What is Digg?Sponsored by Norton 2010
Kimbo Slice vs. a caterpillar. Who would win? view!
everyclickmatters.com - The street-fighting legend takes on a leaf-eating menace. See the showdown. Seriously.
108 Comments
- tjasond, on 10/12/2007, -5/+143Third post down in the comments section:
"Nevermind all the bombs and poison they found at his place, the cops now know he has a foot fetish and likes fat women, oh noes! I know, lets sue MS because IE doesn't do a low level HDD wipe when it deletes cookies." - dunezone, on 10/12/2007, -10/+142Whats wrong with liking feet and fat people?
- theDevilsDue, on 10/12/2007, -2/+100His first mistake was believing the sales people at Circuit City.
- Renton, on 10/12/2007, -4/+71He kind of does have a point though. Even when you clear the cache manually and delete temporary internet files, it still stays on cached on your hard drive. This is basically a goldmine for spyware and adware.
(btw, microsoft is not responsible at all for the avi files he downloaded to his hard drive) - Odweaver, on 10/12/2007, -4/+54he should of hid his porn in a hidden folder called WMD, they would of never found it.
- raz98, on 10/12/2007, -4/+36I have you stupid ramble.
What has the porn to do with his case ? Why the FBI/Police even mention the porn thing if this was his personal data and had nothing to do with his case and it wasn't illegal ? - Ramble, on 10/12/2007, -15/+42Read the article you stupid *****.
- Lighthater, on 10/12/2007, -2/+28Yeah, because there's no way the FBI could scour the HD and recover the info from a firefox user.
/end sarcasm. - duzytata, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26What program does do a secure wipe of your cookies, cache, and anything else your browser might store? I use CCleaner and have it set to do three passes but I wonder if its actually securely deleting all those files because it doesn't take very long to run the cleaner. And when you use CCleaner to empty your recycle bin, is it securely deleting those files to, or just emptying it in one click of a button with everything else? Please don't digg me down, it's an honest question.
- zestyhedgehog, on 10/12/2007, -2/+26Yeah, you're right. But considering that "the bigger problem seems to be that Circuit City assured him when he purchased the PC in 2004 that Windows XP, Internet Explorer, and a barrage of other security products would keep his information totally secure," he may have a claim against Circuit City for a breach of implied warranties.
- Yoshi39, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21Acctually every web page you ever visit using ie is recorded in a file called index.dat which is is not easy to delete (you have reboot into safe mode and delete it manually).
"Even after the user has cleared the internet cache folder, temporary internet files folder, and history folder, the index.dat files on Windows continue to store all visited web addresses and cookies and some temporary files. Some people state that this will eventually cause the index.dat files to grow very large, while the average user remains unaware of what is going on."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index.dat - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18@bluebonics
Not only has Gutmans Vista fud been disproven, but his ideas about data deletion are wacky also. I wouldn't put too much credit in anything he says. - Ramble, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16I think maybe the ricin has more to do with his inprisonment.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Should have used a Linux Live CD!
- Klinky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Yeah you but you have to ask, totally secure from what? I doubt the guy asked the Circuit City guy, "So if I am in my basement making Ricin and the FBI comes to bust down my door, would they be able to find my visits to "Bertha's Foot & Fat Buffet"?".
- bIuebonics, on 10/12/2007, -15/+27well, for anyone who would like more knowledge on the subject of securely deleting files from magnetic or solid state memory (and has higher than a 4th grade reading comprehension level), check out peter guttman's page on secure deletion (the man's a genius). simply overwriting files is not enough to ensure they cannot be recovered. most "secure deletion" software is also inadequate. to securely delete files from a magnetic drive memory it's roughly 35 passes (31 if you ignore the random data passes) of specific data to write to the area of the drive. anyways, if you're interested in the subject check out the link below.
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/secure_del.html - EvolvedFromApes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11I know we all think he's stupid (and he is) for believing that a stock PC will "protect his data" from prying eyes but he does have a point. If they make the claim they should be able to back it up. Unfortunately, "Everything is protected from a casual perusal." doesn't carry the same marketing weight, ya know?
- tont0r, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14im glad you are in support of the overly rampant about of pointless law suits in this country.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Why the girlfriend 'looser', he's well hung?
- TwinSigma, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13"The agents found a wide array of files ranging from home sex videos to cached pornographic web pages, eventually embarrassing Crooker and leading to this lawsuit."
Yeah, having porn on his computer is the most embarrassing part of his story. ::rolls eyes:: - raz98, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Renton, so if he broke the law regarding a complety diffrent thing, the police has the right to rape every single aspect of his personal life ? And the fbi/police has the right to watch every single *.avi file on his HDD and keep them as an "evidence" ?
According to other article
"At the FBI lab, agents were able to access Crooker's files by making a mirror image of the hard drive. Among the files, they found a video showing Crooker and his girlfriend having sex, his medical records, family photographs" - Renton, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10He got arrested for bomb making (which the FBI found out about before they even got to his computer.) Then they cracked his security and found cached internet pages which microsoft was supposed to delete. The bomb making has nothing to do with him suing microsoft, its just background info on why the FBI was looking in there in the first place.
- jimsf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Should have used Pornzilla
- xDieStarDiex, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9The only way to keep the FBI from seeing your files is to not have any files.
- nomadxx7, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9I think that the guy is an idiot.
1. Most "terrorist" websites about bomb making and whatnot are already flagged by the FBI and other various agencies. Like the Anarchist's Cookbook, for example. It could possibly that they flagged his IP when he jumped on these sites and viola, he's now a person of interest.
