Autistic (Asperger) Student had 900 child porn collection

Page 2 of 13 [ 198 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next

Fogman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,986
Location: Frå Nord Dakota til Vermont

14 Feb 2008, 2:48 am

Granted yes, I have incredibly poor judgement, I have no social life at all, and I can be rash and impulsive about my interests, however I know full well that if I access child porn, chances are very high that I will go to jail for a long time, and have to register as a sex offender.

A few years ago, there was an article in Wired Magazine about a police officer in Alabama who allegedly had a morbid sense of curiousity about the subject, and accessed the stuff from his home computer. His computer broke, he took it in for repairs, and his browser cache was discovered by the technician, and was then turned in to the police. The cop that downloaded it was placed on unpaid suspension, and was ultimately sentanced to about 5 years in jail, and has to register as a sex offender.

Aspergers Syndrome or not, Mr. Bristow should be in jail for collecting this stuff. Child porn is exploitive, and every piece of it is a record of a crime, recorded by criminals, and accessed by people who will quite likely resort to the same behavior as depicted in the child porn that they download.

Sadly OTOH, I think that this situation may very used well be against people with Aspergers in general.


_________________
When There's No There to get to, I'm so There!


Soap
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 7

15 Feb 2008, 10:21 am

Quote:
I know full well that if I access child porn, chances are very high that I will go to jail for a long time, and have to register as a sex offender.
I get the impression that this guy was the only one caught red-handed, out of who knows how many other people who went to that site. I suspect he was probably just so naive that he didnt bother to consider how illegal it was. I think that in general, people who gets busted for possession of child porn are basically just the ones who make really stupid mistakes.



Norah_W
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Female
Posts: 233
Location: Seattle, WA

15 Feb 2008, 11:56 am

jrknothead wrote:
Quatermass wrote:
I agree. AS should not be an excuse for collecting child porn.


Same here... if enough people do this, AS will become synonymous with pedophilia in the public eye... ditto for murderers who hide behind their dx's in order to get a lighter sentence...


I agree too.



ebec11
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,288
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

15 Feb 2008, 9:13 pm

alex wrote:
"AN AUTISTIC student who amassed more than 900 child porn pictures has been spared jail because his condition meant he couldn't bear to throw anything away.

Jonathan Bristow, 21, of Church Lane, Bromley Common admitted eight counts of making indecent images of children and three of possessing indecent images of children.

Mr Bristow's Asperger's Syndrome means he acts on impulse and becomes obsessive about collecting things.

The barman, whose social life revolves around a medieval battle re-enactment society, had downloaded 922 indecent images."

http://tinyurl.com/2ryl8x

From the Bromley Times

Quote:
"The court was read part of a transcript of Bristow's police interview in which his father told officers his son regretted what he had done.

It read: "Two characteristics in common with people of that condition are that he is extremely impulsive and not likely to think ahead of what the possible ramifications might be. In retrospect he can see he has done something wrong.

"Jonathan, once he starts down any particular course, tends to very quickly become obsessed with that."

Judge Deborah Taylor jailed Bristow for four months but suspended the sentence for two years. She told him: 'This isn't a victimless crime. These children are often trafficked or forced into the making of these images and have to be protected from sexual exploitation."

Right now I feel like screaming a bunch of swear words because this is SICK and I don't like that he got off because of AS! That means NOTHING!! !! !! !! !!



ghostgurl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,328
Location: Orange County, CA

15 Feb 2008, 9:23 pm

It's in news articles like this I wish they wouldn't mention AS as if that has something to do with the incident.


_________________
Currently Reading: Survival by Juliet E. Czerneda
http://dazed-girl.livejournal.com/
Vote Kalister 2008


Griff
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,312

15 Feb 2008, 9:36 pm

Anubis wrote:
Hmm. He is a paedophile...
No. There is a difference between a pedophile and a person who collects child porn. A pedophile actually wants to have sexual relations with children. The other is just a jackass. Believe me, I've known this type of creep.



GoatOnFire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,986
Location: Den of the ecdysiasts

16 Feb 2008, 2:34 am

alex wrote:
pretty sure the whole porn thing doesn't have very many people wearing clothes...


I'm not exactly up on British lingo but ...

"had downloaded 922 indecent images.

Among them was a 15-second movie showing a teenage girl trussed up"

"Trussed up" doesn't sound nude to me.

If the images were all of teenagers I'd even say he didn't really do anything wrong except in the eyes of the stupid law, but it did say some of them were prepubescent so this guy was skating on thin ice.


