FBI posts fake hyperlinks. Raiding Houses.

The FBI has recently adopted a novel investigative technique: posting hyperlinks that purport to be illegal videos of minors having sex, and then raiding the homes of anyone willing to click on them.

Undercover FBI agents used this hyperlink-enticement technique, which directed Internet users to a clandestine government server, to stage armed raids of homes in Pennsylvania, New York, and Nevada last year. The supposed video files actually were gibberish and contained no illegal images.

A CNET News.com review of legal documents shows that courts have approved of this technique, even though it raises questions about entrapment, the problems of identifying who's using an open wireless connection--and whether anyone who clicks on a FBI link that contains no c pornography should be automatically subject to a dawn raid by federal police.

Roderick Vosburgh, a doctoral student at Temple University who also taught history at La Salle University, was raided at home in February 2007 after he allegedly clicked on the FBI's hyperlink. Federal agents knocked on the door around 7 a.m., falsely claiming they wanted to talk to Vosburgh about his car. Once he opened the door, they threw him to the ground outside his house and handcuffed him.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9899151-38.html

Yay for the FBI doing whatever they want to catch whoever they want for whatever reason they want!

I just read this : The implications of the FBI's hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or c pornography--and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the "unlawfulimages.com" domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on. :shock: This cant be right, can it?

I just read this : The implications of the FBI's hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or c pornography--and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the "unlawfulimages.com" domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on. :shock: This cant be right, can it?

Tjeremiah1988

I just read this : The implications of the FBI's hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or c pornography--and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the "unlawfulimages.com" domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on. :shock: This cant be right, can it?

Tjeremiah1988

when I read this I first thought of the book "1984". That is not good..

I mean, I can see them investigating the people, but if they do things like raiding, thats pretty messed up.

So I could just send someone a link to those videos and then the FBI would raid their house when they clicked on it?

Somehow I get the sense that the FBI did not think this through all the way.

I just read this : The implications of the FBI's hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or c pornography--and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the "unlawfulimages.com" domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on. :shock: This cant be right, can it?

Tjeremiah1988

So I could just send someone a link to those videos and then the FBI would raid their house when they clicked on it?

Somehow I get the sense that the FBI did not think this through all the way.

GabuEx

So I could just send someone a link to those videos and then the FBI would raid their house when they clicked on it?

Somehow I get the sense that the FBI did not think this through all the way.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

So I could just send someone a link to those videos and then the FBI would raid their house when they clicked on it?

Somehow I get the sense that the FBI did not think this through all the way.

Brutal_Elitegs

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

So I could just send someone a link to those videos and then the FBI would raid their house when they clicked on it?

Somehow I get the sense that the FBI did not think this through all the way.

Brutal_Elitegs

i can sense some horrible outcomes from that on message boards like ours.

*kid finds out the hyperlink*

"can someone post me a link to a good skateboard site?"

*uh oh*

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

So I could just send someone a link to those videos and then the FBI would raid their house when they clicked on it?

Somehow I get the sense that the FBI did not think this through all the way.

Brutal_Elitegs

Yep, Fed Roll will be the new Rick Roll. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before the FBI starts putting "Never Gonna Give You Up" on these sting sites instead of gibberish encoded videos in order to encourage this new meme.

"hm, what's this my friend just sent me a link to an outtake from last night's Daily Show..."
do do do dooo doo we're no strangers to looove...
"AH HAHA! DUDE! WTF LOL! Now I'm going to get arrested and listed as a sex offender lol!"

im afraid to click any hyperlinks now:|

[QUOTE="Tjeremiah1988"]

I just read this : The implications of the FBI's hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or c pornography--and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the "unlawfulimages.com" domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on. :shock: This cant be right, can it?

carrot-cake

I think the idea is that, they use this as probable cause to raid your home. Whether or not you go to jail is dependant on whether or not you actually are in posession of child pornography. I didn't read the article though.

Wow. Just...wow. :|

Who the hell in the FBI came up with this genius idea?

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

So I could just send someone a link to those videos and then the FBI would raid their house when they clicked on it?

Somehow I get the sense that the FBI did not think this through all the way.

Brutal_Elitegs

:lol: wow..

