State v Bradley Cooper 04-19-2011

[gracielee]

I wonder if the jury is falling asleep? Or perhaps it's my wine?

 

[otto]

This testimony is interesting ... we know that the neighbors had a thing about Brad - an abnormal thing ... and here we have the expert suggesting that it's pretty easy for any one of those neighbors to hack in and mess with the computers.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Hopefully prosecution can correct this error.
Google "cisco 1751 fxo" to see.

Cisco, and other large companies, would never use an FXO port internally, so it's an easy mistake to make for enterprise VoIP guys. You'd only buy one to use at a very small business (or home).

IIRC the FXO card that Brad ordered was NOT available yet. The card was only a prototype..at least that is what I understood ..We are talking about 2008 available gear...not whats available today.

 

[borndem]

Like he didn't know what kurtz was going to ask and needed to write the questions down.
:laughcry:

And what a smug smile -- he just can't help it, can he? The Sleek Geek.

 

[ncsu95]

I wonder if the jury is falling asleep? Or perhaps it's my wine?

Instead of talking about 10 different ways someone can spoof a call, he is showing how easy it is to hack into a network running wep using free programs found on the internet.

 

[LyndyLoo]

This testimony is interesting ... we know that the neighbors had a thing about Brad - an abnormal thing ... and here we have the expert suggesting that it's pretty easy for any one of those neighbors to hack in and mess with the computers.

Interesting indeed....However Brad did his search of Fielding Drive area was done connected to the Cisco Network at 115PM July 11th, 2008...How would a neighbour know where nancy's body was found to implicate Brad??

 

[NCEast]

Well if you have a wireless lan in your house, you need to do it as well. PM me if you need help or instructions.

Thank you. I'll probably pm you anyhow about the noscript you mentioned.

 

[macd]

IIRC the FXO card that Brad ordered was NOT available yet. The card was only a prototype..at least that is what I understood ..We are talking about 2008 available gear...not whats available today.

Since we all like forums.
google: "cisco 1751 fxo forum 2007".
You can find people on forums asking for help on how to configure fxo cards on their 1751 in 2007 .
We're sleuthing, not taking testimony as dogma. Right? :rocker:

 

[happy2binNC]

This testimony is interesting ... we know that the neighbors had a thing about Brad - an abnormal thing ... and here we have the expert suggesting that it's pretty easy for any one of those neighbors to hack in and mess with the computers.

Where do you think the defense is going with this, though? The Google search happened on his computer at Cisco so the neighbors couldn't have done that by breaking into the home network.

I've missed some of the testimony today so I don't understand exactly what he's trying to refute. Any thoughts?

ETA: LyndyLoo - Jinx!

 

[NCEast]

I wonder if the jury is falling asleep? Or perhaps it's my wine?

I'm drinking plain old water and I'm falling asleep. I was just thinking about fixing a cup of coffee, looked at the clock and saw that it was 5. Long day, short on info though.
These poor jurors will never want to sit through another trial after they are released from this one.

 

[otto]

Instead of talking about 10 different ways someone can spoof a call, he is showing how easy it is to hack into a network running wep using free programs found on the internet.

I think this is really interesting. I think that the jury cannot ignore all the badmouthing from the neighbors ... how nearly all of them (and there were a lot) were convinced that Brad was a murderer as soon as Nancy didn't show up to paint (even though Brad was playing tennis at the same time). Now we hear how easy it would be for any one of those neighbors to hack into one of Brad's machines and mess with internet data.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Where do you think the defense is going with this, though? The Google search happened on his computer at Cisco so the neighbors couldn't have done that by breaking into the home network.

I've missed some of the testimony today so I don't understand exactly what he's trying to refute. Any thoughts?

ETA: LyndyLoo - Jinx!

:floorlaugh:..great minds think alike, even tho we arent experts :floorlaugh:

I also think this Defense witness has demonstrated how easy it was for Brad to infiltarte Nancy's computer and possible her Cell Phone.....Dont know IF that was a wise thing to do????

 

[ncsu95]

Interesting indeed....However Brad did his search of Fielding Drive area was done connected to the Cisco Network at 115PM July 11th, 2008...How would a neighbour know where nancy's body was found to implicate Brad??

I think the defense intends to show that this was done at a later time and that the timestamps on the files (or the computer itself...then set back) were modified back to the 11th.

 

[Overly-Curious]

When was Brad playing tennis?

 

[otto]

Interesting indeed....However Brad did his search of Fielding Drive area was done connected to the Cisco Network at 115PM July 11th, 2008...How would a neighbour know where nancy's body was found to implicate Brad??

But wasn't Brad also having lunch with a friend at the same time that the zoom search was done?

 

[Cheyenne130]

Instead of talking about 10 different ways someone can spoof a call, he is showing how easy it is to hack into a network running wep using free programs found on the internet.

According to the options listed, that also included the ability to hack into WPA and WPA2.

 

[NCEast]

I think this is really interesting. I think that the jury cannot ignore all the badmouthing from the neighbors ... how nearly all of them (and there were a lot) were convinced that Brad was a murderer as soon as Nancy didn't show up to paint (even though Brad was playing tennis at the same time). Now we hear how easy it would be for any one of those neighbors to hack into one of Brad's machines and mess with internet data.

But do the jurors understand what they are hearing?

 

[unc70]

This is over my head. I buy Norton 360 each year for each of my computers so happy I don't have to fill my head up with the hows and whys it works.

Now how and why it does not work. Only a small part of what is needed to protect a system. Better than nothing, usually.

BTW Norton is part of Symantec, the company Ward worked for after Cisco.

 

[ncsu95]

Thank you. I'll probably pm you anyhow about the noscript you mentioned.

If you use firefox, just search addons (tools -> add-ons) and search for noscript. It takes a little getting used to because you have to grant permissions (either temporarily or permanently) for applications to run on websites you go to. For example, the wral video won't play unless you grant it permission to. But this helps stop malware crap on some web pages unless you allow it access to do it.

 

[borndem]

I'm not buying much of this so far...but there is a difference when the laptop is on the home network versus when it is on Cisco's network. Unless he had his Cisco VPN client running, the laptop would not have been on Cisco's network once he left on the 11th. Accessing the laptop at that point involves getting around the security of the wireless network at the Cooper house. If he was running wep, that is fairly trivial to get around (although I have never done it....tons of google searches explaining how to beat it). If he was running more secure protocols, it would have been more difficult.

I agree re office vs home sec. difference -- but I just can't imagine someone working in a Cisco or similar business (like many of us who know the dangers of hacking) and not being just naturally security-conscious. He certainly wouldn't want his unfriendly neighbors having any teeny tiny chance of breaking into anything he had online, so surely, Shirley, he would have had it wrapped up in some decent kind of protocol, protection, etc., etc.