_________________
I will befriend the friendless, help the helpless, and defeat... the feetless?


mikebw
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Sep 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,283
Location: Florida

16 Feb 2008, 3:08 am

Quote:
Jonathan Bristow, 21, of Church Lane, Bromley Common admitted eight counts of making indecent images of children and three of possessing indecent images of children.


Making.... Like taking pictures/making video of actual children? Was he just a collector, or did he actively pursue his obsession and coerce children to pose for him or do a bit of peeping tom?

Either way, he shouldn't get off easy.


_________________
The world under heaven, after a long period of division, tends to unite; after a long period of union, tends to divide. This has been so since antiquity.

http://www.imdb.com/user/ur3140151/ratings = My Movie Vote History


Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

16 Feb 2008, 8:09 am

'Making' in this context means downloading them off the web. It doesn't extend to actually producing this vile stuff.

'Trussed up' means hogtied. Probably naked too.



SeaBright
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Aug 2006
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,407
Location: Halfway back

16 Feb 2008, 9:35 am

alex wrote:
"AN AUTISTIC student who amassed more than 900 child porn pictures has been spared jail because his condition meant he couldn't bear to throw anything away.


The barman, whose social life revolves around a medieval battle re-enactment society, had downloaded 922 indecent images."



1. Does this mean I don't have to go to collections because I collect bills? :shameonyou:

2. Ferking pervs always ruining the reinactment societies. I bet there's a few kids in there would want a fair shot at his throat.

Saving him earned jail time is rediculous. Modified jail experience, yes.
Did he win to keep his collection----pukes


_________________
"I'm sorry Katya, my dear, but where we come from, your what's known as a pet; a not quite human novelty. It's why we brought you.... It's nothing to be ashamed of, my dear, but here you are and here you'll sit."


dean
Butterfly
Butterfly

User avatar

Joined: 4 Nov 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 17
Location: south-east Virginia,USA

16 Feb 2008, 2:27 pm

What? I dont follow your meaning,.....



gwenevyn
l'esprit de l'escalier
l'esprit de l'escalier

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,443

16 Feb 2008, 4:37 pm

Norah_W wrote:
jrknothead wrote:
Quatermass wrote:
I agree. AS should not be an excuse for collecting child porn.


Same here... if enough people do this, AS will become synonymous with pedophilia in the public eye... ditto for murderers who hide behind their dx's in order to get a lighter sentence...


I agree too.


Frankly, I think the only things in the DSM that should impact a criminal's sentence are Schizophrenia and related disorders. With anything else, the person still has free will and a reasonable grasp on reality.


_________________
The machine does not isolate man from the great problems of nature but plunges him more deeply into them. -Antoine de Saint Exupéry


Silver_Meteor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,399
Location: Warwick, Rhode Island

18 Feb 2008, 1:12 am

Grimfaire wrote:
No one said he was a paedophile. They said he had a collection of child pornographic images. I could easily see myself amassing that with no sexual feelings whatsoever if I decided to collect pics with people dress in blue boots or something like that... the child porn images would appear but not because they were porn but because they met what to me at the time would be much more important, blue boots. (Note: I've never done this, just creating an example)

Paedophilia is a sexual dysfunction not an action.


Let's get real. Someone doesn't download 900 images of kiddie porn without having sexual fantasies about them. Now if there was some kind of a trojan horse or virus that secretly downloaded this material to his hard drive, I might be inclined to show more leniency.

I agree with Quartermass. When you use AS as an excuse to get away with things such as this, we aren't going to be looked at as a community that contributes towards society we going to be looked at as a bunch of freaks.


_________________
Not through revolution but by evolution are all things accomplished in permanency.


hojuruku
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 7

18 Feb 2008, 1:45 am

I'm lifting a post I made last week on another forum.

Basically there is a case that Police around the world are amassing a collection of child porn. This content is not properly secured due to the design of the software it runs on LogP2P and can be used to frame up anyone on demand. There is a list of IP addresses in a post I quote here.

In Australia there is hot debate about web censorship, and you will see that theme present. My original posts are on ww w. dads on the air dot com under the same username.

--- Taken from another thread - moved here for replies --

Remember when all those men committed suicide for accused of doing kiddy porn and the police did a press release about passive surveillance they allegedly used and the need to improve internet security and [OMFG!] filtering with new laws? That's BS.

What I believe many Police worldwide actually do [likely even our own] is distribute the kiddy porn online and use software developed based on a US doctorate thesis to then track the users who download the file. I'll do some googling and try and find that thesis again to post online.

On P2P Networks the files can have multiple names that can be searched by, as the files are uniquely identified by a cryptographic hash.

