FBI ran website sharing thousands of child porn images

[Silver]

So the FBI ran a child porn website.

Oh, but it is okay, because the gov'ment was trying to catch pedos.

I freaking swear.

[account_inactive]

Apologies about the poll by the way, change it to something less aggressive or something. But yeah it seems everyone is in agreement, or most people are, that it was not okay for the FBI to do this.

[paulpablo]

It wouldn't be the FBI's responsibility to arrest people abroad, that would be put upon interpol and the law enforcement from other countries.

Thanks, Captain Obvious.  My point is that given the absence of reports of arrests abroad -- by whatever agency -- you can't reasonably say that 137 arrests aren't all that there are. If you want to build an argument about the efficacy of this operation, you'll have to present better numbers. And you'll have to avoid relying on suppositions. You wrote:

Well exactly, you don't know one way or the other about the other arrests or the percentage of the overall users of the website that were in America so the percentage you established as a success rate is void.

The success rate that I have quoted is supported by the numbers we have at hand.  The success rate you wish to use in justifying this operation has no support in the data, by your own admission.

To me it seems logical that if the FBI simply shut down the website that would mean they wouldn't have been able to infect the website, and identify it's users.

Obviously not the case. They could shut down the site, and at the same time redirect anyone trying to browse it to a page which infects their computer without delivering kiddie porn. This isn't rocket surgery.

I never said the 137 arrests aren't all that there are.  I said that I think 137 arrests are quite a lot, the information was passed onto Interpol and you have no way of knowing how successful the task was.


If there is an absence of arrests abroad this has nothing to do with the inadequacy of the FBI, and we have no way of knowing if there were arrests or weren't, we just know it has nothing to do with the FBI they just did the right thing and passed the information on to interpol. 

Yes you are quoting a success rate based on the numbers we have at hand.  Which aren't in anyway detailed enough to give an accurate success rate.  This means the percentage you keep quoting as a success rate is void.  We do know there were 137 arrests, by the standards of a typical law enforcement operation I'd say that number is quite high.  If it was very successful, or not successful enough is subjective to our uninformed opinions based on information we don't know, but 137 arrests is at least some success.

I don't know much about taking over websites, hacking and so on.  According to the FBI statements they claim they had to keep the site running in order to get the information they did, it's possible it was done with more than just clicking on a website maybe the offenders had to download pictures and so on in order for their location to be established.  If this is wrong then of course it's wrong to keep the website going for no reason, I don't know enough about the situation they were in or enough about computers in general to say the FBI statements were wrong.

[Silver]

I am more concerned about how those children would feel about having their pictures displayed by an organization that should protect them rather than further exploit what they endured. I am more concerned about how the parents of those children would feel about having those photos displayed.

Clearly, due to the short run, the FBI had not thought properly or logically about what they did.

[Sterben]

I am more concerned about how those children would feel about having their pictures displayed by an organization that should protect them rather than further exploit what they endured.  I am more concerned about how the parents of those children would feel about having those photos displayed.

Clearly, due to the short run, the FBI had not thought properly or logically about what they did.

        Kitan makes a very point here but, the real question is does children involved know there were posted, and what kind of content was it? If it was your traditional example of Uncle Touchies basement then yes, they would quite traumatized from such an event. If it was content such as underwear or bathing shots, they did not know that were being exploited. Since it was a bait and hook OP, I doubt they would inform the parents that there child was involved in such acts. This was a non issue in the pre-internet days in which I grew up in, hell on 56k porn was hard enough to view and kids back then had more home and neighborhood stuff to do. Now in this day and age, even if Mom and Dad says no to a facebook account; they just make one anyways and use a fake name and start posting away, which opens the door for contact and content to be available for these types of CP sites. Even if the parents try there best to monitor there kids actives, there is a lot of smart kids who just hack off the protection put in place by there parents. It's getting the point to were you could receive a picture message from a number you do not know, your first thought is who's this texting me? You open it up and a picture of teen topless or a dick pic. According to the law you are now in possession of CP, even if you do the right thing and report it you can get a lot of trouble just for keeping that message to report it.

       Which is unfair cause you did not request it, even if you don't report it, and parent finds your number texted in there phone. That parent is calling the authorities on you, then you get involved in a very tricky legal issue.

[Silver]

Sterben, you have issues.

[Sterben]

How do I have issues? I'm just trying to be objective to the discussion along with throwing a Patton Oswalt joke in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_conti...gSC8Qle6nA

[Thumpalumpacus]

Thanks, Captain Obvious.  My point is that given the absence of reports of arrests abroad -- by whatever agency -- you can't reasonably say that 137 arrests aren't all that there are. If you want to build an argument about the efficacy of this operation, you'll have to present better numbers. And you'll have to avoid relying on suppositions. You wrote:


The success rate that I have quoted is supported by the numbers we have at hand.  The success rate you wish to use in justifying this operation has no support in the data, by your own admission.


Obviously not the case. They could shut down the site, and at the same time redirect anyone trying to browse it to a page which infects their computer without delivering kiddie porn. This isn't rocket surgery.

I never said the 137 arrests aren't all that there are.  I said that I think 137 arrests are quite a lot, the information was passed onto Interpol and you have no way of knowing how successful the task was.


If there is an absence of arrests abroad this has nothing to do with the inadequacy of the FBI, and we have no way of knowing if there were arrests or weren't, we just know it has nothing to do with the FBI they just did the right thing and passed the information on to interpol. 

Yes you are quoting a success rate based on the numbers we have at hand.  Which aren't in anyway detailed enough to give an accurate success rate.  This means the percentage you keep quoting as a success rate is void.  We do know there were 137 arrests, by the standards of a typical law enforcement operation I'd say that number is quite high.  If it was very successful, or not successful enough is subjective to our uninformed opinions based on information we don't know, but 137 arrests is at least some success.

You're ignoring my point -- I'll return to this conversation when you address my points.

[Sterben]

At the end of the day what they did was entrapment, even if it was to catch sick fucks, it's still illegal for them to use such a tacit. The courts will have a major issue on how the evidence was gathered and most likely all charges will dropped against the who were caught.

[Silver]

At the end of the day what they did was entrapment, even if it was to catch sick fucks, it's still illegal for them to use such a tacit. The courts will have a major issue on how the evidence was gathered and most likely all charges will dropped against the who were caught.

The justice system is not perfect.