Gregory's ServerForging digital artifacts is difficult - there's a huge number of moving parts and they keep changing and it all leaves traces. So here's a description of discrepancies between claims around evidence submitted in a court of law and the data hidden in that evidence: https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/69507.html
|
11 comments
@alextually I'm sorry, that's a flippant answer, but I use a third party service because I don't have time to do everything else I do and also maintain a blog and they've had repeated DDoS issues, and whether we like it or not Javascript is a thing that makes it easier to serve a static page and then gate access to dynamic content based on doing something hard?  @mjg59 I feel like faking that database would have required a VM or real hardware of correct vintage, a fitting OS, being isolated from the outside world, setting the date in BIOS setup before installing the OS, and then carefully, over several reboots while warping time again in setup, making those DB entries. And then the email problem would still have existed. I think the trickiest part there was the Gmail format change. Not insurmountable, but you'd need to be aware of the problem first. @klausman it's really hard! Another instance in the same case involved wastebasket metadata that corresponded to a later version of Windows than was supposed to be associated with the drive  @klausman @mjg59 Even without the Gmail bit, he was relying on the recipient of the email to lie about what they received and when it arrived. I wonder if he assumed his former lawyers would refuse to answer, on the basis of it being under privilege? That might have worked if he wasn't also submitting the possibly privileged information to the court as evidence...  If I had been Satoshi, the *real* Satoshi, I would have checked in my public PGP key with the source code. Then I could prove authorship if the need ever arose. @Phosphenes @mjg59 |
@mjg59 I can't read your blog because I have JavaScript turned off and it's trying to give me a captcha