Comment: Re:Destruction of evidence (Score 1) 364
>I'd destroy my hard drive too if I got word the government was coming.
Are you saying you have any drives that are not full-disk encrypted yet? Amazing. Seriously, just amazing.
|
|
>I'd destroy my hard drive too if I got word the government was coming.
Are you saying you have any drives that are not full-disk encrypted yet? Amazing. Seriously, just amazing.
Skype provides encrypted calls and SMS for how many years now? Oh, this is from Forbes...
I would be willing to hire him,
Let me put it this way.
I would not be willing to hire you.
I would call that a lame attempt to change the subject.
We do not require that every law be perfect, or a legal regime to have no flaws, for us to have any notion of right and wrong, or criminal and victim.
Leaving a company locked out of their equipment is not leaving them in working order, nor does it constitute a "lack of damage."
If you can be that wrong, there's not much point in addressing the other ways your "interpretation" of the facts is wrong.
He's a criminal. What happened between the time he was arrested and conviction isn't that unusual as the DA refined the case, let alone in a case with some technical complexity. He deserves to be where he is, in jail.
I'm aware that's the story his lawyer's spread.
Here's from their rulebook:
"In accordance with these strategies the following policy statements apply to the key areas and functions of the Security Perimeter. In all statements where the “County Authority” (CA) is mentioned, depending on the County reporting structure, this can be the CIO, CISO, CTO, CEO or COO and implies the CA or their designee(s)."
"If someone demands a password, refer him or her to this document or have him or her call someone in Information Security."
Obviously he hated having to do what his boss told him enough to go to prison. But something tells me that if we go through the records of all the people who asked him for the passwords, we would find that among them were at least one person "in Information Security," or who was "CIO, CISO, CTO, CEO or COO and implies the CA or their designee(s)."
And as I've pointed out over and over - if he was telling the truth about this legal issue being his real concern, he would have acted like most any of us would and gotten a lawyer in there. He would have just asked for them to sign a one-pager releasing him from liability in exchange for handing over the passwords, instead of acting like a dick and giving a fake password back, which is what I'm given to believe he did?
Yep. Feeling lonely.
I've just bought OpenSUSE dvd from Novell's website - as a way to say "Thank you!"...
It's the same old story; boy meets beer, boy drinks beer... boy gets another beer. -- Cheers