GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #13

[pearl]

I have a hypothetical question here that someone may can answer. I would ask my husband who is an IT person, but he is asleep. I know that someone who knows how to do so can search my personal computer and find out all the websites that I have visited whether one time or a hundred times. They can find out the date and times I visited the sites. I know that when I visit a website, my IP address is logged into their system. My question is what if my computer's info and the website's info do not match? This maybe could happen because of a glitch or it could be intentional manipulation of a website's data. Whose records would be believable in a court of law?

 

[Sonya610]

They can find out the date and times I visited the sites. I know that when I visit a website, my IP address is logged into their system. My question is what if my computer's info and the website's info do not match? This maybe could happen because of a glitch or it could be intentional manipulation of a website's data. Whose records would be believable in a court of law?

I ain't no IT expert but it wouldn't involve your computer all that much. It would involve the server IP logs, and the ISP logs. Most all of us have dynamic IP addresses, which means every time we shut down our computer or reboot our ISP gives us a fresh IP address (within a group of IP addresses that they own).

So if server logs showed connections from certain ip addresses, the suspect IP addresses would be compared to the originating ISP logs (your internet provider keeps logs of who used what ip at what time) and that would identify who specifically connected to the server.

The actual home computer might show websites visited, and cached pages that were visited, and of course auto login info for those sites, but actually IP info? Nope do not think so.

For instance if the Feds were running a fake child site or whatever, they would log every IP address that connects to that server, then they would look up IP number group and get a warrant for the ISP that owns those numbers so they could check the IP logs and therefore they would know WHO specifically used that IP address at that time specific time to connect to their fake child site.

In simple language, it wouldn't be the home computer vs the website server, it would be the website server logs compared to the internet service provider logs and most likely warrants would be issued to get the info for either, well in the case of a capital murder trial you can be sure warrants would be issued by serious folk, they wouldn't call up the host or the internet provider and just ask for confidential information in a sweet way.

 

[pearl]

I ain't no IT expert but it wouldn't involve your computer all that much. It would involve the server IP logs, and the ISP logs. Most all of us have dynamic IP addresses, which means every time we shut down our computer or reboot our ISP gives us a fresh IP address (within a group of IP addresses that they own).

So if server logs showed connections from certain ip addresses, the suspect IP addresses would be compared to the originating ISP logs (your internet provider keeps logs of who used what ip at what time) and that would identify who specifically connected to the server.

The actual home computer might show websites visited, and cached pages that were visited, and of course auto login info for those sites, but actually IP info? Nope.

For instance if the Feds were running a fake child site or whatever, they would log every IP address that connects to that server, then they would look up IP number group and get a warrant for the ISP that owns those numbers so they could check the IP logs and therefore they would know WHO specifically used that IP address at that time specific time to connect to their fake child site.

In simple language, it wouldn't be the home computer vs the website server, it would be the website server logs compared to the internet service provider logs (not likely either are faked, really really not likely).

Let me see if I've got this right now. I connect to my internet service provider which issues me an IP address which connects with whatever websites I visit during that particular internet surfing session. This IP address will change each time I connect with my ISP. So, my computer can be traced by a techie to particular websites at particular times through these IP addresses. I know that my husband has to maintain the webserver where he works. He has to physically keep it running. Can one of the webservers be manipulated to show different IPs than the actual ones used? I've read about techonologically inclined people bouncing a message from webserver to webserver all over the world to the point that the original IP address cannot be traced. I realize that most people would not have a reason to try to hide what they send over the internet or what they receive over the internet. However, some people might have reason to try to tamper with this information. Basically what I'm asking is (before I probably went about it in the wrong way) what would happen if the sender computer system and the receiving computer system showed a contradiction?

 

[Sonya610]

Can one of the webservers be manipulated to show different IPs than the actual ones used? I've read about techonologically inclined people bouncing a message from webserver to webserver all over the world to the point that the original IP address cannot be traced.

You are sort of thinking two different things (spoofing vs hacking). Yes of course server logs can be manipulated/hacked to show different IP addresses.

Would a psycho killer post weird things and then regret it and use their astounding hacking abilities to break into the servers and change the ip logs? Errrm....not likely...but possible.

Even supposing they did, were warrants and server logs gathered? Because if there were no warrants issued, or server logs gathered by the DA then I think worrying about a psycho hacksaw killers that confessed in odd posts and then decided to hack the servers and manipulate the logs is pretty...errrm....pointless.

If the computer forensic/server log info was gathered at all then maybe theories regarding hackers/spoofers can be explored, and the home PC would probably have a Linux operating system and....well that ain't the situation in this case.

 

[Backwoods]

new from 13WMAZ in Macon:

McDaniel Prosecutors Won't Respond to Bond Request

...Winters noted the defense brief came after Superior Court Judge Phil Brown conducted a bond hearing and that prosecutors don't have anything further to say. ...

read more at: http://macon.13wmaz.com/news/news/68795-mcdaniel-prosecutors-wont-respond-bond-request

 

[bessie]

You are sort of thinking two different things (spoofing vs hacking). Yes of course server logs can be manipulated/hacked to show different IP addresses.

