Hackers gaining power of subpoena via fake “emergency data requests”

Re:Hackers gaining power of subpoena via fake “emergency dat... by otterley on Wednesday March 30, 2022 @02:15AM (#30852005)

Can you point us to an incident where this has ever happened, namely, where a service provider didn't to respond to a demand immediately while they verified its authenticity and someone went to jail for it? Or even got a finger wagged at them by a judge? Third-party records production is almost never time-sensitive to the degree that, say, a warrant to search for drugs or contraband is, and there's little risk of spoliation of evidence.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Hackers gaining power of subpoena via fake “emergency dat... by rosndo on Wednesday March 30, 2022 @04:16AM (#30852598)

As the article points out, nobody actually verifies these requests.

So no, I can’t point you to such an incident. Have people been held in contempt for failing to comply fast enough? for sure.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Hackers gaining power of subpoena via fake “emergency dat... by otterley on Wednesday March 30, 2022 @09:47AM (#30855167)

You cannot conclude that because someone has been held in contempt for intentionally failing to respond to a records production request because they simply didn’t want to do it, that someone would also be held in contempt for delaying production for a few hours while they make a good-faith attempt to verify the authenticity of a request. Judges take all the facts and circumstances into account—including intent—when making these kinds of decisions, especially those that involve depriving someone of their liberty.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Hackers gaining power of subpoena via fake “emergency dat... by rosndo on Wednesday March 30, 2022 @11:11AM (#30856252)

> delaying production for a few hours

Ah yeah, I think you are totally right. Our disagreement stems from the fact that I don’t believe that few hours is sufficient at all.

[ Parent | on HN ]