I saw an Alex Jones movie for the first time, because people name them the same as Hollywood movies. The Hollywood movie people put up Hollywood porn with the same name as popular Hollywood movie to discourage people from trying to download, if that doesn't work the'll get some token lambs to sue for trademark violations by tracking the IP address and issuing warrants. Now P2P Networks are running through TOR and the like to make your PC web usage anonymous. www.azureus.org - for such an application that bundles this feature.

So if their arrest quota is low, or they want to frame up 300 people again for kiddy porn, that's all they need to do just give the incriminating file a ubiquitous name and share it with their tracking engine running.

[edit 2008/1/6 8h after posting: update after research. I wasn't able to find the original article stating the theory of tracing people who download files, but I actually found the software many detectives use. I recalled the paper explained that the police actually have to share and commit the crime of propagating child pornography on Peer to Peer networks in order to track it.

Keep in mind innocent people, as I said before can inadvertently download inappropriate content. I wouldn't I'm an experienced network engineer that doesn't rely on a the search button in any P2P software like "limewire" etc. All it takes is one user on a Peer to Peer (P2P) network to rename the file to something less criminal, and the Police will get false postivies.

Many law enforcement agencies worldwide use a French developed application called LogP2P in which a Microsoft compatible file server on a Linux box is employed. That part is used for the storage of the illegial content. That's right, police around the world maintain a treasure trove of kiddy porn. LogP2P uses opensource P2P software clients (they didn't write their own software, just kludged existing P2P network apps). The LogP2P application then generates MD5 signatures (unique digital signature) from the actual porn, and uses that to search for locations to download it.

Click here to see a picture of the web interface for the porn honeypot police use

I believe there is law enforcement cooperation in the identification of MD5 signatures for child pornographic images which is a good thing for the purpose of identifying illegal content.
From there it can be used to block it without propagating it. But blocking systems by their nature can be used to block free speech - such as this whole website!

Click here to see a sample picture and it's MD5 signature in a LogP2P console

Weather the LogP2P application distributes the illegial content and tracks downloaders or just searches for known file signatures is the part I haven't yet worked out yet.

Remember the system actually runs P2P client software. Normal P2P clients share the content, many times even before a download is complete [and before the user identified what they are downloading], but not all software in all configurations.

So if the police want to track those who don't share illegal conten tbut download, the police need to make a honeypot and share the illegal pornography themselves.

So is it legal sharing the content too in order to catch those who view child pornography?

Maybe we could ask the police to comment on the technology used and it was passive or actively sharing the content when they did that raid in 2005? Note: Any content detected by this system at some point would have to be collected and curated by a police officer.

An article critical of this program is available here

The Crimes Act Section 91H prohibits the distribution of child pornography.

Now did NSW Police get their new toy, a "child pornography ring smashing" technology and they go out and arrest the first 300 or so people that it detected?

When the detection technology is inaccurate and gets many false postivies what lengthy steps did they go to prove beyond a reasonable doubt before they get a subpoena from a judge they is probable cause the user knowingly downloads illegal content?

How many people committed suicide or nearly did with the stigma of having their door kicked in a raid and didn't have a large illegal porn cache?

Most readers of this forum are disgusted at those sick and twisted enough to peddle that content. It's disguisting, but equally disgusting is being falsely accused of a stigmatised crime, you didn't knowingly commit. Actus Reus and Mens Rae. It's happened before and it will happen again, unless more checks and balances are put NSW Police in line.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? They may as well break the law every day themselves with some of their policies, and you take something as disguisting as domestic violence, child pornography, real [not state sponsored] terroism and make laws that can easily apply to anyone not friendly with the police. Where are the checks and balances to prevent their misuse when it's as clear as day happening? Where is the oversight? (i.e. the Ombudsman...)

I got angry at the time when I read a newspaper article in 2005 that stated that this "passive" technology is why we need further investment in Internet surveillance network.
The truth was they didn't even invest enough money to write or license their own software!

I wonder how many more people can be framed up with this historical web usage data being available to the police such a new filtering/blocking web proxy network will provide on all those not tech savvy? They wont even have to ask DOTA with a supeona to find out who every single one of us are! Do you all feel guilty? I sure as hell don't!

My point here is this:

Now we have NSW Police playing favorites who they choose to arrest on a daily basis, with a media campaign "educating" them that men are the only perpetrators in Domestic Violence, the intimidating ability to make stupid false allegations against anyone they just don't like or wont be a good boy and bends down....

Just look at the potential damage that can be done to the community. It's a world gone mad.

]

------ snip -----

I'm going to get my father to fax the newsclippings for the original newspaper article.

Can others post links to news reports about that big raid in 2005?

It would be interesting to get a debriefing about it from the Police to rest assure concerns raised about the method outlined above employed by other overseas agencies wasn't the sole method of detection used in Australia too, if so I fear the likelihood of some false positives in that bunch could be high.

