Home page logo
/

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: Fw: [IACIS-L] Statement by Defense Expert
From: "J. Oquendo" <sil () infiltrated net>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 08:42:11 -0400

Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:

So I take it that law enforcement computer examiners and prosecutors *do* have
the years of experience in software engineering and exploit construction and
use, to qualify them to translate a bit of data into forensic evidence of guilt?


Catch 22. This is why prosecutors often rely on expert witnesses who even then are lacking. One of the things many omit in their methods of thinking when it comes to perhaps going to trial is the following, and please take it very seriously... Will the JURY understand it first and foremost, secondly will the
jury even give a rats ass.

From experience, 1) the jury WILL NOT understand even 1/2 of the terminology nor concepts, analogies you can throw at them. This works to the benefit of whichever side is willing to exploit the jurors. "Overwhelm them with so much technology they'll have to believe the accused is guilty. After all, why bring in all of these *experts*" (for the prosecution). "Overwhelm them with so much technology to
counter the former experts expertise and throw in doubt..." For the defense.

On the latter... While "guilty until proven innocent is the American dream, it is seldomly practiced. If so there would be no need for bail since the defendant is after all innocent. (Bottom line holding true to the letter of the law... Not practical but this concept of innocent until proven guilty is flawed). Anyhow, if one were to find themselves on trial this is what you SHOULD expect... You will get a jury of your so called peers.. So let's define peer: Noun 1. peer - a person who is of equal standing with another in a group. Your peers will never be in equal standing from a technological perspective period. For one, it would take a miracle to gather a bunch of computer literate users for jury duty. Heck you will likely find 0 even if one appears for jury duty, it is likely the prosecution will try to rid this person from selection. Its not in their best interest to have someone fully technical on trial for a few reasons. 1) The juror might associate his experiences with the case being tried and taint an outcome based on HIS experience, not the facts presented. Would be the main reason. It might not be in the best
interest of the defendant for the same reason.

No sir, your peer will consist of someone who's likely going to be computer illiterate, likely twice your age, etc., they'll 1) be frustrated they have to go through jury duty and want to get things over with to return to normal life. 2) They'll be looking like a deer in headlights trying to understand what the hell an expert is talking about: "SMTP is a protocol used to deliver electronic mail. This mail consists of binary zeros and ones which when converted formed a corrupted gif image which caused Microsoft's Windows Small Business Server to suffer a buffer overflow." Might sound like clockwork to anyone here, but will sound Klingon to a juror. I could go on and on... But one should be able to
envision the possibilities of jurors being lost and irrate.

I may or may not do a write up based on my case, but that is likely going to irritate a lot of federal agents and it will likely mean I will end up posting my case files online which will further piss off more federal agents and perhaps place me back to square one. Who knows maybe I will discuss this with an attorney beforehand. Lest I face the wrath of again breaking into an employer while on an airplane. But hey... An expert can always be called in on my defense on how it would have been impossible to spoof over the Atlantic Ocean... Then again, a counterexpert could show the possibility of me hijacking satellite after satellite after satellite for said connection to leave "a
teasing message saying... Hi I pwnd you" for shits and giggles.

--
====================================================
J. Oquendo
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1383A743
echo infiltrated.net|sed 's/^/sil@/g'
"Wise men talk because they have something to say;
fools, because they have to say something." -- Plato


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

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

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]
AlienVault