[QUOTE="carrot-cake"]

[QUOTE="Tjeremiah1988"]

I just read this : The implications of the FBI's hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or c pornography--and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the "unlawfulimages.com" domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on. :shock: This cant be right, can it?

RearNakedChoke

I think the idea is that, they use this as probable cause to raid your home. Whether or not you go to jail is dependant on whether or not you actually are in posession of child pornography. I didn't read the article though.

I believe the article said that the Ph.D. student the story focused on was convicted on a charge of clicking on the link. Apparently it counts as an attempt to obtain child porn. So this is basically the FBI just taking their already dubious tactics that they use with drug and prostitute stings and applying it to internet crime.

Bungie confirms Halo 4!

Bam! Enjoy your FBI raid gamespot members!

I just read this : The implications of the FBI's hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or c pornography--and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the "unlawfulimages.com" domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on. :shock: This cant be right, can it?

Tjeremiah1988

I think people have already exploited this to frame people. I hope they thought through a way to deal with this problem, because it's ridiculously easy to do.thriteenthmonke

They can't even prove intent with the way they have the video hosted. I could send someone a link purporting to be of, say, the Stewart-Cramer Daily Show interview, they click it and all they get is a foreign site with a garbled up video feed that just looks like a bug. The person won't think anything is wrong except that the site is glitched so they continue to visit the site hoping that the video will fix itself and they'll get to see the interview clip. The FBI will, of course, present this as evidence that they definitely had intent to watch kiddie porn because they were trying to access a kiddie porn video multiple times. Seriously, if they don't even track the referring source and they keep this **** up then the internet is going to get really ugly, really fast.

The FBI has recently adopted a novel investigative technique: posting hyperlinks that purport to be illegal videos of minors having sex, and then raiding the homes of anyone willing to click on them.

Undercover FBI agents used this hyperlink-enticement technique, which directed Internet users to a clandestine government server, to stage armed raids of homes in Pennsylvania, New York, and Nevada last year. The supposed video files actually were gibberish and contained no illegal images.

A CNET News.com review of legal documents shows that courts have approved of this technique, even though it raises questions about entrapment, the problems of identifying who's using an open wireless connection--and whether anyone who clicks on a FBI link that contains no c pornography should be automatically subject to a dawn raid by federal police.

Roderick Vosburgh, a doctoral student at Temple University who also taught history at La Salle University, was raided at home in February 2007 after he allegedly clicked on the FBI's hyperlink. Federal agents knocked on the door around 7 a.m., falsely claiming they wanted to talk to Vosburgh about his car. Once he opened the door, they threw him to the ground outside his house and handcuffed him.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9899151-38.html

Tjeremiah1988

If I have a problem with this, does that mean that I support child pornography?

[QUOTE="thriteenthmonke"]I think people have already exploited this to frame people. I hope they thought through a way to deal with this problem, because it's ridiculously easy to do.gameguy6700

They can't even prove intent with the way they have the video hosted. I could send someone a link purporting to be of, say, the Stewart-Cramer Daily Show interview, they click it and all they get is a foreign site with a garbled up video feed that just looks like a bug. The person won't think anything is wrong except that the site is glitched so they continue to visit the site hoping that the video will fix itself and they'll get to see the interview clip. The FBI will, of course, present this as evidence that they definitely had intent to watch kiddie porn because they were trying to access a kiddie porn video multiple times. Seriously, if they don't even track the referring source and they keep this **** up then the internet is going to get really ugly, really fast.

Until more info about this situation comes out I will have to assume that the links clearly identified itself as a link to child porn and not to free Big League Chew or something not illegal.

[QUOTE="Tjeremiah1988"]

I just read this : The implications of the FBI's hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or c pornography--and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the "unlawfulimages.com" domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on. :shock: This cant be right, can it?

Iconic_D

I know, it's not like anyone can screw around with links. This professor of law at Harvard was on CNN talking about just this very issue.

[QUOTE="Iconic_D"][QUOTE="Tjeremiah1988"]

I just read this : The implications of the FBI's hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or c pornography--and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the "unlawfulimages.com" domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on. :shock: This cant be right, can it?

gameguy6700

I know, it's not like anyone can screw around with links. This professor of law at Harvard was on CNN talking about just this very issue.

Bungie confirms Halo 4!

Bam! Enjoy your FBI raid gamespot members!