Would a psycho killer post weird things and then regret it and use their astounding hacking abilities to break into the servers and change the ip logs? Errrm....not likely...but possible.

Even supposing they did, were warrants and server logs gathered? Because if there were no warrants issued, or server logs gathered by the DA then I think worrying about a psycho hacksaw killers that confessed in odd posts and then decided to hack the servers and manipulate the logs is pretty...errrm....pointless.

If the computer forensic/server log info was gathered at all then maybe theories regarding hackers/spoofers can be explored, and the home PC would probably have a Linux operating system and....well that ain't the situation in this case.

I'm not sure it would be necessary to gather server logs in this situation, Sonya, since every post McD made on that site is tagged with a unique user ID derived from his IP. His ID from 2009 until April 2011 was 39xxxx, and all subsequent posts are tagged with ID d0xxxx. The only variations I've found are in July 2010 when he was posting from D.C.; January 5, 2011; and late May/very early June 2011 when he might've been posting from a different location (visiting with family, perhaps?). For three years, his ID history remained very consistent, and from what I've been told, those ID's are impossible to fake. Therefore, it just might suffice to authenticate a post attributed to him if the ID is a match.

 

[southern_comfort]

I'm not sure it would be necessary to gather server logs in this situation, Sonya, since every post McD made on that site is tagged with a unique user ID derived from his IP. His ID from 2009 until April 2011 was 39xxxx, and all subsequent posts are tagged with ID d0xxxx. The only variations I've found are in July 2010 when he was posting from D.C.; January 5, 2011; and late May/very early June 2011 when he might've been posting from a different location (visiting with family, perhaps?). For three years, his ID history remained very consistent, and from what I've been told, those ID's are impossible to fake. Therefore, it just might suffice to authenticate a post attributed to him if the ID is a match.

Interesting, Bessie.. thanks for the info!

It sounds like you've got a nice catalog of posts... but still no barbecue post?

 

[Sonya610]

I'm not sure it would be necessary to gather server logs in this situation, Sonya, since every post McD made on that site is tagged with a unique user ID derived from his IP.

For three years, his ID history remained very consistent, and from what I've been told, those ID's are impossible to fake. Therefore, it just might suffice to authenticate a post attributed to him if the ID is a match.

The webpage is simple html with the user ID number and date in plain html. A poster couldn't fake the number without using a fake ip address BUT someone that copied pages from the site could easily open it up and type in a different id or date into the html, now they have what appears to be the same exact webpage with totally different user id numbers or dates or whatever they want, they could take screenshots and claim "oh look what we found!" They could also change the image in photoshop but that would leave pixel evidence of alterations.

<span class="postername">SoL</span>

12/04/04(Wed)17:23</label>
<span class="reflink">
<a href="/n/res/3852.html#3874" onclick="return
highlight('3874');">No.&nbsp;</a><a href="/n/res/3852.html#i3874" onclick="return insert
('>>3874\n');">3874</a>
</span>
ID: 9e93n
<span class="extrabtns">

That is why if they collected the evidence correctly they would have copied the entire site and have proof when it was copied.

In order to determine whether a computer holds information that may serve as evidence, the professional must first create an exact image of the drive. The examiner examines only this image drive to protect the original from inadvertent alterations. These images must be actual bit-by-bit or "mirror" images of the originals, not just simple copies of the data. Acquiring these kinds of exact copies requires the use of specialized forensics techniques.

These mirror images are critical because each time someone turns a computer on, many changes are automatically made to the files. In a Windows® system, for example, more than 160 alterations are made to the files when the computer is turned on. These changes are not visible to the user, but the changes that do occur can alter or even delete evidence, for example, critical dates related to criminal activity.

Assuring chain of custody is as important to the specialist who oversees drive imaging and evaluation of the data for its evidentiary value as it is in medical forensics. The forensics specialist uses hash codes to assure chain of custody.

Hash codes are large numbers, specific to each file and each drive, that are computed mathematically. If a file or drive is changed, even in the smallest way, the hash code will also change. These hash codes are re-computed on the original and images at various points during the investigation in order to ensure that the examination process itself does not modify the image being examined.

http://www.expertlaw.com/library/forensic_evidence/computer_forensics_101.html

 

[AgentFrankLundy]

Good Afternoon, Sleuthers! I have done a little bit of snooping around and just outright pondering , here are my thoughts, and only my thoughts, I have no real evidence to support, other than a few tidbits :
The barbecue/v-card post did come from McD. The prosecution knows this because of direct evidence obtained from McD's computer that was seized as evidence. Lots of other stuff on there we will get to see in due time .
April 20th will not be a non-event, but nothing in the way of a bombshell day either, I don't believe. Prosecution is not required to show all their cards pointing towards guilt, but they do have to show all their cards pointing towards innocence ( anything that could exculpate McDaniel) I don't think there is anything like that for them to reveal because , plain and simple, he did it.
Cannibalism and/or necrophilia did occur . This is one sick puppy we are dealing with here.