-- # Post #2

In my opinion any filtering system will only net surveilance benefits on adults, but for the kids it may help, but will be less effective on home PC's than dedicated software the government has been subsdising already.

The system in the UK and China can be easily subverted by anyone knowing what they are doing. The effectiveness of such systems are a joke.

Here is a thesis for those who are interested. It shows the many ways anyone can get around such a system, in this case British Telecom's.
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rnc1/thesis.pdf

The Sydney Morning Heard has a special section online about this news issue:
http://www.smh.com.au/specials/netporn/index.html ,
In which you can read a story about a NSW Detective admitting to PIC asking for a cash payment for a tip off of a child pornography raid

Will having a nationalwide network side internet filter eventually negate the need for warrants to identify web users?

So if the Police can detect child porn through it's most frequent method (P2P) to exchange outside secretive paranoid 'sydicates' why add web proxies that so easily log everything you do online? In the corporate environment there is already software that categorises what you doing online and for how long. I know I used to have a Websense server at my old job. This will alow for "web profiling" used by detectives in searching for a criminal or a patsie. There is no silver bullet for socially responsibile internet censorship.

The TOR, FREENET and other distributed routing tools mentioned elsewhere on this forum and everywhere else just goes to show if someone wants to do something illegially online without being traced they already can without fear of reprisal, so unfortunately it's not to reduce child porn circulation by those who really want to do it.

I guess if the government make a policitical issue such as child porn or domestic violence and we the people clamor for a solution to the porblem... They in the guise of giving us what we wanted they provide something that does nothing to solve the problem but takes away our civil liberties. This is the Problem Reaction Solution paradigm all over again.

MINOR RETRACTION: At least some of the people in the big raid was due to credit card trace from a US based illegial content provider. Link is here.

Here is this issue recently in the news, source from the Sydney Morning Herald.

Code:
[b]Minister warned on porn filters - January 1, 2008[/b]

LABOR'S plan to introduce mandatory internet filters will send Australia down a censorship path similar to China's and Singapore's, but will not stop computer-savvy children looking at banned sites, according to the NSW Council for Civil Liberties.

The council's vice-president, David Bernie, said the Federal Government plan was political grandstanding. It would force users to ask internet service providers to lift a block on extremely violent and pornographic sites.

"It is a gimmick," Mr Bernie said. "It's been sold to the public as protecting children from pornography but what is dangerous about these filters is that parents will think their children can't access pornography on the internet when in fact they can.

"Anybody who's computer-savvy can work their way around these filters in about two minutes maximum," he said.

Mr Bernie said the filters would lull parents into a false sense of security and discourage them from monitoring their children's internet activities. Only adults would be restricted by the filters, he said.

"Will there be some database of people who want to access adult pornography, which is legal in most democratic countries?"

"It has serious implications for freedom of expression. When you start filtering material on political grounds - even if the material is objectionable or quite awful - we're heading in the same direction as China and Singapore."

The Telecommunications Minister, Stephen Conroy, pointed to European examples of successful restrictions to quell fears the move could slow connection speeds.

"Labor makes no apologies to those who argue that any regulation of the internet is like going down the Chinese road," Mr Conroy said yesterday. "If people equate freedom of speech with watching child pornography, then the Rudd Labor Government is going to disagree."

Britain and Scandinavia had successful internet restrictions, he said. "The internet hasn't ground to a halt in the UK, it hasn't ground to a halt in Scandinavian countries and it's not grinding the internet to a halt in Europe."

The measures would ensure only a "clean" feed of internet material was reaching schools and households and a list of banned sites would be prepared by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, he said.

In March 2006, the then communications minister, Helen Coonan, said she rejected filtering because it would slow speeds for all users without effectively protecting children. A national system could cost $45 million to set up and $33 million a year to maintain, she said.


Here is my main source for my assertions made in the above post, and of course the software developer's own website.

Code:
P2P Networks endangered by LogP2P
============================
A depressing story

by benign

Long Title: Why LogP2P (and similar to follow) will destroy eMule and other Peer-to-Peer Networks, and
possible counter measures.
Keywords: eMule, P2P, RIAA, IFPI, MPAA, WIPO (TRIPs), , LogP2P, Surveillanceware, Censorware,
LogIRC, LogProtect, APF (AntiPedoFiles), Kazaa, Gnutella, eDonkey, MLdonkey,
Home_land Sec_urity.


