Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

eridani

(51,907 posts)
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 04:29 AM Jun 2015

You Can Be Prosecuted for Clearing Your Browser History

http://www.thenation.com/article/208593/you-can-be-prosecuted-clearing-your-browser-history

In 2010 David Kernell, a University of Tennessee student, was convicted under Sarbanes-Oxley after he deleted digital records that showed he had obtained access to Sarah Palin’s Yahoo e-mail account. Using publicly available information, Kernell answered security questions that allowed him to reset Palin’s Yahoo password to “popcorn.” He downloaded information from Palin’s account, including photographs, and posted the new password online. He then deleted digital information that may have made it easier for federal investigators to find him. Like Matanov, he cleared the cache on his Internet browser. He also uninstalled Firefox, ran a disk defragmentation program to reorganize and clean up his hard drive, and deleted a series of images that he had downloaded from the account. For entering Palin’s e-mail, he was eventually convicted of misdemeanor unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer and felony destruction of records under Sarbanes-Oxley. In January 2012, the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit found that Kernell’s awareness of a potential investigation into his conduct was enough to uphold the felony charge.

At the time Kernell took steps to clean his computer, he does not appear to have known that there was any investigation into his conduct. Regardless, the government felt that they were entitled to that data, and the court agreed that Kernell was legally required to have preserved it.

Hanni Fakhoury, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says the feds’ broad interpretation of Sarbanes-Oxley in the digital age is part of a wider trend: federal agents’ feeling “entitled” to digital data.

Fakhoury compares the broad application of Sarbanes-Oxley in the digital realm to the federal government’s resistance to cellphone companies that want to sell encrypted phones that would prevent law enforcement from being able to access users’ data. When the new encrypted iPhone came out, FBI Director James Comey told reporters that he didn’t understand why companies would “market something expressly to allow people to place themselves beyond the law.”

59 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
You Can Be Prosecuted for Clearing Your Browser History (Original Post) eridani Jun 2015 OP
This is nuts. xfundy Jun 2015 #1
unbelievable marym625 Jun 2015 #2
hacking is a crime? covering up by destroying evidence is a crime. gee who could figure that? nt msongs Jun 2015 #3
"destruction of records" joshcryer Jun 2015 #5
What kind of asinine crap is that? Years before you are ever accused of anything-- eridani Jun 2015 #7
If you have actual awareness that you intentionally committed a crime with your computer, then yes. prayin4rain Jun 2015 #8
And how many people have such knowledge years in advance? eridani Jun 2015 #11
Agreed. I think those people are safe. n/t prayin4rain Jun 2015 #47
Are you saying you think he didn't know that hacking someone's computer is illegal? WillowTree Jun 2015 #53
If the specific purpose was to cover up a crime hack89 Jun 2015 #9
Good luck distinguishing that from garden variety cyberhouskeeping n/t eridani Jun 2015 #12
He wasn't prosecuted for cyber-housekeeping; he was prosecuted for hacking and the deletion Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2015 #15
Sarbanes-Oxley had zero to do with individual file deletion. joshcryer Jun 2015 #24
Need I reply that "people are corporations too" or do I have that backwards LiberalArkie Jun 2015 #37
You nailed it. joshcryer Jun 2015 #39
Your post is an absolutely legitimate argument but the previously poster claiming it was Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2015 #45
It would be easy to determine if it was done on a routine basis hack89 Jun 2015 #40
Sarbanes-Oxley concerned corps. joshcryer Jun 2015 #23
I agree with you about Sarbanes-Oxley hack89 Jun 2015 #41
Then prosecute the destruction of the torture videos. Downwinder Jun 2015 #4
Stop being so sanctimonious. We must look forward, not KingCharlemagne Jun 2015 #31
Looking Forward: Downwinder Jun 2015 #48
DUZY...nt Jesus Malverde Jun 2015 #51
OFFS it was just some folks. L0oniX Jun 2015 #58
Sarbanes-Oxley was supposed to be for Enron style corruption. joshcryer Jun 2015 #6
But people who warned it would be overused weren't just making it up Recursion Jun 2015 #14
It's a joke. joshcryer Jun 2015 #16
Meh. Bribes are not routine for basic business in the US Recursion Jun 2015 #19
Can't disagree. joshcryer Jun 2015 #21
talk about making a stretch... ProdigalJunkMail Jun 2015 #10
"they could use any law to convict you of any thing" = Kafkaesque - nt KingCharlemagne Jun 2015 #33
Not sure how defragmentation meant anything IDemo Jun 2015 #13
When you delete files, they are just marked as deleted, they are still right there. djean111 Jun 2015 #17
Likely not securely without also employing a disk wipe utility, though IDemo Jun 2015 #18
Oh, you are right, but it would sure be on my list of things to do if I was trying to wipe a disk. djean111 Jun 2015 #20
Which is why the Linux dd command is nicknamed 'disk destroyer' IDemo Jun 2015 #22
Linux dd command malokvale77 Jun 2015 #59
You can defrag with null or random data. joshcryer Jun 2015 #25
That's cool. djean111 Jun 2015 #26
Under this broad interpretation? joshcryer Jun 2015 #27
Oh, I know it is. djean111 Jun 2015 #29
Truth. joshcryer Jun 2015 #35
I clean out my browser history as a matter of routine once a week. hobbit709 Jun 2015 #28
This under ann--- Jun 2015 #30
What about deleting e-mails? bigwillq Jun 2015 #32
Clearing browser history should be done daily and automatically, like with Firefox. bemildred Jun 2015 #34
The privileged lie Gman Jun 2015 #36
he gets a federal felony for resetting a password on a yahoo account. Hacker news usa gets NOTHING Sunlei Jun 2015 #38
I've got no sympathy for him. cwydro Jun 2015 #42
just like in any crime when you destroy evidence Romeo.lima333 Jun 2015 #43
LOL, hiding the murder weapon and bloody clothes before you knew the FSogol Jun 2015 #44
Actually the crime is murder Jesus Malverde Jun 2015 #50
I have private browsing as default PowerToThePeople Jun 2015 #46
my browser's set to delete when closed! n/t wildbilln864 Jun 2015 #49
So upgrading my operating system would be a similar violation. liberal N proud Jun 2015 #52
Required to preserve data that may incriminate you? Sounds like the 5th should apply here. Plus Monk06 Jun 2015 #54
The Police in this country are out of control, on so many fronts.nt Joe the Revelator Jun 2015 #55
Coincidentally I was personally involved with Yahoo's efforts to catch this guy... cascadiance Jun 2015 #56
Gee ...my browsers are set to delete history on quit. L0oniX Jun 2015 #57

