The FBI Finally Says How It ‘Legally’ Pinpointed Silk Road’s Server

[itsAj]

Something about this capha story doesn't make sense, but I can't put my finger on it. To me, it reads like a red herring.

I agree. If seems like something is missing. I think it would be wise for the defense to depose the FBI agent before the trial to get more details about what exactly it was that he did. I would find it hard to believe that the FBI got the IP address from the headers of the return data after just a few attempts of random letters being input.

[shawshankinmate37927]

If it was not for drug dealers then drug users would never be able to get ahold of drugs, nor would they have ever gotten into using illegal drugs. Also drug dealers will often take advantage of a person's addiction and do things like extend credit and give a discount to a person who is unable to pay to prevent them from potentially breaking their habit.

As if people that support the war on drugs really give a shit about drug addicts.

Drug addiction isn't the problem, it's just a symptom.  That's why trying to take away the supply won't eliminate the demand.  Only counseling and treatment can do that.

Furthermore, not all drug users are drug addicts.  Many are recreational users with no danger of becoming addicted.

[Biochemical]

Interesting, but nothing special i expected something more.

[dankkk]

If it was not for drug dealers then drug users would never be able to get ahold of drugs, nor would they have ever gotten into using illegal drugs. Also drug dealers will often take advantage of a person's addiction and do things like extend credit and give a discount to a person who is unable to pay to prevent them from potentially breaking their habit.

As if people that support the war on drugs really give a shit about drug addicts.

Drug addiction isn't the problem, it's just a symptom.  That's why trying to take away the supply won't eliminate the demand.  Only counseling and treatment can do that.

Furthermore, not all drug users are drug addicts.  Many are recreational users with no danger of becoming addicted.

If drugs are not available in the first place then people would never get addicted.

You are correct to say that not all users are addicts, but the majority of the drugs consumed are done so by addicts. This and many "hard" drugs more or less guarantee that people will get addicted and many people get addicted after using it just one time.

[darkota]

If it was not for drug dealers then drug users would never be able to get ahold of drugs, nor would they have ever gotten into using illegal drugs. Also drug dealers will often take advantage of a person's addiction and do things like extend credit and give a discount to a person who is unable to pay to prevent them from potentially breaking their habit.

As if people that support the war on drugs really give a shit about drug addicts.

Drug addiction isn't the problem, it's just a symptom.  That's why trying to take away the supply won't eliminate the demand.  Only counseling and treatment can do that.

Furthermore, not all drug users are drug addicts.  Many are recreational users with no danger of becoming addicted.

If drugs are not available in the first place then people would never get addicted.

You are correct to say that not all users are addicts, but the majority of the drugs consumed are done so by addicts. This and many "hard" drugs more or less guarantee that people will get addicted and many people get addicted after using it just one time.

This is true. You can get addicted to cocaine after using it just one time. Same with many other drugs. They ruin people's lives.

[shawshankinmate37927]

If drugs are not available in the first place then people would never get addicted.

You are correct to say that not all users are addicts, but the majority of the drugs consumed are done so by addicts. This and many "hard" drugs more or less guarantee that people will get addicted and many people get addicted after using it just one time.

This is true. You can get addicted to cocaine after using it just one time. Same with many other drugs. They ruin people's lives.

The war on drugs has ruined more lives than the drugs themselves.

[shawshankinmate37927]

If drugs are not available in the first place then people would never get addicted.

Drug availability isn't the cause of drug addiction.  Drug addiction is just a symptom of other psychological issues.  Regardless of how good one's intentions may be, drug availability can't be eliminated by politicians declaring war on drugs.  The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

You are correct to say that not all users are addicts, but the majority of the drugs consumed are done so by addicts. This and many "hard" drugs more or less guarantee that people will get addicted and many people get addicted after using it just one time.

You've been exposed to far too much propaganda.

[RoadStress]

The war on drugs has ruined more lives than the drugs themselves.

This! Also the money spend on the war on drugs could've helped many in need! Let's not even get started on the private rights of the people. People should be allowed to do whatever they wish in their homes at least. As long as they don't interfere in a bad way with others then there shouldn't be a problem. Why not allow all the addicts to have their fun in their homes? If they don't go out on the streets to hurt/steal/damage/etc where is the problem? Oh wait, but the alcohol industry and the tobacco one will not make that much money...

