Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Tuesday March 07 2017, @03:39AM   Printer-friendly
from the we-could-tell-you-but-then-... dept.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/03/doj-drops-case-against-child-porn-suspect-rather-than-disclose-fbi-hack/

Rather than share the now-classified technological means that investigators used to locate a child porn suspect, federal prosecutors in Washington state have dropped all charges against a man accused of accessing Playpen, a notorious and now-shuttered website.

The case, United States v. Jay Michaud, is one of nearly 200 cases nationwide that have raised new questions about the appropriate limitations on the government's ability to hack criminal suspects. Michaud marks just the second time that prosecutors have asked that [the] case be dismissed.

"The government must now choose between disclosure of classified information and dismissal of its indictment," Annette Hayes, a federal prosecutor, wrote in a court filing on Friday. "Disclosure is not currently an option. Dismissal without prejudice leaves open the possibility that the government could bring new charges should there come a time within the statute of limitations when and the government be in a position to provide the requested discovery."

https://threatpost.com/doj-dismisses-playpen-case-to-keep-tor-hack-private/124102/

Intent on keeping details private about how it hacked the Tor browser, prosecutors with the U.S. Department of Justice on Friday asked to dismiss a case involving a suspect who visited the Playpen dark web child pornography site in 2015.

"The government must now choose between disclosure of classified information and dismissal of its indictment," Annette Hayes, a US attorney, wrote in a court filing (.PDF) on Friday. "Disclosure is not currently an option."

Hayes asked the court to drop charges around the case without prejudice, insisting the government has "simply acted to protect highly sensitive information from criminal discovery as was its obligation." There's a chance, if the exploit is unclassified later down the line, the government could reopen its case, she claims.

"Dismissal without prejudice leaves open the possibility that the government could bring new charges should there come a time within the statute of limitations when and the government be in a position to provide the requested discovery," Hayes wrote.

News the government is unwilling to disclose the exploit–something the FBI refers to as a "Network Investigative Technique" (NIT)–has seemingly been a long time coming; the DOJ has remained resolute to keeping the exploit under wraps. Last April the FBI refused to comply with the judge's request to describe how it compromised the Tor browser.

Previously: FBI Let Alleged Pedo Walk Free Rather Than Explain How They Snared Him


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday March 07 2017, @03:55AM (12 children)

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday March 07 2017, @03:55AM (#475894) Journal

    What this means is this particular hack is likely used against nation states, and/or internally against citizens. If they revealed it they would lose too much leverage.

    Nice going, asshats. Now a kiddie fiddler goes free *and* we know you're doing skeevy illegal unconstitutional shit on the sly.

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 07 2017, @04:25AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 07 2017, @04:25AM (#475896)

    He probably is a pedophile, unfortunately because the government opted to fold on the case rather than pursue it through the trial phase, it means that this mans life is effectively over. He probably won't be able to get any more jobs of any sort and will have a hard time finding a place to live.

    If he's guilty, that's probably not the worst thing in the world, but if he's not guilty and the evidence wasn't there for a conviction, the government presumably has a period of time during which they could change their minds and even if they don't, not being acquitted isn't the same as being acquitted or not charged in terms of public opinion.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 07 2017, @05:18PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 07 2017, @05:18PM (#476074)

      Excellent! Punishment without even the pretense of due process. Mmm mm, feels good, this land of the free and home of the brave!

  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 07 2017, @04:38AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 07 2017, @04:38AM (#475899)

    OR....they're using the same exploit to actively find other pedophiles, and then simply use parallel construction in order to actually bring them in. Disclosing the details would nab this guy (who is, yes, a pedophile, but from the summary anyway appears to be merely a consumer, rather than a producer of the material) but in so doing effectively let an indeterminate number of kiddie porn producers go free.

    It's not a situation that I think anyone is happy with, but I'm willing to trust they've got good reason for this. That they could still bring charges later on is definitely a nice caveat to this whole situation; I sort of wonder what country this guy will wind up fleeing to, assuming he can.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 07 2017, @01:49PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 07 2017, @01:49PM (#475997)

      "but I'm willing to trust they've got good reason for this"

      the freaking fbi? that locked barrett brown up for posting a link and a long list of other crimes against the people? don't be such a dumb, kiss ass.