2. Also, I thought that using a big ass magnet (i.e. like the kid from The Core)? Since most hard drives are magnetic, wouldn't one ol' swipe take care of making sure the information was unrecoverable? And I know that this would essentially fry the HD but since the FBI is raiding your house anyways, it's not like you're going to get your computer back and if you do it probably won't be in any working order.
"Let's sue MS because they didn't keep my information about porn secure. Nevermind that I was manufacturing ricin in my basement. That is only secondary to being embarassed that people now know that I view porn." - YourTechSupport, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Actually. I was gonna say, somewhat ironically,
that he should've used Browzar.
Not that it isn't a limited IE shell with branded redirects, but because it would have been funny.
Actually. He should've used thermite. - Jammerdelray, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8He is just making himself look like a even bigger ass by Attempting to sue Microsoft.
- foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8"Due to its OPEN SOURCE nature, you can create your own extension that encrypts your cache on the fly"
He believed the salesmen at Circuit City.
He is no genius... - TSSaloic, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Just Another reason to use Firefox.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6in other news,
Man sues Toyota for selling clear windows in cars, allowing police to see dead body in backseat - bIuebonics, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9@artfuldodga
no, delete means it flags that portion of the hard drive to be available for data to be written. - HellifIno, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Stupid, stupid, stupid.
I'll leave it at that, and mention that both sides are directly related to my comment. - onixxino, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6If the cops have his computer, then they can find out everything, not just "browsing habit", unless he used secure erase.
- RedLion, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7artfuldodga: most consumer OSes (windows, OS X, ubuntu, etc) don't delete safely the files (by default) for a simple reason, deleting the files in a secure manner takes ages because in order to have a really safe deletion, one that can't be recovered even with specialized hardware, you should overwrite the data about 20-30 times. for example if you have a 700mb file that you want to delete your HD should write 700*20 = 14000 MBs of data over it and that would probably take entire hours.
i would prefer at that point running "portable firefox" from an encrypted usb stick. - raz98, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Zythryn, so let's say the police officer finds a "sex_with_my_girlfriend.avi". After he watches 1 minute of the movie, he calls of his colleagues and watch all the movie again, to be sure it's clean. They probably make a copy of it, to check it later :)
This must have happened because this guy was pissed off because he knew the police/fbi watched his movies, right ? From where does this guy knows that ?? Someone must have told him : hey , all the department seen that video with you ***** that women.
Normally, if the police didn't find any evidence on the disk, they should have given the disk back and not even mentioning his porn. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11Redchannel...over 85% of hte people in the country stil do. People who are FAR smarter than you could ever dream of being.
To put just how ***** idiotic your statement was, it is WORSE than saying "Who still uses an iPod?" since iPod's market share is LOWER, and is falling at a faster rate than IEs. - pathy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Now, I haven't looked at it for long, but all I see in the IE options are 'Days to keep History for', no mention of deleting/making them unrecoverable.
In any case, I seriously doubt keeping the hsitory deleted would stop the FBI from finding out what you were looking at.
Damn stupid lawsuits. - rocke86, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Your best bet at hiding is using a truecrypt volume with a portable copy of firefox so it writes all settings to drive. If your really paranoid use torpark instead of firefox, but it will be very slow. If you use a strong password it will be hard to crack, especially if you have the volume file hidden as another file randomly on the drive.
- P5ycHo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The scriptures should be use in any improper manner one can think of. This Jesus/God/Religion thing has been going on for far too long and is ruining the world. We're not in the dark ages anymore.
- grumpyrain, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3As if they actually need to cease his PC to check what he was doing. A quick look at some ISP logs is all that would be required.
- unitedkronos, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Sounds like he should have used Torpark. :)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4You're missing the point of Firefox. Due to its OPEN SOURCE nature, you can create your own extension that encrypts your cache on the fly. Due to how you CAN'T see the souce code behind Internet Explorer, you have no idea what the hell's going on back there.
- LizardSlayer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4P0rn is a red herring. It's about a convicted felon dealing in firearms, Crooker was convicted of attempting to mail a silencer for an air rifle to a hobbyist in Ohio in 2004.
Some of his sniveling court action from 1995 can be found here : http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-2183.01A
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION] = ) - Twelvevolts, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I'm alarmed to find out Microsoft IE isn't hiding my browsing habits - what planet have I been on??
- Tossadin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Well once you get to the point where there is a warrant involved, usually it would be legal. A friend of mine, an officer who deals with child pornography cases, routinely has to deal with this kind of issue. When I asked him about that, a warrant would basically give the FBI/Government agency the right to pretty much break into any kind of encryption you might be running to get at the data they have told the judge is on the system.
The warrant (and at this point one would assume they had one) probably said something along the lines of "We think this guy has ricin manufacturing information on his computer. We also believe this guy has other bomb making information that we want to get at to take him to court." That would make any such information they found admissible as evidence in a court case. The porn and so forth is essentially irrelevant, and was just there to flavor the story i would suspect. - undergrace, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I love Jesus, but your comment is completely irrelevant to the conversation at hand. I don't think the guy was shifting the blame, he never denied the porn, he was just upset that a third party could discover it and made it public knowledge. If he didn't have the money to pay the $250 court fee from his previous attempt at this lawsuit then he clearly was hoping this one might bring in the big bucks. He might be immoral and greedy, but please don't start throwing out Scripture to prove a superfluous point.
- etechonline2002, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1lets just say if the FBI wants your browsing history. you should stop what you are doing online.
- darlyn, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3But then of course you'd have way more than pornography charges under your belt :) ... confronting the feds with a gun will surely win you a trip to prison ...
- Redchannel, on 10/12/2007, -9/+10Who still uses IE anyway ?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I used to want to work for the FBI. Not anymore."
Fox Mulder, is that you? -
Show 51 - 100 of 108 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is