Re: Computer Hacking

Also in further response to my last posting would there be a way of tracing
the person in particular to identify who it was who hacked into you
regardless of whether you had a firewall or not....

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 15:20:34 +0100, Chris Suckling
<csba17084@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> Also in further response to my last posting would there be a way of
> tracing the person in particular to identify who it was who hacked into
> you
> regardless of whether you had a firewall or not....

It should be possible for a law enforcement agency to find out if the
computer
seized has any trojan or virus on it and if it is vulnerable (firewall
on/off,
antivirus up/out dated,etc), which could establish the likehood of someone
being able to hack into the computer.

If the computer is found vulnerable and the suspect claims that some
malicious
hacker has planted the pictures the line of investigation will go towards
examining the internet activity, if they can not proof that the suspect has
downloaded the pictures off the internet and the computer has a trojan, in
my
oppinion the case does not hold enough ground to convict a suspect beyond
reasonable doubt.

Most pictures are downloaded off the internet, if the suspect does not
wipe his hard disk
and does not use encryption, any law enforcement agency should be able to
find
the traces. Even if the disk has been wiped it could be possible to find
out the
traces if not done properly, and having a data wiper installed will surely
count
against the defendant in court, but this alone proves nothing.

Each case is different from another, and there are many factors into
consideration.

For private questions feel free to email me: forensic at ml1.net , but I
do not
guarantee any quick reply or even a correct one.

PS: Unless the persorn hacking into your computer it is a scriptkiddie in
my oppinion
it is highly unlikely he could be traced. It will all depence on the logs
available
and how careful he has been, having a firewall does not guarantee you can
not be hacked
but it makes it harder.

I have noticed you are using an UK ISP to post, the UK has one of the
worst records in the
World about data privacy, you may want to stop your ISP from holding your
data for years
by using some paid for proxy like:

http://www.blacknet.biz
http://www.steganos.com
htt://www.cotse.net

Or tor http://tor.eff.org, which is free but needs a little learning to be
used.

Melic

The free server thing that you refer to who owns it and when you say the
information on it cannot be obtained what do you mean, what would be the
difference from getting the free pay option to the paid option.... any
response or help would be appreciated


"Melic" <email@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:op.tgvccjdw7jng6g@host...
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 15:20:34 +0100, Chris Suckling
> <csba17084@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Also in further response to my last posting would there be a way of
>> tracing the person in particular to identify who it was who hacked into
>> you
>> regardless of whether you had a firewall or not....
>
> It should be possible for a law enforcement agency to find out if the
> computer
> seized has any trojan or virus on it and if it is vulnerable (firewall
> on/off,
> antivirus up/out dated,etc), which could establish the likehood of someone
> being able to hack into the computer.
>
> If the computer is found vulnerable and the suspect claims that some
> malicious
> hacker has planted the pictures the line of investigation will go towards
> examining the internet activity, if they can not proof that the suspect
> has
> downloaded the pictures off the internet and the computer has a trojan, in
> my
> oppinion the case does not hold enough ground to convict a suspect beyond
> reasonable doubt.
>
> Most pictures are downloaded off the internet, if the suspect does not
> wipe his hard disk
> and does not use encryption, any law enforcement agency should be able to
> find
> the traces. Even if the disk has been wiped it could be possible to find
> out the
> traces if not done properly, and having a data wiper installed will surely
> count
> against the defendant in court, but this alone proves nothing.
>
> Each case is different from another, and there are many factors into
> consideration.
>
> For private questions feel free to email me: forensic at ml1.net , but I
> do not
> guarantee any quick reply or even a correct one.
>
> PS: Unless the persorn hacking into your computer it is a scriptkiddie in
> my oppinion
> it is highly unlikely he could be traced. It will all depence on the logs
> available
> and how careful he has been, having a firewall does not guarantee you can
> not be hacked
> but it makes it harder.
>
> I have noticed you are using an UK ISP to post, the UK has one of the
> worst records in the
> World about data privacy, you may want to stop your ISP from holding your
> data for years
> by using some paid for proxy like:
>
> http://www.blacknet.biz
> http://www.steganos.com
> htt://www.cotse.net
>
> Or tor http://tor.eff.org, which is free but needs a little learning to be
> used.
>
>

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 20:48:08 +0100, Chris Suckling
<csba17084@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> Melic
>
> The free server thing that you refer to who owns it and when you say the
> information on it cannot be obtained what do you mean, what would be the
> difference from getting the free pay option to the paid option.... any
> response or help would be appreciated

I think that if you visit the webpage given you will find it very well
explained.

But cutting short, Tor is not a single server, it is a combination of
servers
where not even the owner of the servers cand find out who is using it at
the
last end, as they work chained.

The Tor network was created by the Electronics Frontiers Foundation so
that people living in opressive regimes can surf the internet without
fear of prosecution and bypassing the internet filters of their countries.

Tor server operators are all volunteers nobody gets paid anything, it's
all done to help citizens to be anonymous on the internet, because data
retention laws can be abused as much as can be helpful.

Because Tor is run by volunteers for free, it can be real slow sometimes
and it is not reccomended for big file downloads, that is one
difference between paid for servers and Tor, paid for servers are much
faster. Another bad point of Tor is that is not easy to set up for
newbies. Paid for servers will all make sure you can make it work
otherwise they lose your subscription.

The bad side of the paid for servers is that you have to trust them, they
claim not to retain your data but you have no way of knowing 100%, with
Tor you
have no such problem because even if they retain data it is useless, the
server operators could not know who is doing what as it is not a single
server but a network of them.

Newsgroups that are more convenient for anonymous internet access
discussions:

alt.anonymous
alt.privacy.anon-server

Cotse (http://www.cotse.net) also has its own newsgroup:

alt.cotse

I think you are using also a UK company to access newsgroups, be
warned that they also tend to censor the newsgroups they carry, if you
want free access to newsgroups without any censorship just Google
for "uncensored newsprovider", then you can set it up with SSL and your
ISP will not be able to tell what you are reading, get a provider
from any western country other than UK, it is good for privacy to use
companies based out of your home country, ideally based somewhere
with strong data privacy laws.

Anonymous search:

http://www.blackboxsearch.com
http://www.scroogle.org

Tor has its own newsgroup too I forgot the address.

Some other useful link:

http://www.secure-tunnel.com