
Responding to msg by declan+@CMU.EDU ("Declan B. McCullagh") on Sun, 31 Mar 10:42 AM
One gave me the impression the DoJ had to develop custom hardware and software for this "Internet wiretap" done without Harvard's direct cooperation.
DoJ is probably cutting spying-sensitive Harvard some slack, or slyly crowing about setting up the Crimson butts with a promise for deniability. Is it possible that the CFP chit-chat revved that Janus-spin, practicing for more pervasive cyber-sleuth slathering of wannabe L&O insiders? ---------- The New York Times, March 31, 1996, p. 20. First Internet Wiretap Leads to a Suspect [Excerpts of story not in the TWP] Stephen P. Heymann, a Federal prosecutor in Boston, said investigators had worked with Harvard to determine a method of tracking the suspect that would protect the privacy of legitimate users. He said that the Harvard system had 16,500 accounts and 13,000 users and that about 60,000 E-mail messages each day moved in and out of the area where investigators were looking for the intruder. Mr. Heymann said investigators had used a high-speed computer to check for 10 to 15 key words that matched the intruder's profile. If they were not sure if an electronic communication containing a key word was Mr. Ardita's, the investigators looked at 80 characters on either side of the key word to make that determination. Mr. Heymann said investigators believed that only twice had they read a complete message that was not Mr. Ardita's. [End excerpt]
participants (1)
-
John Young