INTRODUCTION
````````````````````````
In 2002, a coder named Frederic Aidouni and a cop named Philippe Jarlov together started at Bordeaux (France) production of surveillanceware called LogP2P. It is based on experiences gathered earlier with another program called LogIRC, which was developped by Frederic Aidouni and Cyril Vrillaud in 2001, and which is now used by hundreds of law enforcement and security organizations in western oriented countries troughout the world, to track down people chatting and exchanging so called illegal content on IRC. Jarlov is also involved in production of APF (AntiPedoFiles) a descriptive image database used by law enforcement organizations, which can build up picture and file databases containing descriptive extracts of incriminated pictures and movies, which is essential for rapid recognition and catalogueing of such files. APF uses image recognition routines delivered by www.practeo.ch and www.ltutech.com. Jarlov also developed LogProtect (together with Luc Bellego + Michael Ballester), a censorware content filter which is now used by paranoid parents (and schools) to block certain incoming internet content and to remove outgoing keywords like names, adresses and phone numbers (based on a keyword database). None would mind about this, but the program also logs every activity of the children using their computers, and sends silent alerts to the surveillor. Quite contrary to its appealing pretext of protection, in fact it serves for perfect censorship, surveillance and control of the children while they're unsuspectingly using the internet.


What is LogP2P and how is it working?
````````````````````````````````````````````````
First, LogP2P, despite using open software (linux + python + samba+ libpcap) is NOT open, but classified (a blattant GNU public license violation). Only cop- and anti-pedo organisations are able to get it by now (but they are already in negotiations to finance development by selling it to the copyright protection organisations).
LogP2P, running under Linux, is essentially a highly specialized network sniffer and is used in combination with P2P clients (eMule, eDonkey, MLdonkey, Kazaa, Gnutella), logging the network traffic on their specific IP ports (i.e. 4662-4672 with eMule for example).
The data is logged and analyzed by LogP2P in realtime and derived results are shown in the GUI of LogP2P.
Given, an eMule client and LogP2P are running together on a computer, and a number of ed2k links are added to the download section of eMule. This will generate eMule network traffic, triggering LogP2P to log, analyze, and show numerous computed infos, which it is extracting from eMule traffic. For each file being downloaded by eMule, LogP2P will log and show, what IP numbers are sharing this file, how much of the file is already downloaded by every single IP adress, lookup/whois result of each IP number, which of the monitored files are being downloaded by the same IP number, time of downloading and lots more. Combined with lookup results, eventually all this gathered information will give an exact picture of who is/was downloading what file at what time, and also, if an already logged user is also downloading further tracked files. This enables whatever organization who owns and runs a copy of LogP2P, to setup a BigBrother-like, perfect and gapless surveillance on any subset of eMule users and/or shared files, which they are eager to control (ie. MP3 and OGG sound files by RIAA and IFPI, MPG + AVI for MPAA, loli + r@ygold + hussyfan by the cops & pedo hunters, PDF files by the International Book Publishers Association, the users Monte Christo + Huckleberry Finn + Osama Bin Ladin by CIA and Dept. for Homeland Security, Software by WIPO (TRIPs), and so on.
And worse: Interested people can also share in eMule their own "Honeypot", "Trap" and "Lure" files and track you down while you are downloading them, and afterwards "harvest" your hardware and/or the fines you've been sentenced to pay. Easy money for cops, copyright- and pedo-hunters (and of course an easy way to get rid of political opponents), am I right?
Why the pedos first? Why those pogroms against them (not only on P2P)? Simply, because they are a very easy target to hit. They are such a stigmatized minority now, they could even be killed without hard consequences. Cops are quite cowards, they usually select the weakest possible target to gather experience.


