
descendant_command
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,783

Rep: Reputation: 592Reputation: 592Reputation: 592Reputation: 592Reputation: 592Reputation: 592
An0m


https://www.theregister.com/2021/06/...ironside_anom/

Bahaha ... priceless!
 
Old 06-08-2021, 07:07 AM   #2
//////
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: Land of Linux :: Finland
Distribution: Arch x86_64 | OpenBSD 6.7 bridge | Virtualbox Guest windows 10 pro
Posts: 573

Rep: Reputation: 275Reputation: 275Reputation: 275
yea, thats like a medium interaction honeypot, i wonder why none has done that before.
 
Old 06-08-2021, 08:45 AM   #3
business_kid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Ireland
Distribution: Slackware, RPi OS, Mint & Android
Posts: 12,840

Rep: Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676
Maybe once the cops get AI working on decryption for themselves, they can make life bad for them.

If you google 'EncroChat arrests' you can see the success in Europe. The police broke the encryption by hacking the servers. Instead of going in gung-ho, they got every other police force involved, and a lot of good work was done.

https://omertadigital.com/blogs/news...e-king-is-dead

In Ireland, we have 'proceeds of crime' legislation. If someone with insufficient legitimate income
has stuff, it can be seized on the order of a high ranking police officer while they discuss it. The onus is on the criminal to prove it's not the proceeds of crime.
 
Old 06-09-2021, 12:11 AM   #4
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 17,235
Blog Entries: 10

Rep: Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160
I question the legality of such tactics.
 
Old 06-09-2021, 07:16 AM   #5
business_kid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Ireland
Distribution: Slackware, RPi OS, Mint & Android
Posts: 12,840

Rep: Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676
The proceeds of crime? It's dead legal.

FYI, the Irish Constitution was written by people who fought in our War of Independence, and it bends over backwards to protect folks on trial, rights, etc. We were thoroughly sick of the "If he's before the court, he must be guilty" type of justice we had been used to as a colony. Then when the leglisation was passed, the President exercised his prerogative to have it constitutionally tested in the Supreme court.

If a guy has something, has no job, and cannot honestly say where he got the money to pay for it, it is viewed as the proceeds of crime. It isn't just confiscated; he is given opportunity to explain in court where the money came from. But the onus is on him to explain. No major criminal has ever tried to explain, but have taken the loss of fancy phones, cars, weapons, yachts, houses, etc without presenting a case. We can't convict a criminal without proof. But we can prevent him enjoying his ill-gotten gains.

Irish criminals started making it big with heroin in the 1980s, diversified, and are significant international players at this stage. But this sort of thing puts a smile on your face.
 
Old 06-10-2021, 12:17 AM   #6
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 17,235
Blog Entries: 10

Rep: Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160
Quote:
Originally Posted by business_kid View Post
The proceeds of crime? It's dead legal.
The article does not make such bold statements - it only repeats what Kershaw, one of the police (?) involved, claims.

I read now that
"The app, called AN0M, was seeded into the organised crime community. The software would only run on smartphones specially modified so that they could not make calls nor send emails. These handsets were sold on the black market between criminals as secure messaging tools."

If that means that they were 100% sure that they only snooped on suspects, fine.
But I highly doubt that it is possible to be 100% sure.
I'd actually like to read more about how they did that.

Putting backdoors in software - I know, it's one of the big topics of our time. It's the idiot solution of powerful people who haven't the first clue about internet security.
Just because it was succesful this time does not make it a good blueprint, neither technical nor legal.
 
Old 06-10-2021, 06:42 AM   #7
business_kid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Ireland
Distribution: Slackware, RPi OS, Mint & Android
Posts: 12,840

Rep: Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676Reputation: 1676
Oh, you mean snooping on criminals isn't legal?

No comment, really. But I would think it only takes 1 court order from a judge who just wants to get back to his tv, or if that's refused, subcontracting a few white hats. Anyhow, it was done in the Excited States and information shared by the FBI, iirc. They have the NSA, don't they, their Thought Police?

It's also true that criminals infringe on the public's rights, when you think about it.
 
Old 06-11-2021, 12:38 AM   #8
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 17,235
Blog Entries: 10

Rep: Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160Reputation: 5160
Quote:
Originally Posted by business_kid View Post
Oh, you mean snooping on criminals isn't legal?

No comment, really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ondoho View Post
If that means that they were 100% sure that they only snooped on suspects, fine.
But I highly doubt that it is possible to be 100% sure.
I'd actually like to read more about how they did that.
business_kid: first read, then think, then write. Not the other way round.
No comment, really.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:10 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration