Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Here's What Facebook Sends the Cops In Response To a Subpoena

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the your-dna-in-a-box dept.

Facebook 153

An anonymous reader writes "Facebook already shares its Law Enforcement Guidelines publicly, but we've never actually seen the data Menlo Park sends over to the cops when it gets a formal subpoena for your profile information. Now we know. This appears to be the first time we get to see what a Facebook account report looks like. The document was released by the The Boston Phoenix as part of a lengthy feature titled 'Hunting the Craigslist Killer,' which describes how an online investigation helped officials track down Philip Markoff. The man committed suicide, which meant the police didn't care if the Facebook document was published elsewhere, after robbing two women and murdering a third."

cancel ×

153 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! (1, Funny)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609295)

Samarkand was a butthole! Levodopa! Corinth was a butthole! Levodopa! Airplanes are buttholes! Dramamine! Butthole! God is a dog's anus farting loudly! Levodopa! Nimrod! crommmmmmmmmm the twalf!!!!! At noon catfish ... YOU! bromide

Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609381)

This is the best argument for browsing at -1 that I have ever seen. Even though it looks like it's machine-generated nonsense, it's still one of the best comments ever made on Slashdot.

Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! (5, Funny)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609523)

This is the best argument for browsing at -1 that I have ever seen. Even though it looks like it's machine-generated nonsense, it's still one of the best comments ever made on Slashdot.

I wholly agree. It reminds me of Vogon poetry. Butthole is used throughout, quite successfully, as a lubricant for the deep prose sprinkled about. Without it, I believe it would make much less sense. While the statement that "God is a dog's anus farting loudly" was quite provocative as a commentary on the meaning of life, it derailed rather quickly with the nonsequiter introduction of a catfish arriving at noon of all times....

Not the work of a true Vogon master, but I sense much potential.

Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! (0)

History's Coming To (1059484) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609599)

I believe it may be the work of one of Pratchett's Gonagle's, a Pictish battle poet. Not that they do poems about battles as such, they're usually to busy killing the enemy with doggerel. I can't wonder if it isn't abstract insults from another language translated into English. I'm surprised to see the absence of Butthole and Levopoda at Tenagra.

Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609845)

I believe that "catfish" is being used as a verb, with "YOU" as the object of the action. In this interpretation, that fragment may be a reference to the traditional Slashdottian Russian Reversal.

Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! (0)

Pf0tzenpfritz (1402005) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609901)

Agreed. Leaves some interesting questions to think about. Like what Samarkand might have become.

Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610303)

Actually it's just a google translate from Estonian to English.

Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! (0)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610635)

the statement that "God is a dog's anus farting loudly"

lol, sounds like someone really, really, really horribly misinterpreted a Buddhist riddle or something.

"What is the sound of a dog's anus farting loudly? Within that, you will find god."

Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610067)

And it's still more coherent than Timothy's summaries.

Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! (-1, Offtopic)

GmExtremacy (2579091) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609515)

Shut up and use Gamemaker, friend. Your internet is nothing compared to Gamemaker's true ferocity.

Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! (0)

Pf0tzenpfritz (1402005) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609929)

Does it fart loudly?

Re:Buttholes! Buttholes! Buttholes! Levodopa! (5, Funny)

Reality Master 301 (1462839) | more than 2 years ago | (#39611043)

This calls for a new alternative mod point, "+1 Poetic"

Feel bad for his girlfriend (5, Insightful)

danbuter (2019760) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609315)

Maybe they should have deleted his girlfriends name and location from this stuff, before publishing it to the net.

Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend (5, Interesting)

Sir_Sri (199544) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609363)

Or really anyone he befriended on facebook.

The girlfriend might have been basically screwed on the deal no matter what, since as his girlfriend some of her information might have been out there anyway.

It does seem like the article in question is very perturbed by the way the police released the info though, and didn't sanitize everything, leaving reporters to do it, who may not have realized that people can be linked via their unique facebook id's in the URL string etc. I suppose that's a good argument for an addendum to the facebook legal document pile, that if you release this information, the following other information should be redacted so as to not endanger the privacy of people not covered by the existing request.

Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend (-1, Offtopic)

GmExtremacy (2579091) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609519)

I think an unbiased third party needs to resolve this matter. Calm down, everyone. Just calm down.

Use Gamemaker. Return to Gamemakerdom right this minuteness.

Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend (4, Insightful)

History's Coming To (1059484) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609613)

If you friend somebody you make that information public, it's how social networks, you know, network socially. They're presenting that information in an unpleasant context, yes, but it's still public.

Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609855)

unless, of course, you set your privacy to 'friends only'. anyone getting information beyond that is still a breech.

Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend (5, Interesting)

tbird81 (946205) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610033)

Not if your friend essentially releases that information (by committing crimes, then committing suicide). You've got to chose your friends well - even your Facebook friends.

I've got a screenshot of Clayton Weatherston's Facebook main page. He's a narcissistic economics tutor who stabbed his girlfriend to death and her mother tried to get into the room - on his birthday.

The year afterwards, there were still people wishing him happy birthday, oblivious to the fact that this guy was in police custody awaiting trial for a very well publicised and terrible murder. That's what Facebook friends are like.

There were two med students I knew who still had him friended - they didn't even know how they knew him. They were clueless that their name was associated with one of the most hated people in NZ.

Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610709)

"The year afterwards, there were still people wishing him happy birthday, oblivious to the fact that this guy was in police custody awaiting trial for a very well publicised and terrible murder. That's what Facebook friends are like."

So it's now forbidden to wish someone a happy birthday when he's awaiting a trial?? Moot.

Re:Feel bad for his girlfriend (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610171)

Really? Says who? Its a breech of what? A TOS agreement?

Any dipships who do anything on facebook are putting that in the public view, regardless of "privacy" settings. If you do not understand that, you are a fucking retard.

The last thing they would care about (2)

secretwhistle (1116881) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609329)

After robbing two women and murdering a third, I'd be very surprised if the police cared about anything.

Re:The last thing they would care about (3, Insightful)

Elbereth (58257) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609393)

Allegedly. Innocent until proven guilty.

Re:The last thing they would care about (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609507)

In the Police States of America, it's the other way around.

Re:The last thing they would care about (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609511)

"Innocent and proven guilty" has a specific meaning for the purposes of deciding whether to impose criminal sanctions on someone. It doesn't mean that someone is actually innocent, nor is "proven guilty" a necessary indicator of guilt.

For example, Obama and GW Bush are a pair of corrupt, evil bastards. The fact that I say so and could reel off a hundred actions of each of their governments in evidence doesn't mean that it is proper for the law to do anything about it.

It is, however, proper for you to stop voting for them.

Re:The last thing they would care about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610353)

>> It is, however, proper for you to stop voting for them.

And vote for Romney?

Or do you think that throwing away one's vote, by voting for an impossible candidate, is the way to go?

Or do you think that forfeiting one's vote altogether, giving up a chance to at least choose the lesser of two evils, is proper?

Look, it's fine to want candidates with more intelligence, integrity, and compassion for the public, but until you can rally enough support for such candidates, to make them credible competitors to the historically dominant parties, then, given a non-runoff election system, the only practical option remaining is to make the best of the candidates the majority factions of the population support. The public must be won over. If you think the public is hopelessly stupid, and unable to recognize the evil candidates and choose the good candidates, then your conclusion must be that our society is doomed.

Re:The last thing they would care about (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610367)

When voting for who you want in office most, regardless of popularity, you will never throw away your vote. But then, you don't sound like you have any principles or free will at all.

Duverger's Law (2)

gd2shoe (747932) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610933)

Parent is AC troll.

For those who think he might have a point, look up Duverger's law. We have a two party system due to the math of our election system, not because we fail to exercise free will. It's math, not principle that is at issue.

Re:The last thing they would care about (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610391)

...our society is doomed.

Do you have an issue with that?

Re:The last thing they would care about (5, Insightful)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609839)

Allegedly. Innocent until proven guilty.

If you're not a lawyer, a judge, or a juror, you have no obligation to maintain an artificial neutrality with regards to someone's guilt or innocence.

Innocent in the eyes of the law != innocent.

Re:The last thing they would care about (4, Insightful)

tbird81 (946205) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610043)

Very true. I wish people would stop believing that a court's decision is always correct. People escape conviction all the time.

Re:The last thing they would care about (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610477)

That is true, but popular opinion is unlikely to be more correct than the courts, since they don't even have all the information available to them.

If a man is found innocent in court but is treated as guilty by society, then what's the point of even having a trial?

Re:The last thing they would care about (3, Informative)

illumnatLA (820383) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610805)

Very true. I wish people would stop believing that a court's decision is always correct. People escape conviction all the time.

And vice versa unfortunately.

The poor are more likely to get convicted and serve jail time as they can't afford the expensive 'good' lawyers and must rely on the overworked, under-budgeted public defenders.

Wish I had mod points (1)

turing_m (1030530) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610395)

Perfectly said.

Re:The last thing they would care about (2)

swalve (1980968) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610779)

Regardless, since the courts are the best way to impartially try to determine guilt or innocence, thinking people reserve judgement until after a trial. "I just know he's guilty" really doesn't count for anything.

Re:The last thing they would care about (1)

Deep Esophagus (686515) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610037)

Dang, I was going to make a snarky comment but somebody beat me to it about dangling participles.

Direct link (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609343)

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/105727/fb-subpoena-db/index.html

Re:Direct link (1)

Magic5Ball (188725) | more than 2 years ago | (#39611069)

On page 5: "Neoprints"

What are neoprints? Google only knows about teenage Asian girl photos adorned with visual clutter bling from Myspace or Geocities, and various local printing companies.

Unclear antecedents are dangerous! (5, Funny)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609349)

"The man committed suicide, which meant the police didn't care if the Facebook document was published elsewhere, after robbing two women and murdering a third."

Indeed, if the cops are going around robbing and murdering, why should any of us worry about a Facebook profile?

Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609373)

There's a reason that English isn't used as a programming language.

Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! (5, Funny)

colinrichardday (768814) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609423)

No, clearly it was the Facebook document that robbed two women and murdered a third.

Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! (2)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609947)

Oh God, I didn't think of that angle. That's even more terrifying. WHO WILL STOP THE KILLER FACEBOOK PAGES?!?

Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! (1)

philip.paradis (2580427) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610165)

WHO WILL STOP THE KILLER FACEBOOK PAGES?!?

Nancy Grace to the rescue once again!

-------- SNIP --------

Please note: the following text is inserted to defeat the "lameness filter," which apparently got triggered even though I'm simply verbatim quoting the text from the parent post.

Capicola ball tip shankle boudin. Salami short ribs ground round shankle leberkas frankfurter. Fatback ball tip pig pork chop. Boudin flank t-bone, pork loin biltong leberkas chuck ham frankfurter. Cow bresaola spare ribs prosciutto. Leberkas drumstick sirloin, chuck turkey tri-tip beef tenderloin corned beef jowl shankle fatback swine pastrami short loin.

Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 2 years ago | (#39611041)

I like your filler!

Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609495)

Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! (0, Offtopic)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609671)

Except that the comma in that picture is wrong unless you put a comma before "Jack" as well. The commas aren't needed anyway. The capitalization is what makes the difference.

Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! (1)

Lumbre (1822486) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609747)

Indeed, if the cops are going around robbing and murdering, why should any of us worry about a Facebook profile?

Let's hope they aren't tagged in hundreds of photos; that would mean hundreds of pages in the report. Captain Planet and the Planeteers would not be happy.

Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609835)

Posting anon as to not erase the moderation done here. Comma's are used to set off parenthetical elements.

Re:Unclear antecedents are dangerous! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609895)

Posting anon as to not erase the moderation done here.

Comma's are used to set off parenthetical elements.

Wherea's apostrophe's are used to warn reader's of an impending 's' at the end of the word.

lol +1! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610153)

lol +1!

They send an annoying (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609355)

full-screen viewer with page-flipping animation? I'd commit suicide too.

Re:They send an annoying (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609909)

That document viewer robbed two women and murdered a third!

What does slashdot provide... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609367)

to a formal subpoena?

Re:What does slashdot provide... (2)

tftp (111690) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609473)

Slashdot has very little to provide beyond public comments that the account holder wrote. There is probably only the email address that isn't public, and preferences (which don't have much value.)

The IP address may be logged, but I doubt that all the millions of HTTP requests per day are logged for more than a day, even if that. Slashdot has no duty to keep logs, and it costs money to do so, and it creates a legal obligation to make those logs available. Why to have them then?

Re:What does slashdot provide... (2)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609503)

You forgot about the "anonymous" comments.

Re:What does slashdot provide... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610479)

Yeah ... and what cop want's to slog through thousands of goatse.cx links?

Re:What does slashdot provide... (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610695)

... and what cop want's to slog through thousands of goatse.cx links?

A cop with a stick up his ass?

Re:What does slashdot provide... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609497)

What does slashdot provide...

1x Bag of Hot-Grits
1x stained 1979 signed photo of Natalie Portman
2x pairs of Cmdr Tacos underpants (slightly soiled but usable)
2x bags of Pickled Onion Chips (crushed)
1x Copy of Linux for n00bz (2nd edition)
1x Pony (pink natch)
1x ????
1x PROFIT !!

Re:What does slashdot provide... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609637)

..2x bags of Pickled Onion Chips (crushed)

Who knew /. had such refined tastes?

Pickled Onion crisps, the food of the gods..

Re:What does slashdot provide... (1)

russotto (537200) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610221)

1x stained 1979 signed photo of Natalie Portman

Now that would really be something.

Re:What does slashdot provide... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610249)

1x stained 1979 signed photo of Natalie Portman

She was born in 1981... so is that just a blank sheet of a paper?

It looks like this: (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610301)

. ,

Re:What does slashdot provide... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610371)

That is awesome! I am totally sending a subpoena to Slashdot!

Re:What does slashdot provide... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609517)

If Slashdot provides any information aside from a "fuck off and die you lawyer scumbag", then it has no place to post stories about rights violations.

Re:What does slashdot provide... (1)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610605)

In criminal cases, it has no choice - they're not issued by lawyers anyway, they're issued by district judges.

And frankly, if they're investigating a murder or other such criminal behaviour I would expect even Slashdot to assist law enforcement with properly formed discovery requests.

Anti-establishment nutbag.

Re:What does slashdot provide... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610419)

the location of the basement where the posts originate, of course. and the parents names.

Private Messages (5, Interesting)

Celexi (1753652) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609369)

Is it just me, but it doesn't include private messages? or is it because there were none?

Re:Private Messages (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609397)

They were requested. I'd expect some kind of response from Facebook even in the very unlikely event that he didn't have any. My guess is the reporters omitted them or never received them from the police.

Re:Private Messages (4, Interesting)

rgbrenner (317308) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609491)

Is this the same data people get when the request a DVD (under EU laws)? Because if it is, then I'm having a hard time imagining what the problem is... It's basically everything the user has posted on the site + their IP address/last login.

Were people really surprised that the stuff they stored on Facebook was stored on Facebook?

Re:Private Messages (2)

Cederic (9623) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610147)

It doesn't include everything about the user, so it would be an incomplete record under EU law.

Which is in itself interesting :)

Re:Private Messages (1)

rgbrenner (317308) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610691)

Is it incomplete? It has their entire profile... so what do you think is missing?

Re:Private Messages (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39611065)

Facebook supposedly tracks every change a user has ever made to their profile (i.e. including deleted information) along with every profile view. (Profile views are at least counted, as the news feed definitely shows more entries from friends whose profiles you view more often.)

account (2)

101percent (589072) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609413)

Never had an account. Never will. I'm glad I've stuck to my guns this long and I hope others will push forward as well. I wonder if this correlates to me never having a girlfriend.

Re:account (4, Informative)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609545)

If you read the Boston Phoenix article, it was actually the IP address he used to sign up for his throwaway hotmail account, followed by the street address associated with that from Comcast that identified him. Then they did further field work to establish that it was him, and not a neighbour or passer-by who had hacked into his wifi network. The Facebook profile in this case didn't produce any useful information.

Re:account (1)

gravis777 (123605) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610861)

This really seems useless to me, and a waste of resources. The only thing this may be useful for is people who have their profiles set to be viewed by friends only. I guess it could be useful if you are trying to track someone who is on the run by monitoring IP addresses, and for the really dumb criminal, their check-ins, but a savory criminal would just need to use some VPN service or something else to mask their IP address. I mean, seriously, that seems to be the only bit of useful information in here at all is the IP address. It may also be useful for private messages (which now should include chat conversations), but, seriously, they asked for his pictures and videos? The average Facebook user has their profile set to be wide open where anyone can view it, and many who have set their privacy levels up higher still approve every single friend request they get.

Seems like it would be a lot easier to just subpeona Facebook for the IP address and private messages, as its really the only info of any use.

God says... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609427)

I don't think I want to get in the ghost business.

God says...
instructed yielding singularly Troy smoothed sect folded
hid stiffness fastings plan employ distinct backward containeth
forming popular vain reclaim daemon ripened lilies female
scenical shared Answer Predicaments desirous Hebrew dared
wanton raging constrained passages weep bewailed foreshower
followers them III comparing Praise file temperance distrusted
reigns 'it star givest familiarised discovers faintly
supported whoring ascribe sail faith wash overwhelmed
Apollinarian whatever mouth infirmity mule songs kindred
pressure estimate architects Donations prevail Far compactedst
provide trustees flowed fumed reference mightier Electronic
absent likely falsified Valentinian par deal consumed
flights strongholds INDIRECT REMEDIES uncertain deferring
forms Vermont divine sciences Nevada drowsy youths ariseth
pliant overclouded

Re:God says... (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610651)

50 years from now, we're gonna find that Chinese and Russian agents have secretly been passing messages in seemingly nonsense posts on Slashdot.

Taking bets. My guess is this one is about a Russian sub off the coast of Beijing.

Makes you wonder (1)

phazemstr (1405173) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609447)

What does the information they provide to paying parties (advertisers) look like?

Re:Makes you wonder (3, Insightful)

gellenburg (61212) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609487)

Same info but without the redactions.

Re:Makes you wonder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609721)

A pile of statistics?

Re:Makes you wonder (1)

Esteanil (710082) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609755)

They don't. Facebook works as a "black box" for advertisers. The advertisers specify what kind of profile they want their ad to appear in. Facebook then puts the ad on said profiles, without giving any information back to to the advertiser.

Re:Makes you wonder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610063)

True, otherwise advertisers would be able to mine the data from facebook and be independent from it, lock in works both ways.

really? (-1, Offtopic)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609489)

They get a white box that says "Missing Plug-In"?

Interesting... (1)

Memroid (898199) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609625)

Based on the documents, it looks like Facebook even was able to provide deleted wall posts and friends.

Facebook Logging a good thing? (1)

grumling (94709) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609649)

So do you think our old-media friends will ever point out when a Facebook or other tracking/logging program proves someone wasn't committing a crime because he was at home at the time of the incident?

Re:Facebook Logging a good thing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609731)

No. Evidence making you look guilty is always real. Only that which proves your innocence could be (and probably is) fake.

Re:Facebook Logging a good thing? (1)

tbird81 (946205) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610055)

Are you saying this guy was framed?

Why can't people on this site realise that there are burglars, muggers, rapists and murderers in this world - they're not all framed by the cops and courts. Nearly all of them did the crime.

Re:Facebook Logging a good thing? (1)

Cederic (9623) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610157)

Are you saying this guy was framed?

No, he wasn't. Why would you jump to that conclusion?

Re:Facebook Logging a good thing? (1)

tbird81 (946205) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610421)

Are you that AC? How do you know what he was saying?

Re:Facebook Logging a good thing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610453)

AC here. I was just trolling by being overly cynical, suggesting that evidence that makes you look guilty is always considered real despite the multitude of cases where people are able that police evidence is unreliable and escape conviction for crimes that they committed.

I find this technique of trolling works for most articles, and is quickly modded up.

Other examples are:
  - the insurance troll: "once insurance companies get this information there'll be trouble"
  - the tracking troll: "advertisers are going to use this to track our every move"
  - the information selling troll: "Company X is going to sell information to the highest bidder."
  - the surveillance troll: "malls having video cameras means our every move will be tracked."

Re:Facebook Logging a good thing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610333)

they're not all framed by the cops and courts. Nearly all of them did the crime.

Look up Josiah Sutton. When it came down to it, a woman was raped by two guys, two guys' DNA was retrieved, neither matched him.

The DA was certain that DNA evidence didn't count when it didn't say what he wanted it to say.

I'm sure very few people are framed by the cops. But what the AC said is exactly how they act.

How to download (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609705)

Is there a way to download the whole document? At the moment all I can do is look at individual pages.

less verbose than I thought (3, Interesting)

mindcandy (1252124) | more than 2 years ago | (#39609735)

Compared to what some of the European folks that were using DPA to harass Facebook and getting reams of data, this seems pretty tame .. perhaps it's because FB was just responding the subpoena as written?

Nothing in TFA should surprise anyone that has any experience in enterprise IT .. think about your average webserver and what it logs by default.

Re:less verbose than I thought (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609757)

Likewise - where's the search history?

Can you explain what the last 5 or 6 pages of text are for a layperson? Is that him viewing various pages and profiles?

Re:less verbose than I thought (2)

Magic5Ball (188725) | more than 2 years ago | (#39611091)

The last few pages appear to be a log of every FB page he viewed. The search history you can grab for yourself from those logs. Requests for /search.php are searches (e.g. on 2009-02-17 19:31:10 shows a search for an individual named tom, and then a minute later for someone named kainlin, both followed by viewing of those individuals' profiles).

Re:less verbose than I thought (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610039)

So you're not concerned all the "deleted" stuff is still present?

Evil (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39609797)

This is a gross violation of privacy. The material was clearly only disclosed in connection with a criminal investigation and at least on Facebook's part, clearly marked confidential and not for release. Then a public agency releases it! Dead or not, the entire family has been smeared by this release, apparently including dead ones. This is a violation of something and if it is not in itself criminal, it should be. However I think it is.

JJ

From the Wall: (2)

tbird81 (946205) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610097)

Friends/family:
"How's Boston going for you? How's Bean Town?"

Phil M:
"Well, I've got a rheumatology exam, and I pulled a black 9mm Luger pistol, not far inside the door. Began to bind her hands with white plastic flexcuffs, but before I could complete this, she fought back. In our subsequent struggle I hit her in the skull with my gun, causing injuries I'd describe as serious but not fatal. I then shot her three times. One bullet lodged in her hip, while two bullets went straight through her, piercing her heart and lung. It's also quite cold here at the moment."

Friends/family:
"Really? I heard that it sometimes rains in Boston? I got an oncology exam coming up myself."

Phil M:
"Lol, sometimes. About 55 here I think."

No password? (1)

TClevenger (252206) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610155)

Interesting that there doesn't seem to be a password in that report. Since a lot of people use the same password for everything, you would think that would be demanded.

Or maybe they actually hash the passwords like they should.

Re:No password? (1)

karlm (158591) | more than 2 years ago | (#39610535)

Following the large number of very public password disclosures in the past couple of years, failure to hash passwords (salted by username, user ID and/or random nonce) should be considered gross negligence.

Are there any proposals to standardize a password column type for SQL databases? If the column is write-only but comparable for equality against a varchar/string then the implementation details of hash algo and salting are hidden. The sad thing is that proper password storage could be made a lot more intuitive, even for the "just learned XYZ in 24 days/hourse" crowd.

Black rectangles (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39610821)

That guy must have a huge black rectangle fetish to have filled his account with so many of them.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?