Ignorance of the law is no excuse but here is a different spin on that commonly used phrase:
In January, a jury found Amero guilty of four felony charges of risking injury to a minor or impairing the morals of a child, following a 2004 incident where her classroom PC became infected with pop-up ads that displayed thumbnails of pornographic imagery. The prosecution maintained that the pop-up ads were caused by Amero’s activity on the PC and the testimony of a forensic expert that would have refuted the charges was curtailed by courtroom rules…
“The primary reason that I got involved was to get Julie out of this train wreck, but it was also to bring awareness to the problem of malware and forensic analysis — it is a big problem,” he said.
In the latest case, one of the school’s teacher logged into the classroom computer, because Amero did not have credentials. The substitute teacher was told not to log out or turn off the computer. What happened after that has become the main point of contention.
A detective on the case using off-the-shelf recovery software argued that Amero clicked on pornographic Web links and caused the computer to display pornographic pop-up advertisements. However, the defense’s forensic expert, Herbert Horner, stated that a more complete analysis showed that a harmless hairstyling Web site had actually redirected the PC’s browser to pornographic sites, setting off the deluge of offensive ads.
The forensic analysis produced by Eckelberry and other independent security researchers found a large number of inconsistencies between what was said during Amero’s trial and what really happened, according to the analysis of the computer’s hard drive.
Posted under Tech News
This post was written by Veg on June 19, 2007





