Hi Hayley, To make sure it's clear, this is a publicly visible mailing list.
I assume you've seen the news post about flawed surveillance techniques? https://freenetproject.org/news.html#20160526-htl18attack It goes over our understanding of attacks used by law enforcement and why they appear to be heavily fundamentally flawed. If we can help elaborate on parts of it please let us know. The attacks we are aware of included information about how far away the request probably originated; (Hops To Live - HTL) you didn't mention that, and without it the attack is even less accurate than the effectively entirely inaccurate thing it already is. As a non-profit organization running an open source project, we don't currently have employees, hence the lack of a phone number. You may be able to find someone in the community willing to participate; if this is the case I think it is we've been following it with interest for a while now. Could you please elaborate on what is involved in reviewing the search warrant, reviewing the police report, or being an expert witness? Would this be an attempt to invalidate the search and suppress evidence acquired with it? Now addressing others on the list: I note an ethical dilemma here. It may well be that the accused is guilty of the things they are accused of, and invalidating this presumably-mistaken search warrant would allow them to go free. That said, do we want to resist the application of flawed statistics in prosecuting Freenet users? I'm leaning toward probably. Selectively assisting in fighting search warrants that seem invalid also seems unethical. Are we obligated to help? - Steve On Mon, Jul 25, 2016, 2:33 PM Hayley Rosenblum <hrose...@slu.edu> wrote: > Hello, > I am a law intern at Rosenblum, Schwartz, Rogers, & Glass, P.C. in St. > Louis, MO. As a criminal defense firm, we have recently been hired for a > Possession of Child Pornography case. According to the police report , a > special investigator began running copies of Freenet that had been modified > for law enforcement to log the IP address, key, and date, and time of > requests that were sent to these law enforcement Freenet nodes which were > then compared to keys of known child pornography. The special investigator > observed an IP address routing/and or requesting suspected child > pornography file blocks. The special investigation noted that the number > and timing of the request was significant enough to indicate that the IP > address was the apparent original requester of the file. > > We have doubts about the legitimacy of this based off some brief research > we have done on Freeness and how it works. Is there anyone I could contact > to discuss having a Freenet employee/specialist to review the search > warrant and police report and/or potentially hire as an expert witness. If > so, how much would you charge for that? > > Any information or further contacts would be great. I didn’t see a phone > number on the website, so I figured i’d start with an email! > > Thank you, > > Hayley Rosenblum > Law Intern > Rosenblum, Schwartz, Rogers, & Glass P.C. > rsrglaw.com > hrose...@slu.edu > office: 314-862-4332 > _______________________________________________ > Support mailing list > Support@freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
_______________________________________________ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