  • (Score: 3, Touché) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday March 07 2017, @04:57AM

    by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Tuesday March 07 2017, @04:57AM (#475906)

    Is he a child molester, a pedophile, a child molester and a pedophile, or is he none of those things? I don't think we know for certain he actually did anything he was accused of. It doesn't even look like he was charged with actually molesting children, so I'm not sure where the "kiddie fiddler" remark comes from.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 07 2017, @09:07AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 07 2017, @09:07AM (#475951)

    You give them way too much credit.

    What it most likely means is that the software used contains has some not quite legal features, and they would be in big trouble if the judge was to find out about the evidence planting module.

    Not a conspiracy theory, that did actually happen in Germany, when it was discovered that the "stats-trojaner" had features specifically for evidence planting.

    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 07 2017, @01:51PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 07 2017, @01:51PM (#475998)

      of course pigs will plant evidence anytime they think they can get away with it. they rationalize it as they're the good guys and if they have to burn a few slaves to get what they want, then so be it.

  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday March 07 2017, @03:15PM (4 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 07 2017, @03:15PM (#476036) Journal

    "kiddie fiddler goes free"

    Do you know that he is/was a kiddie fiddler? We can agree that he is a major fricking douchebag, and not worth the powder that it would take to blow him away. But, did he commit the act, or just fantasize about it, with the aid of some illegal images?

    These are important questions, because we want to know how long he should suffer, before we allow him to die. Precisely which kind of douche is he? A mere passive pedo, or an active abuser of children?

    • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Tuesday March 07 2017, @06:22PM (3 children)

      by Thexalon (636) on Tuesday March 07 2017, @06:22PM (#476105)

      Also very very relevant: What exactly was the evidence that he did anything at all? If all they have is something they aren't willing to let him confront, then for all we know this guy was completely innocent and didn't do what the FBI says he did. For all we know, the source of evidence they aren't willing to tell us about is a system in which somebody using Tor to browse a completely legal website that .gov has decided is Really Bad gets something injected into the page HTML when passing through FBI-controlled Tor nodes that instructs the browser to download some kiddie porn while alerting authorities as to its source. Which would mean that the kiddie porn is there because of the FBI, not because of the defendant.

      A lot of people have a hard time with the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing.

      --
      The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday March 07 2017, @06:51PM (2 children)

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 07 2017, @06:51PM (#476126) Journal

        True - the FBI could have planted the images. It's within their capability, I'm sure. But, why? Why snag some innocent fool, and set him up? If this man is innocent of the charges against him, then he is still crosswise with the FBI for a reason. If they set him up, they had some reason for putting forth the effort, however minimal that effort may have been. So - let's dismiss the likelihood that he's a terrorist, because the FBI has no problem framing people for terrorism.

        Hell, maybe I've answered my own question. If they are willing to frame ignorant hicks for terrorism, just to boost their case rates, then they would be just as willing to frame another ignorant hick for child pornography.

        • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Tuesday March 07 2017, @08:01PM (1 child)

          by Thexalon (636) on Tuesday March 07 2017, @08:01PM (#476157)

          People can end up crosswise with the FBI for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with whether they've committed a crime. People have become targets because they wrote a letter to the editor expressing opposition to official government policies. Anti-Iraq War groups can and have been targeted for infiltration. Occupy Wall Street was targeted, and a few people were set up and framed for terrorism as you mention. I'm going to guess that they're also going after various right-wing and libertarian activist groups as well. Basically, they have a very long history of not being politically neutral in the slightest, and definitely not being dispassionate arbiters of the law.

          So in the example I used, the FBI would be framing people because (a) they don't want people using Tor because it makes them a bit harder to track, and (b) they don't want people viewing certain legal websites, both of which are very plausible.

          --
          The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
          • (Score: 2) by butthurt on Tuesday March 07 2017, @11:36PM

            by butthurt (6141) on Tuesday March 07 2017, @11:36PM (#476222) Journal

            > People have become targets because they wrote a letter to the editor expressing opposition to official government policies.

            The FBI opened its file on Pete Seeger after he wrote a

            [...] letter protesting and criticizing the California American Legion's resolution advocating deportation of all Japanese, citizens or not, after the war, and barring all Japanese descendants from citizenship.

            --/article.pl?sid=15/12/23/1524255 [soylentnews.org]

            ...something that never became an official policy.