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
5. "destruction of records"
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 05:18 AM
Jun 2015

They stretched that one pretty thin.

Yeah the guy did wrong but yeah. They were out for him.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
7. What kind of asinine crap is that? Years before you are ever accused of anything--
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 05:52 AM
Jun 2015

--it is criminal to destroy your browser history? Authoritarian bullshit is getting way out of hand on DE. AFter you are accused, it is an entirely different matter.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
11. And how many people have such knowledge years in advance?
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 06:52 AM
Jun 2015

Sure, if you do something you know is wrong and THEN cover it up--but people delete histories all the time just to decrud their information universe.

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
15. He wasn't prosecuted for cyber-housekeeping; he was prosecuted for hacking and the deletion
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 07:22 AM
Jun 2015

was used to extend and aggregate the list of charges. The deletion required an underlying criminal offense before it could be considered criminal in its own right.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
24. Sarbanes-Oxley had zero to do with individual file deletion.
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 07:49 AM
Jun 2015

It was to do with corporations deleting data en masse to cover up corruption. C'mon.

Yes the guy was an asshole or troll or hacker or whatever you want to call him but it didn't legitimately fall under Sarbanes-Oxley.

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
45. Your post is an absolutely legitimate argument but the previously poster claiming it was
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 09:50 AM
Jun 2015

"cyber-housekeeping" is silly.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
40. It would be easy to determine if it was done on a routine basis
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 09:32 AM
Jun 2015

or whether it was a unique event.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
23. Sarbanes-Oxley concerned corps.
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 07:47 AM
Jun 2015

They somehow managed to apply it to an individual. Yes the guy fucked up and was a stupid "hacker" (he did nothing any journalist with protections couldn't have done). But this is a stretch.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
41. I agree with you about Sarbanes-Oxley
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 09:33 AM
Jun 2015

but you have to think there were other ways to charge him if in fact he was covering up a crime.

Downwinder

(12,869 posts)
48. Looking Forward:
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 08:03 PM
Jun 2015

Lets start charging Cops for erased videos.

Either on their own cameras or on witness cameras.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
6. Sarbanes-Oxley was supposed to be for Enron style corruption.
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 05:20 AM
Jun 2015

What a clusterfuck. Hopefully a sane judge overturns this stupidity.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
14. But people who warned it would be overused weren't just making it up
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 07:12 AM
Jun 2015

Seems to happen with every law. Hell, look at RICO and all the gymnastics that get done with it every other week.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
16. It's a joke.
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 07:35 AM
Jun 2015

Surprises me the US places so high* on the corruption indexes.

It's stupid.

*high as in least corrupt.

ProdigalJunkMail

(12,017 posts)
10. talk about making a stretch...
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 06:49 AM
Jun 2015

SOX was written to go after corporations trying to cover their tracks. If they were able to get a conviction under SOX in this case, they could use any law to convict you of any thing. Stupid... but something I would totally expect from government prosecutors... just figured the judge would be smart enough to see the law being abused.

sP

IDemo

(16,926 posts)
13. Not sure how defragmentation meant anything
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 07:06 AM
Jun 2015

It merely re-arranges related blocks of file data together to improve hard drive performance, but doesn't delete or wipe it.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
17. When you delete files, they are just marked as deleted, they are still right there.
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 07:35 AM
Jun 2015

If you have lots of room on your hard drive, they will be there if someone knows how to get at them.
When you defrag, the blocks are likely to be re-arranged/moved over the deleted files, which REALLY deletes them.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
20. Oh, you are right, but it would sure be on my list of things to do if I was trying to wipe a disk.
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 07:41 AM
Jun 2015

And it is free, and easy, and likely would never cause me to go Oh CRAP! if I used it before thinking things through.
I was a system manager for HPs and Tandems and IBM mainframes a while back, and I know that with great powerful software utilities comes the opportunity to yell Oh F**!!!! and hope desperately that your backup is a good one.

