Help
It looks like some people aren't happy with just swiping your bank numbers.
AP IMPACT: Framed for child porn -- by a PC virus
AP IMPACT: Framed for child porn -- by a PC virus
Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.
Page 1 of 1
Something Else to Worry About Viruses Used to Load Child Porn onto Third Party Computers.
#1
- Forum Regular
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 296
- Joined: 22-July 09
- Gender:Male
- Location:Providence
Posted 09 November 2009 - 01:36 AM
To err is Human; To blame it on someone else is even more Human.
Back to top
#2
- Forum Addict
-
- Group: Banned
- Posts: 1,923
- Joined: 21-September 08
- Gender:Male
Posted 28 November 2009 - 02:28 PM
Those sick, sick f***s. Downloading child porn on an innocent person's computer to fulfill their sick pleasure without being caught.
#3
- I know the drill!
-
- Group: Malware Response Instructor
- Posts: 27,039
- Joined: 24-July 08
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, UK
Posted 28 November 2009 - 05:47 PM
Just one more reason for why I am doing what I'm doing on BC.
If I have helped you fix your PC then please donate to the anti-malware cause. Thanks
m0le is a proud member of UNITE (Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators)
m0le is a proud member of UNITE (Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators)
#4
- Forum Addict
-
- Group: Banned
- Posts: 1,923
- Joined: 21-September 08
- Gender:Male
Posted 29 November 2009 - 12:55 PM
Oh hey m0le :D
#5
- I know the drill!
-
- Group: Malware Response Instructor
- Posts: 27,039
- Joined: 24-July 08
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, UK
Posted 29 November 2009 - 01:19 PM
Hey xblindx 
If I have helped you fix your PC then please donate to the anti-malware cause. Thanks
m0le is a proud member of UNITE (Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators)
m0le is a proud member of UNITE (Unified Network of Instructors and Trusted Eliminators)
#7
- Forum Addict
-
- Group: Banned
- Posts: 1,923
- Joined: 21-September 08
- Gender:Male
Posted 01 December 2009 - 05:53 PM
Sick, sick people >_>
#8
- Forum Regular
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 154
- Joined: 28-September 09
- Gender:Male
Posted 16 January 2010 - 04:00 PM
I've brought this situation up to several people years ago when I questioned the validity of prosecuting someone in court for having child porn files on their system.
I know back in the day it was possible to get into a person's system and put in or take out anything you wanted using a net trojan. My question is, does the law enforcement community have the sophistication to be able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, the owner was in fact the person who downloaded the materials?
I'm sure in some cases, the times and locations can be documented and even correlated if it's caught early enough or there is a large enough path to trace (ie repeated usage, or monitoring someone online, in the act) but what about John or Jane Doe who may have had an infection injected and planted on their system and then had the traces removed? I would hope that the prosecution or the defense in the case would do some serious forensics beforehand but I know in many areas with limited budgets and or resources the chances are probably quite slim that practice would in fact be followed.
What we're talking about here is a subject that is very dangerous given the history of the material and it's results in the late 1980's and early 1990's whereby some truly innocent people were prosecuted AND sent to jail, lost everything they owned etc. I would only advise those in the law enforcement investigative fields to be very cautious as well as those who want to comment about it. To those who are guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt they should receive the maximum punishment but I would warn those who would create another witch hunt like we witnessed a decade or so ago to tread very carefully on this matter.
I know back in the day it was possible to get into a person's system and put in or take out anything you wanted using a net trojan. My question is, does the law enforcement community have the sophistication to be able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, the owner was in fact the person who downloaded the materials?
I'm sure in some cases, the times and locations can be documented and even correlated if it's caught early enough or there is a large enough path to trace (ie repeated usage, or monitoring someone online, in the act) but what about John or Jane Doe who may have had an infection injected and planted on their system and then had the traces removed? I would hope that the prosecution or the defense in the case would do some serious forensics beforehand but I know in many areas with limited budgets and or resources the chances are probably quite slim that practice would in fact be followed.
What we're talking about here is a subject that is very dangerous given the history of the material and it's results in the late 1980's and early 1990's whereby some truly innocent people were prosecuted AND sent to jail, lost everything they owned etc. I would only advise those in the law enforcement investigative fields to be very cautious as well as those who want to comment about it. To those who are guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt they should receive the maximum punishment but I would warn those who would create another witch hunt like we witnessed a decade or so ago to tread very carefully on this matter.
Share this topic:
Page 1 of 1