Consequences of LogP2P operation
````````````````````````````````````````````
The consequences of prolonged monitoring with LogP2P by the mentioned organizations are already visible and future prospects can be figured out easily. If the file-sharing systems (including especially eMule) do not soon take efficient counter-measures, they will gradually die out from lack of users (only very few people can afford offshore hosting). With the aim of LogP2P (and similar software to come), which is now run by several law enforcement facilities and certain private anti-pedo organisations from several countries, hundreds (or thousands ?) of P2P users, especially eMule users, have been tracked down since big logging business started. They have been arrested for months, ALL (!) their IT equipment and ALL (!) data media being confiscated, they are faceing endless and downwearing proceedings with harsh jail sentences and ruinous fines. Some of them even lost their jobs. Among them are numerous brothers (and sisters), which were contributing to our file sharing community with high amounts of money, programming skills, computing power and server time. It's worse: a growing number are uncautious youngsters, just curious and without any idea, what they are dealing with, still lacking the skills needed to hide their real IP adresses successfully. Those robberies of the police stand in blattant disparity to the cause. Their targets didn't harm anyone, they just downloaded files which anyway are present millionfold in the internet.
LogP2P has grown a high risk and starts to cause devastating damage to the entire file sharing community. RIAA, IFPI and MPAA have just begun to evaluate LogP2P, or are developing similar Surveillanceware (source: personal communication), and it is only a question of time, when they will start to run their own logging business.


Antidotes against LogP2P
```````````````````````````````
There are two crucial facts a logger must proof, to win a trial against you:
First he must make sure, you really downloaded the COMPLETE file (if you only had part of the file, you will not be punishable). Second he must get proof of your real IP-Adress. At these points we can hook in:
1) eMule for example could be modified in such a way, that there is an additional download mode selectable, 'safe download' or so. This kind of download would use an altered download scheme, which creates a double entry in the download section, splitting correspondingly the temp-file into part 1 + 2 of random size, but both of them showing the full length of the file, only that each of them says, the part which is represented by the other one, has already been downloaded (minor problem: both files with the same file name or better without?). As soon as one of the parts is complete, it switches into total silence, and if the other part completes, it switches into saying, that the data which was downloaded by the now silent part, has not been downloaded yet, and in parallel it stops generating download requests (or it sends only fake requests to clients, which do not have the corresponding data). In the end, you have downloaded the whole file, but split into two parts, one of them held in total silence, as if non existing, the other one saying to be still not complete, but not requesting anything. This leaves only the problem, how you take them
out from the downloading section and put them (puzzled together the right way) into a folder not shared.
As long as the files are located in the download folder, anyone who is tracking that file, will get the impression, you keep downloading, but still did not receive the file completely. May be there is a better
solution, and the problem can be solved in complete virtuality, by faked communication. The same scheme
might be applied to add a 'safe release' feature, too.
2) The 'safe download' scheme, described above, should be enhanced further, every eMule client should have some kind of 'borrowable transit throughput slot' acting as a proxy between a transmitting and a receiving client. This slot could be borrowed by any of the other clients wishing to download in safe mode for a certain amount of time. This will generate extra traffic, which might be limited. A file, which is downloaded in safe mode, would thus download more slowly, but secure in turn, as there is always (or at least sometimes) another, occasionally and randomly changing client in between (preferable for each of the two file parts a different one), acting as proxy. Anyone who is tracking that file, would not only log real clients, but also some phantom clients downloading that file, and more important, some false IP numbers in consequence. But only, if the phantoms behave sufficiently genuine, and are not easily distinguished from real clients (i.e. they should download realistic portions of a file; this is, why the concept might fail with small files).
It is undesirable for a prosecutor, to accuse the wrong person, as this will generate very embarassing situations, and worse, it will cause very high compensation claims, which usually are successful, if the court does not recognize any evidence for an accusation.
If the above mentioned antidotes are applied alltogether, they will turn LogP2P useless, as a logger could never be sure, whether a file is downloaded normally or in safe mode, thus showing him only incomplete downloads, or worse, setting him under high risk of tracking down false IP numbers.

One could plug together the (very secure) Freenet client with eMule somehow, to have the advantages of both of them. But most people are not really lucky with freenet, as it is generating tremendous overhead. There is always a tradeoff between security and loss of bandwidth. The antidotes mentioned above generate much less overhead, as they rely on ambiguity rather than perfect safety. From a legal standpoint of view, ambiguity does the job as well, generating a sufficient level of safety. Total security would be suitable under military conditions only, I think.

Summary
````````````
There has formed a conglomerate of officials, private people and private organisations on the extreme right, spanning several european countries, consisting in detail of software developpers, cops and very rich people with strong influence and high financial resources, which succeded in developping and operating software to track down and denounce on a massive scale P2P users downloading files via P2P clients.

List of Persons involved (until June 2004)
``````````````````````````````````````````````````
Frederic Aidouni (Frederic: both 'e' with accent egu)
Owner of the software company named @idounix
Co-developer of LogP2P, LogIRC
<adress>
Algerian descendant. Completely mad; one of his relatives, Bachir Aidouni, was drown in
the Seine at Paris by french cops during 1961, now he is serving exactly those cops, who
murdered his relative.
Relatives: 1yo daughter <name>
18yo <name>

Philippe Jarlov
Rank: Adjutant, Gendarmerie Nationale de France, Section Recherche at Bordeaux-Battesti
Co-developer of LogP2P, LogProtect, APF.
<adress>
Jewish roots; from eastern europe (may be Poland). End jews as cops, if they loose their roots?
Relatives: François Jarlov (Wife: Ulla), Artisan, Poterie du Héron, 40660 Messanges, France