[darkota]

If drugs are not available in the first place then people would never get addicted.

Drug availability isn't the cause of drug addiction.  Drug addiction is just a symptom of other psychological issues.  Regardless of how good one's intentions may be, drug availability can't be eliminated by politicians declaring war on drugs.  The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

You are correct to say that not all users are addicts, but the majority of the drugs consumed are done so by addicts. This and many "hard" drugs more or less guarantee that people will get addicted and many people get addicted after using it just one time.

You've been exposed to far too much propaganda.

And you've been exposed to too much ignorance. Stop being a conspiracy theorist and get a grip on life please.

http://www.drugfreeworld.org/drugfacts/cocaine/why-is-cocaine-so-highly-addictive.html

http://abovetheinfluence.com/drugs/cocaine/

http://easyread.drugabuse.gov/meth-effects.php

+1million others along with peer reviewed studies showing the devastating effects of using drugs.

[darkota]

If drugs are not available in the first place then people would never get addicted.

You are correct to say that not all users are addicts, but the majority of the drugs consumed are done so by addicts. This and many "hard" drugs more or less guarantee that people will get addicted and many people get addicted after using it just one time.

This is true. You can get addicted to cocaine after using it just one time. Same with many other drugs. They ruin people's lives.

The war on drugs has ruined more lives than the drugs themselves.

That makes absolutely no sense.

[TheButterZone]

"If drugs are not available in the first place" LOL.

Beyond belief that you've never seen people using paint, glue, or any substance whatsoever to get high (and... low?)

[moni3z]

There is a refutation here: https://www.nikcub.com/posts/analyzing-fbi-explanation-silk-road/ by somebody who claimed to have been poking at the login for months and didn't notice the same things the FBI supposedly noticed. I imagine now defense attorneys will argue about this until the end of days

[The One]

If drugs are not available in the first place then people would never get addicted.

You are correct to say that not all users are addicts, but the majority of the drugs consumed are done so by addicts. This and many "hard" drugs more or less guarantee that people will get addicted and many people get addicted after using it just one time.

This is true. You can get addicted to cocaine after using it just one time. Same with many other drugs. They ruin people's lives.

The war on drugs has ruined more lives than the drugs themselves.

And costs countless billions.....ruining the economy.

[The One]

"If drugs are not available in the first place" LOL.

Beyond belief that you've never seen people using paint, glue, or any substance whatsoever to get high (and... low?)

Exactly....always felt a bit drunk when i'd painted a room.

[rikkejohn]

If drugs are not available in the first place then people would never get addicted.

Drug availability isn't the cause of drug addiction.  Drug addiction is just a symptom of other psychological issues.  Regardless of how good one's intentions may be, drug availability can't be eliminated by politicians declaring war on drugs.  The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

You are correct to say that not all users are addicts, but the majority of the drugs consumed are done so by addicts. This and many "hard" drugs more or less guarantee that people will get addicted and many people get addicted after using it just one time.

You've been exposed to far too much propaganda.

It's a valid point, but availability causes those with a propensity to become addicted to drug X, to become addicted to it.

But you're right to dismiss the other post. If you don't crave altered states, not even heroin will light your fire.

Drug addiction is complicated, and very rarely, if ever, a problem merely due to physical dependency (hardly any drugs are physically addictive).

Cigarettes, alcohol, benzos are the hardest to kick. Heroin is hardish. But they are the ones that give withdrawal.

The rest are only hard insofar as they are pleasurable for some people and they can't imagine life without them.

[bigasic]

I got this from a post on one of the sites that talks about this.. i think this guy nailed it on the head..

