[Full-Disclosure] hushmail.com, is this true?
chows at ozemail.com.au
Tue Jan 25 22:40:20 GMT 2005
----- Original Message -----
From: <Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu>
To: "james edwards" <hackerwacker at cybermesa.com>
Cc: <full-disclosure at lists.netsys.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 9:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] hushmail.com, is this true?
> > On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:51:07 MST, james edwards said:
> > No business can ignore a judges orders to produce whatever required
> > information.
> > The business can contest the request but if it is proven out the information
> > must be produced.
> So tell me - what do you do when you get served a subpoena requesting all
> your records regarding the development of a specified drug by Pfeizer?
> Oh. You never *had* those records, because you don't keep them? I see.... ;)
> They can't force you to produce information you can prove you don't have...
Sorry for requoting in it's entirety but I couldn't find a way to snip that missed vital info if someone starts reading at this point.
My question to you, Valdis, is how the heck can you prove something DOESN'T exist such as a record? You would have to prove that whatever it is, I.T. related or even drug company drugs related, that you didn't keep records for all similar things and then that would not be believed anyway.
You could, however, produce faked records supporting anything you want these days. Give a reasonable (not great) web site builder an official looking domain name and 5 minutes and that person can be making the most outlandish statements from a web site that shows itself looking respectable.
The only true way an investigator has of proving a point is their own ability to judge a situation, the people and their knowledge of the field they investigate. "Trust me". :)
Full-Disclosure is hosted and sponsored by Secunia.