IDemo

(16,926 posts)
22. Which is why the Linux dd command is nicknamed 'disk destroyer'
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 07:47 AM
Jun 2015

Normally a low level utility for copying data from one drive or partition to another, it will ruin your day if you confuse source and target.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
25. You can defrag with null or random data.
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 07:51 AM
Jun 2015

ie, overwriting fragmented / deleted data with random data. Impossible for even the NSA or CIA or any government agency to recover. There are dozens of tools out there to let you do this.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
26. That's cool.
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 07:55 AM
Jun 2015

And - if you asked my grandson if he would rather go to jail for clearing history or risk having someone else look at his browser history - the answer would be jail.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
27. Under this broad interpretation?
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 08:09 AM
Jun 2015

Yes.

Say someone like a pedo hijacks the wifi of your router, then they come in and see your grandson did a full null wipe of his hard drive (maybe he did look at some naughty stuff and didn't want anyone to see it, innocent of anything truly bad). Under this utterly ridiculously broad interpretation, your grandson could be implicated. For simply wiping the drive of (legal) data.

I'm dead serious. This is a terrible precedent.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
29. Oh, I know it is.
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 08:17 AM
Jun 2015

Odd to think people are jumping up and down about a watered-down Patriot Act - as if anything will change, ever. Big brother is in charge of us.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
35. Truth.
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 08:35 AM
Jun 2015

The "Freedom Act" is completely false. Sanders rightly voted against it. It's not, as Snowden argues, a move forward. It's a move backward.

hobbit709

(41,694 posts)
28. I clean out my browser history as a matter of routine once a week.
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 08:13 AM
Jun 2015

I also know how to clean all traces in my browser of a lot of things.

bemildred

(90,061 posts)
34. Clearing browser history should be done daily and automatically, like with Firefox.
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 08:21 AM
Jun 2015

And cleaning your cookies is essential too.

Edit: this guy should have recycled his computer, if he was worried about being "looked in to".

Gman

(24,780 posts)
36. The privileged lie
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 08:39 AM
Jun 2015

I just read an article at Media Matters about how ABC News ran a story with the headline saying how Issa decried the State Department for redacting some of Hillary's email then in the second paragraph says the committee actually received unredacted versions.

This looks the same. You will not be prosecuted for clearing your browser history if you don't do it to cover up a crime. But this headline is misleading.

 

cwydro

(51,308 posts)
42. I've got no sympathy for him.
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 09:34 AM
Jun 2015

Getting into someone's personal email is criminal.

Why do I think that if someone had done this to Obama or Kerry that everyone would be ready to throw away the key on this guy?

FSogol

(45,491 posts)
44. LOL, hiding the murder weapon and bloody clothes before you knew the
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 09:47 AM
Jun 2015

police were investigating you is a crime? Who knew?

Jesus Malverde

(10,274 posts)
50. Actually the crime is murder
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 08:25 PM
Jun 2015

The hiding a body and gun is minor in comparison.

It's more akin to being charged with misdemeanor murder but felony hiding a body. It's backwards and an abuse of a law designed for financial crimes.

 

PowerToThePeople

(9,610 posts)
46. I have private browsing as default
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 10:03 AM
Jun 2015

I also mount all temporary directories to a ram drive to conserve the number of writes to my ssd. Nothing is ever saved after a power cycle unless I specifically choose to save it.

Monk06

(7,675 posts)
54. Required to preserve data that may incriminate you? Sounds like the 5th should apply here. Plus
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 08:36 PM
Jun 2015

Sarbanes-Oxley has been abused so much it is almost never used for it's original intent.

 

cascadiance

(19,537 posts)
56. Coincidentally I was personally involved with Yahoo's efforts to catch this guy...
Wed Jun 3, 2015, 09:23 PM
Jun 2015

I know they caught him by looking at raw server mail log files and spotting his IP address.

I think a good question to ask was the timing of when he deleted his browser history. He knew that he had broken in to her account, and that this was unlawful. And Yahoo was aware of what was going on the day he did it, and probably located his IP address that day or not long after that. So, I think he probably knew that investigation was coming his way shortly after the hack.

If Yahoo and the FBI had already gone through prosecuting him and doing everything and he did this months later, then perhaps he could argue that he didn't think his actions then would get in the way of an investigation then, if he had perceived it had already been concluded then. I have to believe though that they probably went through his computer after he purged these records shortly after the hack, which is why they went after him.

I'm guessing they probably wanted to make sure that he hadn't hacked others' accounts too.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»You Can Be Prosecuted for...