From poster:

From a recent wired article (docket), it appears to me that the F.B.I. used brute force SQL injection to find out the necessary information

“As they typed “miscellaneous” strings of characters into the login page’s entry fields, Tarbell writes that they noticed an IP address associated with some data returned by the site didn’t match any known Tor “nodes,” the computers that bounce information through Tor’s anonymity network to obscure its true source. And when they entered that IP address directly into a browser, the Silk Road’s CAPTCHA prompt appeared, the garbled-letter image designed to prevent spam bots from entering the site. ”

“That discovery by the FBI, the prosecuting attorneys in Ulbricht’s case argue, means that no illegal spying techniques were needed to pinpoint the world’s largest anonymous bazaar for narcotics. In fact, they write, the evidence revealing its physical location was left in plain sight. ”

“After the initial revelation of the Silk Road server’s location in a data center in Reykjavik, Iceland, the filing explains that Reykjavik police accessed and secretly copied the server’s data. As agents of a foreign government, the prosecution argues, they weren’t required to seek a warrant from any US authority. And the prosecution writes that Ulbricht didn’t himself even own the server: He had allegedly rented it through a third-party service, which in turn rented space in the Icelandic data center. The brief goes on to quote the web host’s terms of service, which warned that “systems may be monitored for all lawful purposes, including to ensure that use is authorized.”

“But the prosecution’s motion goes on to request that all of Ulbricht’s claims of illegal evidence collection be dismissed. The defense had argued that a surveillance technique known as a pen register applied to Ulbricht’s Comcast internet connection without a warrant had also violated his privacy; the prosecution responds that it merely collected metadata rather than the actual content of his communications, and thus didn’t require proving probable cause to a judge. The defense’s earlier motion argued that when the FBI did get a warrant to seize and search Ulbricht’s Samsung laptop, it used an illegal “general” warrant rather than specifying the data it sought. The prosecution claims that it needed to see all data on the machine to establish Ulbricht’s alleged identity as the so-called “Dread Pirate Roberts” who had created and managed the Silk Road’s billion-dollar drug trade. ”

What is the government doing now ,violating people’s fourth amendment rights , then trying to find out ways to make T.O.R. less anonymous ?

Is this what we want the government to do?

End post:

I think its kind of weird, that they were messing with the code and discovered this hole.. I believe that there is much more to this story.. while I think its mostly true, i would like to know the real story as to how they discovered it.. Typing in miscellaneous items would take a shit load of time.. some big computer was doing something...

[darkota]

If drugs are not available in the first place then people would never get addicted.

Drug availability isn't the cause of drug addiction.  Drug addiction is just a symptom of other psychological issues.  Regardless of how good one's intentions may be, drug availability can't be eliminated by politicians declaring war on drugs.  The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

You are correct to say that not all users are addicts, but the majority of the drugs consumed are done so by addicts. This and many "hard" drugs more or less guarantee that people will get addicted and many people get addicted after using it just one time.

You've been exposed to far too much propaganda.

It's a valid point, but availability causes those with a propensity to become addicted to drug X, to become addicted to it.

But you're right to dismiss the other post. If you don't crave altered states, not even heroin will light your fire.

Drug addiction is complicated, and very rarely, if ever, a problem merely due to physical dependency (hardly any drugs are physically addictive).

Cigarettes, alcohol, benzos are the hardest to kick. Heroin is hardish. But they are the ones that give withdrawal.

The rest are only hard insofar as they are pleasurable for some people and they can't imagine life without them.

You're terribly misinformed. Using drugs(especially Heroin, Cocaine, Meth, etc etc) over a long period of time creates a dependency on them. Some countries even give long-term drug addicts free drugs, because the Physical withdrawal they'd receive if they stopped taking the drugs would kill them.

Some symptoms of withdrawal after short-term use include, anxiety or jumpiness; shakiness or trembling; sweating, nausea and vomiting; insomnia; depression; irritability; fatigue or loss of appetite and headaches.

Effects of withdrawal from Long-term use of heavy drugs can cause death.

[rikkejohn]

If it was not for drug dealers then drug users would never be able to get ahold of drugs, nor would they have ever gotten into using illegal drugs. Also drug dealers will often take advantage of a person's addiction and do things like extend credit and give a discount to a person who is unable to pay to prevent them from potentially breaking their habit.

As if people that support the war on drugs really give a shit about drug addicts.

Drug addiction isn't the problem, it's just a symptom.  That's why trying to take away the supply won't eliminate the demand.  Only counseling and treatment can do that.

Furthermore, not all drug users are drug addicts.  Many are recreational users with no danger of becoming addicted.

