Re: Internet and Civil Liberties?

So are you suggesting that crimes involving the Internet are very rare? If you go back a bit in this newsgroup you'll find lots of posts about Internet crime, including its use in the abuse of minors. Are you saying these events are rare?

It is true with TV news (and many newspapers) "if it bleeds it leads". But the fact is that crime is still a big part of our world, whether it is sensationalized or not. My local newspaper is reporting credit card fraud victims among our residents and it is a surprisingly and distubingly long list. Computer viruses and other forms of sabotage are no joke or pertty matter. We all have received those emails about some Nigerian prince or body part enlargement--do you think any of those claims are real? Someone is writing and sending them out and pocketing the money. There are destructive anti-social people who exploit the anonymity of the computer to act out their aggression; these are the people who write and disseminate viruses, spam, spyware, etc.

I don't distinguish how the fraud or forgery was executed, whether someone mainipulated internal bits and bytes or merely stole someone's logon by peeking over their shoulder. Either way, the computer becomes a very powerful tool for evil and innocent people will get hurt.

My concern in this topic is not only the victims of fraud, but also innocent people blamed for crimes. I'll discuss this in detail in another response.

I'm glad that you have never been in trouble or ever accused of doing something wrong. But the real world is not so perfect or nice. Through DNA testing we have learned that some criminals who proclaimed innocence were indeed guilty. But we also learned that some weren't guilty and spent years in prison for crimes they clearly did not commit. The system is not perfect.

Yes, someone falsely accused will probably (though not always) eventually be acquitted. But the cost to that person will be enormous -- loss of all their money on legal fees, loss of job, respect, family, home, etc.

The power of computers > If you're not technically astute, you'd better hire a good lawyer

Actually, I thought recently that the courts ruled that such tainted currency was indeed admissable -- they found it on someone suspected of drug dealing.

It is frightening. Modern science can detect extremely miniscule traces of substances. Ok, I'm now sitting in a public library chair. Isn't there a heck of a good chance that a strand of hair from the prior patron was left on the chair and now is on me? I certainly think so since I find such strands occassionally. Further, I notice some cat hair I brought in gets left on the chair and I have to sweep it off. Now a library is a random place; presumably the patron after me won't turn up dead with me as a suspect. But what about the workplace where we do sit in each other's chairs and desks routinely to work together? If something happened to any of my co-workers, odds are high you will find mine hair or other fluids (suppose I sneezed) on that other person, maybe even their skin.

I am not confident about this. I know too many "Sheriff Bubbas" who think they're computer experts when they're not.

Note that one troubling social issue today is the abuse of minors through meetings and illegal photograph distribution. The police are going after this very aggressively with strong support by the public. (See other posts on this topic in this newsgroup). Anyway, a participant in this stuff has a motivation to use someone else's identity and e-account for their purposes.

Here are scenarios I am concerned about, based on news media reports. Obviously they don't happen every day, but they have happened.

1) Stolen e-account information (taken by looking over shoulder or guessing a password or via spyware):

a) Use the stolen account to fraudulently buy goods and services. b) Use the stolen account to send and receive illegal p*rn (per above). c) Create new accounts.

2) Forged e-account information: I doubt it is that hard to forge someone's name and account over the 'net. Spammers cover the tracks in various ways, such as finding an unprotected server (apparently there are a great many) and using it is a relay station. The risks are that above. 3) Civil liberties -- Loss of privacy: Because of the interest in illegal p*rn and assignation activities, there is more desire to monitor otherwise private internet use. This public library computer is now monitored for that reason. How far will this monitoring and searchse go? Will ISPs automatically and secretly report whenever of their clients access a website or newsgroup that is deemed "illegal"? Does the mere access of such sites constitute a crime? There was a 100 year old girls' college named "Beaver College". Although the name drew some snickers over the years, it wasn't a problem. But with the Internet, the alternate meaning of "beaver" triggered protectors and the college found itself hidden with decreasing applications. They had to rename themselves. Once they did applications went back up. 4) False identify: A big use these days of the Internet is to set up social meetings. There are matchmaker websites and chat rooms. But sometimes someone lies about who they are. There have been several cases reported where a minor claimed to be an adult, had ID (fake) and travelled to see a real adult. The real adult ended up being convicted for illegal activity. As posted in the other threads, there are minors today intentionally doing just that. Plenty of 16 y/o could easily pass as an 18 y/o college student. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A particularly odd instance of this took place for several years on : a middle-age gentleman had various online profiles of himself as older teenage _female_ members, none of whom actually existed. He seemed to 'specialize' in younger, more naive, less sophisticated males with whom he wished to have a homosexual relationship, but without telling them that at first. He would chat with them, flirt with these guys, and because they were sort of insecure anyway, easily engage the guys in chatting on a regular basis, never saying a word about his _true_ intentions. As the victims got more and more interested in a possible meeting with their new 'female friend' the hints would begin to issue forward.

Meet at a certain time and place, etc, but always with a condition attached: The condition involved 'dealing with this older guy who has been hassling me a lot, following me around, etc.' 'Can you (new boy friend) help me get rid of this old guy who is always making trouble?' 'If you can do that for me, then I guess I can agree to meet you also'. Time and again, as reports later reached Yahoo, these sort of naive guys were agreeing to meet (allegedly to get rid of the interloper and trouble maker) in some deserted place -- where in fact the 'troublemaker' or 'stalker' was the original guy. The newer (and more naive guy) wound up getting sexually molested, or raped (at worst) or at the very least humiliated. Apparently the _sick impersonator_ of a female pulled this off many hundreds of times, Yahoo doing nothing to stop it, and generally the guys were to embarassed by what had happened to them sexually to ever discuss it again, until some were questioned at length by informal groups of investigators working to 'clean up Yahoo Chat'. PAT]

5) Malicious secret storage: People have been arrested for having illegal p*rn photos on their computer. In some cases it was found that the material was placed there by someone with malicious intent (similar to planting drugs in someone's purse). How would the victim of such an attack prove their innocence?

Again, I realize these things do not happen every day, but as computers become more widespread and integrated in our daily lives, the risk of being in the wrong place at the wrong time increases.

[public replies, please]