 

[SouthernKate]

Just got a notification on my iPhone from 13wmaz app that bond was approved at $850,000 with conditions. Can't find a link yet....

 

[GeorgiaSunshine]

Here you go

http://www.13wmaz.com/news/local/article/177651/153/Judge-Approves-Bond-for-Stephen-McDaniel

 

[SouthernKate]

And here's a lengthier article:

http://www.macon.com/2012/04/11/1986323/mcdaniel-murder-bond-set-at-850000.html

 

[SouthernKate]

Obviously, he has to also be given bond on the other charges in order to be released. But with the bond on the murder charge being given today, I am curious. If he actually gets out on bond, what do you think he will do?

Nothing
Run (with or without help)
Hurt himself
Hurt someone else

 

[AgentFrankLundy]

Obviously, he has to also be given bond on the other charges in order to be released. But with the bond on the murder charge being given today, I am curious. If he actually gets out on bond, what do you think he will do?

Nothing
Run (with or without help)
Hurt himself
Hurt someone else

I vote for nothing , other than sitting in Lilburn . Don't know what they will do with the kids of his wacked out sister , though. This was a big setback for Winters, McD getting bond because Winters failed to indict within 90 days of the arrest. He also just recently took the death penalty off the table for two guys up for murder, one that killed a convenience store clerk in cold blood, and the other burned babies alive when he set a house on fire , angry at his girlfriend. Not sure Greg wants this job at the rate he's going. He is up for re-election .

 

[Sonya610]

Obviously, he has to also be given bond on the other charges in order to be released. But with the bond on the murder charge being given today, I am curious. If he actually gets out on bond, what do you think he will do?

Nothing
Run (with or without help)
Hurt himself
Hurt someone else

I don't think he will do anything but if the restrictions that the DA wanted go into place McDaniel might wish he had just stayed in jail. If I recall Winters wanted him to wear a monitor and not leave the house unless it was to meet with his attorneys, plus no access to the internet or other electronic devices.

If he is locked up with his parents and all of those kids for weeks or months on end listening to Lord only knows what from his mother he will probably start thinking jail was preferable.

 

[GeorgiaSunshine]

You can see the restrictions here and on the document:

http://news.telegraph-online.com/dc/120411-McDanielBondOrder.html

I do not think he will want to be out. They are pretty severe, and he would have to pay for his monitoring system as well whatever that costs.

Plus, he has to have a detailed plan submitted to the judge before he can even be granted this.

To me, this isn't a loss for the DA. I still think this is a big win.

 

[southern_comfort]

You can see the restrictions here and on the document:

http://news.telegraph-online.com/dc/120411-McDanielBondOrder.html

I do not think he will want to be out. They are pretty severe, and he would have to pay for his monitoring system as well whatever that costs.

Plus, he has to have a detailed plan submitted to the judge before he can even be granted this.

To me, this isn't a loss for the DA. I still think this is a big win.

I have to say, "Sunshine" is a good name for you! You are definitely looking on the bright side.

I just can't find a way to think of an attainable bond in a case like this as a win for the prosecution. This is completely within reach.

 

[tomkat]

Good Afternoon, Sleuthers! I have done a little bit of snooping around and just outright pondering , here are my thoughts, and only my thoughts, I have no real evidence to support, other than a few tidbits :
The barbecue/v-card post did come from McD. The prosecution knows this because of direct evidence obtained from McD's computer that was seized as evidence. Lots of other stuff on there we will get to see in due time .
April 20th will not be a non-event, but nothing in the way of a bombshell day either, I don't believe. Prosecution is not required to show all their cards pointing towards guilt, but they do have to show all their cards pointing towards innocence ( anything that could exculpate McDaniel) I don't think there is anything like that for them to reveal because , plain and simple, he did it.
Cannibalism and/or necrophilia did occur . This is one sick puppy we are dealing with here.

okay, how do you know or why do you think? Originally stated you had no real evidence to support this. I'm sorry, you lost me.

Why does the prosecution have to show innocence????


Jeffrey Dahmer...................looks and acts like him.............creeeeeeepy!!!!

THANKS

 

[tomkat]

You can see the restrictions here and on the document:

http://news.telegraph-online.com/dc/120411-McDanielBondOrder.html

I do not think he will want to be out. They are pretty severe, and he would have to pay for his monitoring system as well whatever that costs.

Plus, he has to have a detailed plan submitted to the judge before he can even be granted this.

To me, this isn't a loss for the DA. I still think this is a big win.

<mod snip>HOw do you prove that he wont' be a threat??? I mean you can say what you want, but how to PROVE that?

 

[GeorgiaSunshine]

I have to say, "Sunshine" is a good name for you! You are definitely looking on the bright side.

I just can't find a way to think of an attainable bond in a case like this as a win for the prosecution. This is completely within reach.

The bottom line is he was going to get bond no matter what, due to the 90 day rule that was missed. Yes I would have loved to see the bond set at 1 million atleast, but I think with all these restrictions why would you want out, and he still has to be tried for the child and burglary, so if no bond is set for the other charges, can he really get out?

And do you or anyone ele think 850k is an attainable bond?