Michael Ballester (Michael: 'e' with two points on it) Co-Developer of LogProtect
<adress>
Luc Bellego (Quebec, Canada) Co-Developer of LogProtect
<adress>
Cyril Vrillaud Co-Developer of LogIRC
<adress>

Pascal Seeger, Carouge/GE (former cop at Groupe de criminalite informatique de Genève) now
working as technical advisor at Action Innocence Group, webmaster of www.e-prevention.ch
<adress>
Relatives: Seeger-Neyroud Sandra (wife ?), <adress>
Seeger Gertrude Paula, <adress>

Sellier Homayra
<adress>
President of Action Innocence Group

David Royston
<adress>
Technical advisor at Action Innocence Group

Philipp Kronig, Chief Officer KOBIK/SCOCI (Switzerland)
<adress>
Eva Bollmann, Analyst at KOBIK/SCOCI
<adress>
Marc Henhauer, KOBIK/SCOCI
<adress>
(KOBIK = Koordinationsstelle zur Bekämpfung der Internetkriminalität )

List of Organizations involved (until June 2004)
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
@idounix, Rue Père Louis de Jabrun 21, 33000 Bordeaux (Dept. Gironde FR)
President: Frederic Aidouni
www.aidounix.com IP: 213.246.36.90

AIG (Action Innocence Group) Geneva (CH), Monaco (MC), Paris (FR), Bruxelles (BE)
President: Homayra Sellier
www.actioninnocence.org IP: 62.50.74.218
actioninnocence.org IP: 62.50.74.219
Mrs. Sellier is extremely rich, due to her marriage with one of the richest men in Switzerland.
Presumably, she is financing most of the activities of the organisation. Now and again, she
organizes caritative gala events for the international jet-set, with such illustre guests as the
princess of Monaco, to rise additional funds for her organization.
As the slogan 'innocence in danger' already indicates, this group promotes an extremly
paranoid and antisexual 'philosophy' or rather attitude. Since the belgian crime case Dutroux,
the group turned into complete hysteria, and in consequence they instrumentalize each minor
incidence to demand more repression and control (especially concerning the internet).
Action Innocence Group is running LogP2P on their servers, and is believed to offer
childporn honeypot-, lure-, and trap-files for download over P2P-Networks and IRC, too.
The organization serves as a half-legal tracker and denouncer for corresponding governmental
offices.

Action Innocence Suisse, 19 rue des Vollandes, 1207 Genève - Suisse
Tél: (+41) 22 735 50 02, Fax: (+41) 22 735 51 02
E-mail: [email protected]
www.actioninnocence.org IP: 62.50.74.219
IP: 62.50.74.0-255 (at least whole subnet class c)
received from psinet provider IP: 62.50.64.0 - 62.50.95.255
(former psinet, now psineteurope, owned by VIA Networks)

Subsidiaries:
Action Innocence Monaco, Europa Résidence, Place des Moulins 43,
98000 Monaco, Tél: +377 97 77 51 11
E-mail: [email protected]
financed by the monegassian royal family
Action Innocence France, Av. Victor Hugo 181, 75116 Paris - France
Tél: +33 01 44 05 05 33, E-mail: [email protected]
Action Innocence Belgique, 62 boulevard de la Cambre
1050 Bruxelles - Belgique, Tél: 02 626 20 00, Fax: 02 626 20 06
E-mail: [email protected]

e-Prevention (www.e-prevention.ch), c/o Original S.A. , Belle Combe 30, 1095 Lutry (CH)
President: Paul Seeger
www.e-prevention.ch IP: 62.50.74.219 (same as actioninnocence.org)

Royston Consulting, Avenue Bella-Vista 9,1234 Vessy/GE
President: David Royston
www.royston-consulting.com IP: 212.74.183.248

Innocence en Danger, Rue des Vollandes 19, 1207 Genève (CH)
President: Wertheimer Valerie
www.innocenceindanger.org IP: 80.247.227.71
(do'nt mix up with "La Flotille", a day-nursery for 70 children, at the same adress)

Logprotect Distribution
President: Phillipe Jarlov
www.logprotect.org IP: 213.186.33.19
www.logprotect.net IP: 217.174.203.209
www.rivageslointains.com IP: 213.186.33.3
www.practeo.ch IP: 62.220.134.98
www.ltutech.com IP: 213.41.68.100

IRCGN (Institut de recherche criminelle de la gendarmerie nationale), Europol, Rosny-sous-Bois (Cedex)
Responsible: Capitaine Eric Freyssinet
STRJD (Service technique recherche judiciaire et documentation), cellule de veille internet, Europol,
Responsible: Lieutenant-Colonel Joseph Candalot
Gendarmerie Nationale de France,
Section de Recherche Bordeaux-Battesti (Gironde),
Service de lutte contre la cybercriminalite
www.defense.gouv.fr IP: 195.46.214.111
IP: 195.46.214.0-255 (at least whole subnet class c)
IRCGN are running LogP2P on their servers.

