Computer science student challenges tech seizure
A Boston graduate student is challenging the legality of a warrant that enabled police to search his dorm room and seize several of his computers, an iPod, a cell phone, and other devices.
Riccardo Calixte, a computer science student at Boston College, is petitioning the Newton District Court in Massachusetts for the immediate return of his property and is demanding that investigators be prohibited from any further searches or analysis of his digital data. The confiscation of Calixte's property was spurred by an investigation into who sent an e-mail to a Boston College mailing list alleging that Calixte's roommate is gay.
According to a complaint (PDF) Calixte filed April 10, the warrant issued is invalid because there was no probable cause to believe that a crime was committed. The Electronic Frontier Foundation is representing Calixte and filed a memorandum (PDF) in support of Calixte's complaint.
Kevin Christopher, a detective for the Boston College Police Department, submitted an application (PDF) for a search warrant on March 30 and was granted the warrant (PDF) that day.
Christopher said in his application that, following a dispute between Calixte and his roommate in January, the roommate told an officer that Calixte was "involved in some computer hacking incidents." Christopher subsequently interviewed the roommate, who said among other things that Calixte has a reputation as a "hacker," uses two different operating systems to allegedly "hide his illegal activities," and that Calixte had hacked into the university grading system to change students' grades. The roommate also told Christopher that he had been the victim of a mass e-mail incident in which someone sent out attachments to a fake profile of the roommate on a gay Web site.
The police department was later asked to look into the origin of the mass e-mails, given the stress endured by the roommate, and the e-mails were allegedly traced back to Calixte. Christopher subsequently obtained the warrant in question, claiming that given all the information submitted about Calixte, his property would constitute evidence of the crimes of "obtaining computer services by fraud or misrepresentation" and obtaining "unauthorized access to a computer system."
The EFF is arguing it is irrelevant whether or not Calixte sent the e-mails, since the application for the warrant fails to establish probable cause that sending such an e-mail is a criminal offense.
Calixte "stands accused of fraud, though no money or thing of value is at issue," EFF said in its statement of support. "He is accused of 'hacking' merely by sending an e-mail to a list server. Without a crime, there is no just cause for the search."
Furthermore, the statement argues, "No evidence about the e-mail could conceivably have been stored on Mr. Calixte's cell phone or iPod, and yet neither has been returned after nearly two weeks. This scope of the seizure supports the inevitable conclusion that this investigation is a fishing expedition against a student whose reputation and indeed entire educational career has suffered at the hands of a former roommate who has painted an unflattering portrait of him to school officials."
No court date has yet been scheduled to hear Calixte's motion to quash the warrant.
Stephanie Condon is a staff writer for CNET News focused on the intersection of technology and politics. She is based in Washington, D.C. E-mail Stephanie. 
Who said anything about shooting cops? Trolling seems to be what YOU are engaged in.
Duh! I see now what you meant. My apologies :-)
Calixte "stands accused of fraud, though no money or thing of value is at issue," EFF said in its statement of support. "He is accused of 'hacking' merely by sending an e-mail to a list server. Without a crime, there is no just cause for the search.", therefore the search was unconstitutional and therefore a larger issue is present :)
"...but what if he wasn't lying? why if he really did send the email? "
First, lying isn't illegal. Second, sending an email is not illegal.
The law does not protect one from 'hurt feelings' such as being "outed." The 'outed' person's remedy is through a tort claim in civil court, not criminal court.
Furthermore their is no evidence to connect Calixte to the alleged victim of the email, except the unsupported hearsay statements of a disgruntled ex-roommate
Lastly, if we started issuing warrants based on the hurt feelings of a former roommate, we might as well just throw the constitution out the door. There has to be a 'real' crime, not just something the cops pulled out of clear air... [Incidentally, the 'unauthorized' access based on violating some third party's terms of service, etc has already been tried in court and it didn't work. If the cops looked up from their donuts and were really trying to do their job, they would know this.]
In this case, it seems the cops were 'hot' to get someone and they settled on Clixte. This is what makes a state a 'police state' - criminalizing a person's actions, simply because you don't like what they said.
It does appear that the police are trying to make a 'police state' here where saying that someone is a homosexual is 'illegal' unless it is they themselves that are saying that. Personally, I have the right to make an assumption about someone based on their behavior.
Posting via an email list false information IS illegal. You don't know if there is any evidence to connect Calixte to the email.
If he in fact did hack into the school's computers, that IS illegal. If they traced that back to his computer, they have evidence and cause for the warrant.
Lying to cops IS illegal.
Posting via an email list false information IS illegal. You don't know if there is any evidence to connect Calixte to the email.
If he in fact did hack into the school's computers, that IS illegal. If they traced that back to his computer, they have evidence and cause for the warrant.
____________________________
The problem is, if you read the damn article: THEY DIDN'T DO THOSE THINGS! They didn't actually see if there was an actual hack into the schools computers.
Oh, and as to the 'lying to cops is illegal'.... no, it isn't. Lying in COURT is illegal, lying to cops is not.
Posting false information via an e-mail list: again, NOT ILLEGAL! The fact is that you could not prove that this was 'false information'.... could just be the guys opinion of his roommate!
Filing a false police report is illegal, in case you haven't noticed....
Cute, now everyone who dual boots winblows and Linux is automatically assumed to be hiding something? The only thing I'm hiding is the .357 under my bed. I'll show it to you if you come into my home without my welcome (warrant or not - I don't care anymore, warrants obviously mean nothing if you can get one on false pretenses like this).
You don't want that.
