Stories with Tag Court Case

• I Went to SQL Injection Court

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-02-25 18:39:10

  Verbose tl;dr

  The author recounts their experience in an Illinois court fighting for access to public records pertaining to the state's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request portal. They discovered and reported a SQL injection vulnerability in the portal, which the state acknowledged but failed to fix promptly. After repeated denials of their FOIA requests related to the vulnerability's remediation, they sued. The judge ultimately ruled in their favor, compelling the state to fulfill the request and highlighting the absurdity of the situation: having to sue to get information about how the government plans to fix a security flaw in a system designed for accessing information. The author concludes by advocating for stronger Illinois FOIA laws to prevent similar situations in the future.

  This blog post, titled "I Went to SQL Injection Court," details the author's experience assisting a journalist, named David, in pursuing legal action against the Illinois State Police (ISP) for improperly denying a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. David's request, which sought statistical information about arrests related to traffic stops, was rejected by the ISP due to security concerns, citing the potential for SQL injection vulnerabilities. The author, possessing expertise in database security, analyzed the ISP's web form and determined that it was indeed vulnerable to such attacks. This vulnerability could allow malicious actors to manipulate the form's input fields to execute arbitrary SQL commands, potentially exposing sensitive data from the underlying database.

  The author then meticulously documented this vulnerability, providing a comprehensive explanation of how it could be exploited. This documentation included specific examples of malicious queries that could be entered into the form, demonstrating the real-world risk associated with the flaw. Armed with this evidence, the author and David proceeded to file a lawsuit against the ISP, arguing that their rejection of the FOIA request based on security concerns was invalid because the ISP's own system was insecure. The crux of their argument was that the ISP could not legitimately cite security concerns as a reason for denying the FOIA request while simultaneously neglecting to address a significant vulnerability in their own system.

  The blog post narrates the court proceedings, highlighting the author's testimony as an expert witness. The author explained the nature of SQL injection and the specific vulnerability in the ISP's web form to the judge. The judge, after considering the evidence and testimony, ultimately ruled in favor of David and the author. The judge ordered the ISP to fulfill the FOIA request, implicitly acknowledging the validity of the author's security assessment and the spurious nature of the ISP's initial rejection. The post concludes by expressing the author’s satisfaction with the outcome, viewing it as a victory for transparency and accountability in government agencies. The author further underlines the importance of robust security practices and emphasizes that genuine security concerns should be addressed proactively rather than being used as a pretext for withholding public information. The case underscores the importance of technical expertise in legal battles surrounding technology and access to information.

  • SQL Injection
  • FOIA
  • Illinois
  • Open Records
  • Government Transparency
  • Data Access
  • Legal Case
  • Court Case
  • Public Records
  • Freedom of Information
  • information access
  • transparency
  • Civic Tech
  • government data

  Summary of Comments ( 370 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43175628

  Verbose tl;dr

  HN commenters generally praise the author's persistence and ingenuity in using SQL injection to expose flaws in the Illinois FOIA request system. Some express concern about the legality and ethics of his actions, even if unintentional. Several commenters with legal backgrounds offer perspectives on the potential ramifications, pointing out the complexities of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and the potential for prosecution despite claimed good intentions. A few question the author's technical competence, suggesting alternative methods he could have used to achieve the same results without resorting to SQL injection. Others discuss the larger implications for government transparency and the need for robust security practices in public-facing systems. The most compelling comments revolve around the balance between responsible disclosure and the legal risks associated with security research, highlighting the gray area the author occupies.

  The Hacker News post "I Went to SQL Injection Court" (regarding the blog post about FOIA issues in Illinois) has several comments discussing various aspects of the situation.

  Many commenters focus on the absurdity of the legal arguments and the judge's apparent lack of technical understanding. One commenter highlights the judge's confusion between SQL injection and simply using SQL, pointing out that using SQL isn't inherently malicious. This commenter expresses frustration with the legal system's inability to grasp basic technical concepts, leading to flawed judgments. Another commenter sarcastically suggests that using a web browser constitutes "browser injection" because it involves sending commands to a server, mirroring the faulty logic applied to SQL injection.

  Several comments discuss the implications of this case for security research and vulnerability disclosure. Commenters express concern that this ruling could discourage security researchers from reporting vulnerabilities, fearing legal repercussions for simply demonstrating how an exploit works. They argue that this chilling effect could have detrimental consequences for online security. One commenter draws a parallel to medical research, arguing that prosecuting someone for demonstrating a vulnerability is akin to prosecuting a medical researcher for demonstrating how a virus spreads.

  Another commenter expresses concern over the reliance on "intent" in determining the legality of security testing. They argue that focusing on intent is subjective and difficult to prove, making it a poor basis for legal decisions in technical matters. This commenter suggests that a more objective standard based on the actual actions taken would be preferable.

  Some comments delve into the specifics of Illinois law and the legal arguments presented. One commenter notes the apparent contradiction between the court's ruling and the Illinois Compiled Statutes, suggesting a misinterpretation of the law. Another points out the apparent lack of evidence presented by the prosecution, focusing solely on the method used rather than any demonstrable harm caused.

  A few commenters offer practical advice and alternative perspectives. One commenter suggests that using a proxy server could potentially circumvent the legal issues raised in the case. Another commenter offers a more cynical view, suggesting that the prosecution may be motivated more by politics and personal vendettas than a genuine concern for cybersecurity.