KOBIK (Koordinationsstelle zur Bekämpfung der Internetkriminalität)
SCOCI (Service de Coordination Criminalite sur Internet)
President: Philipp Kronig
www.cybercrime.admin.ch IP: 162.23.39.65
and www.fedpol.ch IP: 162.23.39.65
IP: 162.23.39.0-255 (at least whole subnet class c)
KOBIK/SCOCI are running LogP2P on their servers.

www.kkjpd.ch IP: 195.65.77.20
etat.ge.ch IP: 195.65.37.72
www.geneve.ch IP: 160.53.186.105 160.53.186.12
proxytst3.etat-ge.ch IP: 160.53.250.102
www.polizei.adminbs.ch IP: 193.135.25.50
prow3stat1.bs.ch IP: 193.135.25.53
www.jd.bs.ch IP: 193.135.25.57
www.ji.zh.ch IP: 212.47.173.17
www.kapo.zh.ch IP: 212.47.173.17
(bei aspectra.net) IP: 212.47.170.0 - 212.47.173.255
Router: IP: 212.47.172.0-23

IMPORTANT !
Please, spread this contribution to whatever P2P- and Internet-Freedom Forum/Chatroom you know !
Traduisez cette contribution en francais et diffusez dans tous les lieux P2P, etc. vous connaissez, svp !


Post 3#

Comment to DOTA users:

This is a Indymedia comment to their thread about web censorship with the web new filter proposal by the new Labor Federal Government. Yes BOYS they can censor out this site for being "too controversial".
No wonder they want to charge me, then doing so shuts down your site. Why? Because I was lucky enough to prove that I was framed in a DV matter for material gain of an illegal sex worker etc etc... sighs...

Indymedia thread

Quote:
I've published an article in the interest of free speech.

I've kept all my IT trade-craft secret, but this new filtering proposal has forced me to give this information to the public. I am also backing up what the civil libertarians are saying.

The link above provides information on software Police are using around the world to track child porn downloads, how it provides false positives, and how it can actually shares and redistributes child porn in many cases (or the identified child porn is shared off-site then tracked by the police). Rather than just cataloging the illegal content the police keep it there on a network share, which is good and ready to frame anyone else up when the time comes.

The AFP doesn't seem concerned that other law enforcement agencies listed in my post (possibly Australia themselves) are sharing and redistributing child porn on P2P networks. When I made one call they didn't seem keen to take the link, because it was just other law enforcement people sharing the porn accessible to Australian users... I'd like to get my hands on the LogP2P software to confirm if it is just searching P2P for porn or sharing it for downloads. The latter is more effective because some P2P users (the ones most likely to commit a crime) configure their application not to redistribute/re-share the illegal content.

The post also proves the Labor minister INCORRECT that the British Telecom system can not be easily subverted when we support the Chinese people for easily subverting their own web filter. There is a link to a research paper listing all the methods to do that, and even obtain a list of banned sites / do denial of service attacks against the proxy.

Existing P2P apps such as the most popular bit torrent application (www.azerus.org) use software developed by the US military (TOR) to obfuscate traffic in such a way that downloads can't be tracked anyway.

So if such an expense doesn't even stop child porn outside those who are in "syndicates", why are allowing a proxy between us and the Internet? It changes the anonymous packet switched nature of web surfing to a circuit switched like logged (TCP tracked) network for most of the non-tech Internet savvy users. This is what the Police are familiar with. There is already software in abundance to analyse web logs and build individual "profiles" on certain activities. Users CAN BE and Most likely will be tracked by cookies found in HTTP headers picked up by the proxy on outgoing requests to sites that require identification.

For more information read the original article.

Cheers,

Luke McKee


P.S. For aspies. Finally not to big note myself, the Australian wing of the EFF - Electronic Frontiers Australia did a better attack than myself against the web filter. An enemy of my enemy is my friend ;)



gwenevyn
l'esprit de l'escalier
l'esprit de l'escalier

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,443

18 Feb 2008, 3:22 am

I've yet to hear of a case of a man being sent to prison for accidentally downloading a couple of photos involving child pornography.

Calling "pedos" a "stigmatized minority" is a bit much.


_________________
The machine does not isolate man from the great problems of nature but plunges him more deeply into them. -Antoine de Saint Exupéry


bheid
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 437

18 Feb 2008, 5:12 am

it's nice (but somewhat horrifying) to know i have a get out of jail free card, should i murder someone or something.