If drugs are not available in the first place then people would never get addicted.

You are correct to say that not all users are addicts, but the majority of the drugs consumed are done so by addicts. This and many "hard" drugs more or less guarantee that people will get addicted and many people get addicted after using it just one time.

This is true. You can get addicted to cocaine after using it just one time. Same with many other drugs. They ruin people's lives.

Cocaine isn't physically addictive. So I guess you think people become psychologically dependent after wanting to ride on one night?

[bigasic]

If drugs are not available in the first place then people would never get addicted.

Drug availability isn't the cause of drug addiction.  Drug addiction is just a symptom of other psychological issues.  Regardless of how good one's intentions may be, drug availability can't be eliminated by politicians declaring war on drugs.  The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

You are correct to say that not all users are addicts, but the majority of the drugs consumed are done so by addicts. This and many "hard" drugs more or less guarantee that people will get addicted and many people get addicted after using it just one time.

You've been exposed to far too much propaganda.

It's a valid point, but availability causes those with a propensity to become addicted to drug X, to become addicted to it.

But you're right to dismiss the other post. If you don't crave altered states, not even heroin will light your fire.

Drug addiction is complicated, and very rarely, if ever, a problem merely due to physical dependency (hardly any drugs are physically addictive).

Cigarettes, alcohol, benzos are the hardest to kick. Heroin is hardish. But they are the ones that give withdrawal.

The rest are only hard insofar as they are pleasurable for some people and they can't imagine life without them.

You're terribly misinformed. Using drugs(especially Heroin, Cocaine, Meth, etc etc) over a long period of time creates a dependency on them. Some countries even give long-term drug addicts free drugs, because the Physical withdrawal they'd receive if they stopped taking the drugs would kill them.

There are some drugs that require a slow taper, like any type of benzos (xanax) Alcohol. But drugs like Heroine, Meth, cocaine, can be stopped, you wont die, but you will want to die if the reports are correct they are hell and you feel like dying.. but there are some drugs that you cannot stop cold turkey..some will doctors will want you to stay on some drugs while your pregnant as if you stop the baby will go into distress, so there are truths to both sides.. but in general, not too many drugs cant be stopped cold turkey..youll just feel like shit...

[rikkejohn]

If drugs are not available in the first place then people would never get addicted.

Drug availability isn't the cause of drug addiction.  Drug addiction is just a symptom of other psychological issues.  Regardless of how good one's intentions may be, drug availability can't be eliminated by politicians declaring war on drugs.  The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

You are correct to say that not all users are addicts, but the majority of the drugs consumed are done so by addicts. This and many "hard" drugs more or less guarantee that people will get addicted and many people get addicted after using it just one time.

You've been exposed to far too much propaganda.

It's a valid point, but availability causes those with a propensity to become addicted to drug X, to become addicted to it.

But you're right to dismiss the other post. If you don't crave altered states, not even heroin will light your fire.

Drug addiction is complicated, and very rarely, if ever, a problem merely due to physical dependency (hardly any drugs are physically addictive).

Cigarettes, alcohol, benzos are the hardest to kick. Heroin is hardish. But they are the ones that give withdrawal.

The rest are only hard insofar as they are pleasurable for some people and they can't imagine life without them.

You're terribly misinformed. Using drugs(especially Heroin, Cocaine, Meth, etc etc) over a long period of time creates a dependency on them. Some countries even give long-term drug addicts free drugs, because the Physical withdrawal they'd receive if they stopped taking the drugs would kill them.

Some symptoms of withdrawal after short-term use include, anxiety or jumpiness; shakiness or trembling; sweating, nausea and vomiting; insomnia; depression; irritability; fatigue or loss of appetite and headaches.

Effects of withdrawal from Long-term use of heavy drugs can cause death.

What a stupid post. You've lumped "drugs" into a single category. Most mind-altering substances are not physically addictive. they can cause pain and anguish, the user can become irritable and anxious if access to them dries up. But as far as drugs causing physical addiction and leading to withdrawal, there are not many. Tobacco, alcohol, benzodiazapines and opiates are the ones that spring to mind.

All the above are available legally or by prescription.