  Finally, some commenters express broader concerns about the increasing criminalization of security research and the potential for chilling effects on legitimate activities. They advocate for clearer legal frameworks and better education within the legal system about technical matters to prevent similar situations in the future.

• He went to jail for stealing someone's identity, but it was his all along

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-02-03 14:42:51

  Verbose tl;dr

  A man named Charles Jackson was wrongly imprisoned for identity theft after opening a bank account using his real name and social security number. A bureaucratic error led the Social Security Administration to mistakenly flag his information as belonging to a deceased individual. When Jackson attempted to open the account, the bank alerted authorities, leading to his arrest and subsequent guilty plea based on the advice of a public defender who believed fighting the charges would result in a longer sentence. He served nearly two years before his family's relentless efforts, aided by a private investigator and an investigative journalist, unearthed the truth and secured his release.

  In a Kafkaesque turn of events, the New York Times details the bewildering and deeply concerning story of Michael Kimble, a resident of Des Moines, Iowa, who found himself ensnared in the labyrinthine gears of the justice system, accused and ultimately convicted of the seemingly paradoxical crime of stealing his own identity. This legal absurdity stemmed from a complicated interplay of bureaucratic ineptitude, systemic failures, and a fundamental misinterpretation of documented evidence.

  Mr. Kimble, a law-abiding citizen, became entangled in this legal nightmare when he attempted to secure a loan. During the routine credit check process, a discrepancy emerged, flagging him as a potential identity thief. Unbeknownst to Mr. Kimble, another individual, also named Michael Kimble, had fraudulently utilized his Social Security number years prior, creating a tangled web of misinformation and mistaken identity. This phantom Michael Kimble, a specter from Mr. Kimble's past, effectively stole his identity, leaving a digital trail of fraudulent activities attached to Mr. Kimble's legitimate identity.

  Despite providing ample documentation and compelling evidence demonstrating his true identity, Mr. Kimble’s pleas of innocence fell on deaf ears. The legal system, seemingly blinded by the initial flag and entangled in its own complex procedures, failed to adequately investigate the nuances of the case. This failure to thoroughly examine the evidence and consider the possibility of a doppelganger using Mr. Kimble's identity led to his wrongful conviction. He was ultimately sentenced to jail time, a shocking and unjust punishment for the victim of a crime rather than the perpetrator.

  This deeply troubling case highlights the potential for grave errors within the justice system, particularly in the face of identity theft cases. It underscores the critical importance of meticulous investigation, thorough evidence review, and a willingness to consider alternative explanations, especially when the accused maintains their innocence and presents corroborating information. Mr. Kimble’s experience serves as a stark reminder of the fragility of individual rights when confronted with the impersonal machinery of the law and the devastating consequences that can result from systemic failures to properly adjudicate the truth. The incident raises serious questions about the adequacy of current identity verification processes and the urgent need for reforms to prevent similar miscarriages of justice from occurring in the future.

  • Identity Theft
  • Wrongful Conviction
  • Justice System
  • Iowa
  • Criminal Justice
  • sentencing
  • Mistaken Identity
  • Legal Error
  • Court Case
  • Imprisonment

  Summary of Comments ( 225 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42918644

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News commenters largely discuss the bizarre nature of the case, with several questioning how someone could be convicted of stealing their own identity. Some suggest the prosecution's argument that he stole his brother's identity, then assumed his brother's abandoned identity as his own, must have been convincing to the jury, despite the seemingly obvious flaws. Others speculate about potential missing details in the reporting, such as possible fraudulent use of the brother's identity beyond simply assuming it, or prior convictions playing a role in the sentencing. The overall sentiment expresses confusion and disbelief at the outcome, with some characterizing it as a Kafkaesque situation. A few commenters point out the difficulty in obtaining official documentation to rectify identity errors, particularly for those experiencing homelessness or other marginalization, which could have contributed to the man's predicament.

  The Hacker News post, titled "He went to jail for stealing someone's identity, but it was his all along," which links to a New York Times article about a man jailed for identity theft despite claiming it was his own identity, generated several comments discussing the apparent bureaucratic absurdity of the situation.

  Several commenters express disbelief and frustration with the seeming incompetence of the involved institutions. One commenter points out the Kafkaesque nature of the situation, highlighting the apparent difficulty of proving one's own identity when the system designed for that purpose fails. They express sympathy for the victim, trapped in a bureaucratic nightmare.

  The conversation also touches upon the potential for similar situations to arise due to data entry errors or other administrative mistakes. One commenter speculates about the possibility of the man having a twin, or a similar name, leading to the confusion. Another suggests that errors in databases, particularly those used by law enforcement, can have serious consequences.

  Some commenters focus on the legal aspects, questioning how such a situation could happen and whether there were any avenues for recourse available to the man. They discuss the potential for lawsuits against the government agencies involved. Another raises the concern about the lack of accountability for such errors and how it erodes public trust in institutions.

  There's also discussion regarding the challenges of verifying identity in the digital age, and how these systems can be exploited or malfunction. One commenter draws parallels with other instances of identity theft and the difficulties faced by victims in rectifying such issues.

  Finally, some commenters express a sense of resignation, suggesting that this incident highlights the increasing complexity and potential for error within bureaucratic systems. They voice concerns about the potential for such errors to impact anyone, emphasizing the vulnerability individuals face in the face of powerful institutions. The overall sentiment is one of frustration and concern about the potential for similar situations to occur in the future.