just like civilians
Oops, now ya gone and pushed one of my hot buttons. ) Civilian refers to those who retain the civil rights as oposed to those who give up their rights so that others may have theirs – specifically the military. By that defination LE and the general public are all civilians.
Now that said, I don't see why we would assume that LE would use software licensed for non-LE only. The tools are a small part of the forensic equation. The procedures and the examiner are much more important.
As to an LE only forum, I'm in a CISSP forum. And a CCE only forum. What's the big deal?
I'm still enjoying the sharing of view so I hope this thread continues. Civilians and military alike. )
The CF world isn't divided into people with CCE and people without CCE, it is however divided into LE/Non LE.
just like civilians
Oops, now ya gone and pushed one of my hot buttons. ) Civilian refers to those who retain the civil rights as oposed to those who give up their rights so that others may have theirs – specifically the military. By that defination LE and the general public are all civilians.
Yeah, but that's not the right definition. LEOs are part of the government, which is authorized by Civilians. LEOs can be civilians when they're grocery shopping, but not when they are acting as enforcers in an official capacity. Then they're the government. And then they're soldiers just like our other heros. Don't ever think that our law enforcement people aren't involved in a war just like our military.
Yeah, but that's not the right definition. LEOs are part of the government, which is authorized by Civilians. LEOs can be civilians when they're grocery shopping, but not when they are acting as enforcers in an official capacity. Then they're the government. And then they're soldiers just like our other heros. Don't ever think that our law enforcement people aren't involved in a war just like our military.
One minute you're a soldier protected by the crown (in the UK) whilst on duty (although not immune, but that's a separate discussion), the next you ordering a beer in the local bar, and will get arrested if you start a fight. There's clearly a demarcation in the execution of ones duties. If LE needed a piece of software that was licensed 'non - LE' they could obtain the legal right, through the courts, to use it.
I'm no legal expert, nor do I profess to be, but isn't copyright et al a means of protecting some specific right of the individual, and don't the courts authorize 'violations' of individuals rights all the time, in the form of search warrants, wire taps etc?
If LE needed a piece of software that was licensed 'non - LE' they could obtain the legal right, through the courts, to use it.
I think you're right. But, as far as I know, it also works the other way. I remember seeing a discussion that ILook (an LE-only program) had been licensed to a defense examiner to reproduce the work done by LE on a specific case.
I remember seeing a discussion that ILook (an LE-only program) had been licensed to a defense examiner to reproduce the work done by LE on a specific case.
Yeah, to me that makes sense.
I can tell you from experience that I asked Elliot for a copy of the software on a case from several years ago and he said no.
The FBI used the software and formulated a report so I said that I would like to duplicate the report and see how it was formulated. He still said no. Even after offering him any stipulations on the software that he asked for including providing any of my personal information, agreeing to use the software on a machine that was not connected to the net, agreeing to not copy the software, providing a copy of the report that shows his software was what was used as the primary tool against our client, etc. he still said no.
How do you put out a piece of software for forensic purposes and then restrict the ownership or usage of that software?
I can tell you from experience that I asked Elliot for a copy of the software on a case from several years ago and he said no.
Sorry, I should have also mentioned I think the license was court ordered.
If LE needed a piece of software that was licensed 'non - LE' they could obtain the legal right, through the courts, to use it.
You'd be right, I think, if the author of the software had committed a crime and access to the software would be "evidence" of some sort. But if some corporation wrote software and they themselves were not suspected of a crime, how could a subpeona be issued for LE to use the software? No Probable Cause, no suspicion of a crime, just some company that works for the defense. I'm going to ask some legal eagles about this. It's such an interesting scenario.
As past NYPD (New York) I can pretty much state that very few will be open on these boards regarding cases or case specifics. Yes, very paranoid and there are reasons why. Don't post anything you don't want to follow you into a courtroom.
2. Cops are an odd breed. I can't really explain this well to non-LE and I apologize for that. I am hoping a better articulate LE person could clarify this a bit. I can best describe it as "trust issues". Cops are probably the most paranoid group of people and some only feel comfortable discussing job realated issues with other cops…. I know that didn't sound right, so I expect a few flames for it ) (edited here) This is part due to Defense Attorneys that research the LE examiner and use everything they can find against the officer on the stand. It's actually a crazy thought but it does happen, so private forums help with this issue.