RearNakedChoke

MrGeezer

Not only does that mean you support child pornography, it also means the FBI has enough reason to obtain a search warrant to search your house.

[QUOTE="gameguy6700"]

[QUOTE="thriteenthmonke"]I think people have already exploited this to frame people. I hope they thought through a way to deal with this problem, because it's ridiculously easy to do.Iconic_D

They can't even prove intent with the way they have the video hosted. I could send someone a link purporting to be of, say, the Stewart-Cramer Daily Show interview, they click it and all they get is a foreign site with a garbled up video feed that just looks like a bug. The person won't think anything is wrong except that the site is glitched so they continue to visit the site hoping that the video will fix itself and they'll get to see the interview clip. The FBI will, of course, present this as evidence that they definitely had intent to watch kiddie porn because they were trying to access a kiddie porn video multiple times. Seriously, if they don't even track the referring source and they keep this **** up then the internet is going to get really ugly, really fast.

Yes, the FBI is telling you it's kiddie porn. The guy from work who hates your existence and wants your job, however...

Pfft! This is easy to avoid, if the pornsite you are navigating looks somethign like "Superteenslut.gov" do -NOT- click the links! The key is not trusting the website if it ends with .Gov! otherwise you should be good me thinks!

[QUOTE="gameguy6700"]

[QUOTE="Iconic_D"] Well come on like what kind of normal person is going to click on a site with Child Porn for no reason, of course the people who actually are offenders like that will probably click on those linksIconic_D

I know, it's not like anyone can screw around with links. This professor of law at Harvard was on CNN talking about just this very issue.

[QUOTE="Iconic_D"][QUOTE="Tjeremiah1988"]

I just read this : The implications of the FBI's hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or c pornography--and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the "unlawfulimages.com" domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on. :shock: This cant be right, can it?

gameguy6700

I know, it's not like anyone can screw around with links. This professor of law at Harvard was on CNN talking about just this very issue.

[QUOTE="Tjeremiah1988"]

I just read this : The implications of the FBI's hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or c pornography--and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the "unlawfulimages.com" domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on. :shock: This cant be right, can it?

Iconic_D

LOL **** i just failed, i was thinking differently

Yeah now i see what your getting at how any average ass guy is just going to change the link and screw anybodies life up

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

So I could just send someone a link to those videos and then the FBI would raid their house when they clicked on it?

Somehow I get the sense that the FBI did not think this through all the way.

Brutal_Elitegs

So I could just send someone a link to those videos and then the FBI would raid their house when they clicked on it?

Somehow I get the sense that the FBI did not think this through all the way.

GabuEx

I was thinking of the same thing while reading the TC's Post.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

So I could just send someone a link to those videos and then the FBI would raid their house when they clicked on it?

Somehow I get the sense that the FBI did not think this through all the way.

Brutal_Elitegs

[QUOTE="Brutal_Elitegs"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]

So I could just send someone a link to those videos and then the FBI would raid their house when they clicked on it?

Somehow I get the sense that the FBI did not think this through all the way.

Toriko42

Hope I find the Link by April Fools.

Oyy.. this sounds like several shades of stupid. I'm pretty damn sure some legal sites even contain some ridiculous sketchy names. So I imagine that some of the FBI links could get mixed up in the mess and some poor bugger expecting some legal content might get horribly screwed. I wonder just how clearly defined the nature of the names will be that it screams illegal before some curious guy might accidently click the wrong link on a google search. Seriously there can be just to much ambiguity in the names of hyperlinks that I can't see the FBI justifying this at all. And then there is the potential issue of some prick giving out a ilnk to some unknowing person >_>

So I could just send someone a link to those videos and then the FBI would raid their house when they clicked on it?

Somehow I get the sense that the FBI did not think this through all the way.

GabuEx

The FBI is the one putting up "Child Porn" on the internet. I bet there the number one source for child pornography ON THE INTERNET!

There exposing the little kids still, which is horrible. Hey if you wouldnt mind, can we use your "10 year old sons" Video to capture anyone that clicks on it.

COMPLETELY INSANE! There suppose to eliminate the porn, not produce it, there just as bad as the actual person who made it.

So I could just send someone a link to those videos and then the FBI would raid their house when they clicked on it?

Somehow I get the sense that the FBI did not think this through all the way.