Good intentions, but I've personally participated in the digital forensic investigation of more than one high profile case where CIA zero-day's were utilized to plant child porn onto computers of VIP's in an effort to frame them for various reasons - so unless someone is straight up caught red handed having sex with a child I almost always lean on the side of state-sponsored entities framing "child porn" cases.
If there is video evidence of someone browsing a child porn folder, that's one thing. If it's just meta data from the harddrive, that's so simple to plant it can even be embedded quite easily in other benign content and served to a target system through an ad.
Most child porn accusations seem to be bullshit used to silence someone. I couldn't with any good conscious back any legislation that would just enable these existing blackmail mechanisms to have even more deadly effect.
how many articles have busted people with mega amount of CP?
why is this relevant at all? maybe 100% of people who get articles written about them have had CP planted on them. maybe you haven't been paying attention, but thanks to wikileaks we know the NSA and CIA have software specifically for planting CP on people.
what is the percentage of planted CP compared to those that buy it, or share it?
that's impossible to know unless the CIA and NSA keeps logs of all the CP they've planted. even then, how hard would it be to download CP to someone's computer if you gain access to it. unless you catch someone in person downloading it (not by following their IP address) or you see them beating their meat to kids there's no way to be sure the person who owns a computer with CP is the person who downloaded it.
and where did i ever deny that there is a huge problem with CP?
view the rest of the comments →
obvious_throwaway1 ago
Good intentions, but I've personally participated in the digital forensic investigation of more than one high profile case where CIA zero-day's were utilized to plant child porn onto computers of VIP's in an effort to frame them for various reasons - so unless someone is straight up caught red handed having sex with a child I almost always lean on the side of state-sponsored entities framing "child porn" cases.
If there is video evidence of someone browsing a child porn folder, that's one thing. If it's just meta data from the harddrive, that's so simple to plant it can even be embedded quite easily in other benign content and served to a target system through an ad.
Most child porn accusations seem to be bullshit used to silence someone. I couldn't with any good conscious back any legislation that would just enable these existing blackmail mechanisms to have even more deadly effect.
new4now ago
those that watch are part of the problem
supply and demand
they might not be the ones abusing children, but because of them and their money, CP is made
dontdoxxmefaggots ago
did you even read his post?
new4now ago
what is the percentage of planted CP compared to those that buy it, or share it?
how many articles have busted people with mega amount of CP?
throwaway can assume what he wants when people are busted, but you cant deny there is a huge problem with Child Porn
dontdoxxmefaggots ago
why is this relevant at all? maybe 100% of people who get articles written about them have had CP planted on them. maybe you haven't been paying attention, but thanks to wikileaks we know the NSA and CIA have software specifically for planting CP on people.
that's impossible to know unless the CIA and NSA keeps logs of all the CP they've planted. even then, how hard would it be to download CP to someone's computer if you gain access to it. unless you catch someone in person downloading it (not by following their IP address) or you see them beating their meat to kids there's no way to be sure the person who owns a computer with CP is the person who downloaded it.
and where did i ever deny that there is a huge problem with CP?