sblair@synoptics.COM (Steven Blair) (08/10/90)
There is so little written on actual methodolgy, of cathing those involved. Or committing actual, alleged computer crimes. I'm interested in what methods others(commercial, or Univ's, r&D's, etc) may have developed to find the aleged guilty parties. You hear so much about FBI "stings", local police "stings", but so little about the methods involved in not only the detection, but actual prosecution(successful/unsuccessful) of the parties involved. Yes, I've read Cliff Stoll's book. That's a good idea of what I'm trying to reach out to here. Barry Shein's discussion "seed" started me thinking about this... Not that I'm interested in the nitty gritty like, Officer Bozo saw Johnny peddling 5 1/4" disks on the corner who entraped the kid by having Bozo's child purchase a disk from Johnny, only to discover a bootleg copy of *1-2-3* from XYZ corp. Only when we understand the methodology of what is done during an investigation can we understand how to better protect ourselves. And knowing/understanding the guilty parties' intent will help... And mabye, contribute something to society as a whole from the lesson(s) kearned from such an incident. Robert Morris Jr. did not teach many folks about computer crime. He was not affecting enough folks(*in the Public's "Eye"). Mabye a person who hosed a 911 line, and strangled a town's EMS for 24hours would be more of a "hitting close to home" incident. The EFF has a good idea in supporting the harrassment that is going on in some cases. But, as I read in horror the other day, law enforcement authorities have a tough time deciding what is/isn't involved in a computer crime because they're so far removed from computers in their day-to-day lives, that it's a hard thing for them to be "sure" about.. more ramblings when I get more caffeine.... Comments??