@mraardvark - quote the law that states truecrypt is illegal in any way.
how is using two OSs hiding anything? the roomate sounds like an idiot. Using two different operating systems does not hide anything...anything can be found on any system
That sounds to me more like they're trying to get him for hacking into the school's computer system, which was alleged by the roommate (according to paragraph 5).
Hmm, I'm no lawyer but just doing some research on the "Computer Fraud and Abuse Act", it's hard to say that Calixte even committed a crime in the first place. That act seems to deal mostly with government computer systems, and is focused on protecting national security.* I don't think a university qualifies as a government agency. I suppose there are other laws that deal with computer fraud for non-government systems.
But, it does seem like they article is mis representing things a little bit, since the cops are probably accusing Calixte of breaking in to the school's computer system to change students' grades, and not for mass-emailing a link to a fake gay profile. This makes more sense since sending the e-mails cannot by described as "obtaining computer services by fraud", or obtaining "unauthorized access to a computer system." Though these sentences do describe the act of hacking into a school's computer system to change grades. Unless of course, Calixte sent the e-mails from an e-mail address that he was not authorized to access.
It could also have just been that the cops knew they couldn't get Calixte on any crimes related to the e-mails, so they used that as a cover to gather evidence for the more serious school hacking charge.
*http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1030.html
I think that basic food, basic clothing, basic shelter, basic health care, basic transportation, etc. are HUMAN RIGHTS that should be given to everyone. If you want to charge for NON-basic things or charge more money for non-basic things.... fine, but don't price those basics out of the reach of the majority.
On personal rights? The law can keep it's nose out of my business as long as I am not physically harming someone else without their permission, stealing from someone else, breaking someone else's property without their permission ON PURPOSE, or forcing someone into sexual situations that they don't want with threats of force or actual physical force (almost all pedosexuals DON'T meet this in the slightest).
I agree with the socialists STRONGLY on government interfering with my private choices of what to wear, but I don't have a problem with them saying that EVERYONE has a right to basic clothing and regulating the people who make that basic clothing to make sure that everyone has the access to that basic clothing, at least, to espouse my point.
Socialism is against the Constitution and is immoral. Everyone in America should and does have the freedom of opportunity to pursue their dreams. What they don't have is a right to get their dreams made by taking someone else's property and life, which is exactly what socialism does.
You say everyone has a right to basic shelter, food, etc. Where in the Constitution does it grant the power our imperial federal government to force one citizen to help provide for another's shelter or food? And if they do have that right, and that person(s) decides they don't want to work for it, you still want the government to put a gun to my head and give a part of my life's work to someone who is too lazy / inept to provide for themselves. That is not American nor is it moral. Government should never be used to force someone to provide for another. That is a form of slavery which is what socialism does.
Capitalism is not perfect, but it has lifted more people out of poverty than any other system in human history. This backlash against capitalism is freighting because people aren't thinking clearly. Look at Europe as a prime example of even why socialist democracies keep their populations poorer than if they let the markets do more. Europe has been stagnant for decades because of socialist policies. America's poor are considered middle class in Europe. If capitalism is so bad, why is it that our poor are better off than the rest of the world?
http://www.gnn.tv/threads/10799/Bush_on_the_Constitution_It_s_just_a_goddamned_piece_of_paper
Oh, and you misspelled "nazi".
Those two mistakes took all credibility away from you. Back under the bridge with you, troll!
As to him spending over 1 million to keep his birth certificate from being released? Easy: if it is released, it is a GRAND INVITATION TO IDENTITY FRAUD! If it was MY birth certificate, I would spend 10 times that amount to keep it from being made public if I had that amount of money, in all honesty.
Thirdly, he did provide his certification of birth to the people who make the decision on whether is a natural-born citizen or not.
The people in our government who certify for elections that someone is a natural born citizen are the ONLY ones that matter.
Fourthly, most birth certificates in Hawaii dating back 40+ years are like that! They were NOT what you call a "high tech" society back then, in any sense of the word.
Basically, SHUT UP! You've been proven wrong above, and it's time to simple zip your lip or the government is right to throw you in prison for LIBEL if you don't!
[CNET editors' note: Prohibited content deleted.]
You have not proven anything I said wrong. Have you even read his book? He does not call himself a socialist. He calls himself a Marxist, his favorite professors were Marxists, and his friends were all Marxists. If you read his book you would have found that out.
Most people in America are NOT socialist. I'd love to see where you came up with that. There is no statistic that shows a majority of Americans are socialist. But that doesn't even matter. It is unconstitutional. It's unlawful. It's immoral. That's fact.
As for the birth certificate. Fraud from having his certificate? How? Who the hell can pose as the President of the United States and get away with it? No one would use anything like his certificate for identity theft. Besides, he did not prove anything to the people who make the decision regarding if he's natural born because there is no one who did that. Only the electors can certify whether or not a candidate is eligible, but they didn't do that. In fact, 4 of the electors are currently suing in order to see the actual birth certificate because they were not shown it. Get your facts straight before you spout off your nonsense. Do you even understand how Hawaii handled citizenship and birth certificates back then? With the way you're talking, you certainly don't understand. He released a scanned copy of his certification of birth through the internet. He has not shown his actual birth certificate.
I'd love to know what I've written that is considered libel.
- by Another_Duel_Booter May 2, 2009 1:07 PM PDT
- OK, so if they think he hacked into the schools computers, did they check the log files on the schools computers? Did they confirm any grade changes that would hint at a breach? Did they do anything other than take the word of a disgruntled room-mate? There are ways to see if there was a hack before taking the computer, just jumping to a warrant seems like illegal search and seizure to me. And as far as duel booting to hide illegal activity, how? Simply booting in and out of 2 or more OSes isn't going to hid anything.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(45 Comments)