Re: [Full-disclosure] VPN providers and any providers in general...

[xD 0x41 <secn3t@xxxxxxxxx>]

I still think press drives many and more takedowns, and bends the arms of
others to.. for sure.
I know of a case here of petty crime, but is relevant ok, the guy had many
many, and big charges of murder,manslaughter, in other states within
australia, but was asked for his name, in 'vic' , wich (about 10yrs ago -
pre babybrother to usa) , draconian like laws enabled police to yes, put ppl
in jail for this.
So, he took the temporary jail, and monthly, would b brought b4 the judge,
and asked again eveytime for the name/address so his infos could be checked.
each time he would return... waiting for laws to change.
evtually, they just had no room, and threw him out with a slap ion wrist
fine... then later, they could not do crap about his murder etc, and he is
still free t this day, simply by doing alittle bit of that time, and, not
taking the *definate 15+* :P
Smart, and only would happen NON usa, but yes, USA and USA press has TOO
much power in court, altho online, I think the press if it gets involed* it
is always seen as big, because since when is ITsec involved?only wen you
hear of mass fraud...etc....so, any case would become classed as "oh must be
fraud or sumthin BIG for them to get arrested..."... is indeed fact... but,
it does take sometimes the press, or others, to simply expose it.
many cases are, self explanatory but, some cases are really interesting...
although, laws change somuch in usa, it is scarier than the other scary bits
;p
cheers,
xd


On 5 October 2011 13:52, adam <adam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> >>Its frightening how much power judges have, and how poorly they
> are overseen.
>
> Definitely agree there. Some of the civil cases are disgustingly bad, due
> to there being no media attention and no real oversight. The civil case
> mentioned above is a good example, and all of the excessive child support
> orders even further that.
>
> On topic: I haven't read every single reply here, but from what I've seen:
> no one has mentioned the VPN provider being held personally responsible.
> Being that the attacks originated from machines they own, if they failed to
> turn over user information, could it really be that difficult to pin the
> attacks on them and convince a judge that they were responsible?
>
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:37 PM, Jeffrey Walton <noloader@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 10:32 PM, adam <adam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>>
>> http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00754.htm
>> > Did you actually read the link you pasted?
>> > [...] and "criminal penalties may not be imposed on someone who has not
>> been
>> > afforded the protections that the Constitution requires of such criminal
>> > proceedings [...] protections include the right [..]
>> > Then take a look at the actual rights being referenced. Most of which
>> would
>> > be violated as a result.
>> > In response to 0x41 "This is ONCE you are actually in front, of the
>> > judge...remember, it may take some breaking of civil liberty, for this
>> to
>> > happen... "
>> > No, you're absolutely right. That's the point here. Contempt is attached
>> to
>> > the previous court order, there wouldn't be a new judge/new case for the
>> > contempt charge alone. All of it is circumstantial anyway, especially
>> due to
>> > how much power judges actually have (in both criminal AND civil
>> > proceedings).
>> Its frightening how much power judges have, and how poorly they are
>> overseen. Confer: Judge James Ware, US 9th Circuit Court (this is not
>> a local judge in a hillbilly town).
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
>

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/