Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The FBI has started to create false hyperlinks advertising child pornography which when clicked on will lead the user to a "child pornography site" although no site actually exists. Once the user has entered the site (which has nothing but gibberish) their IP is recorded by a FBI controlled computer which will then lead to the ascertaining of further information about the IPs owner, simply clicking on the link to the site is considered intent to commit a crime with the crime being viewing child pornography.

Now the links aren't created so people can be (initially) charged with viewing child pornography (how can you be charged with viewing it if the site dosen't have any) instead the "evidence" of intent to commit a crime is enough to recieve a warrant for search and seizure. This allows the FBI to search your home to see if you actually have child pornography (if you are searching for it on the web chances are you're going to have it personally) which you will then face charges for.

The problem with this however is that while the hyperlinks created by the FBI are usually planted into sites known for trading child pornography these hyperlinks can be copied and formatted to say something entirely differant then what their contents contain. For example if you where to recieve a email in your spam folder with a hyperlink that says "Gods Paintings" and you, thinking of those countless landscape paintings that are actually photographs click the link to see them, could actually be taken to a fake FBI site where you will be classified as attempting to commit a crime.

Now this dosen't mean that the FBI is sending out emails like this but there are hackers or just malicious people who would do it for kicks. There is also a HUGE possibility of clicking one of these links on accident through various means be it that the link was put into a site where it shoulden't be (say a childs learning page) by hackers, or there is simply the ignorance of the young who may not know any better or whose curiosity may over ride their common sense at such a young age.

Another issue with this is that there is no way to prove who actually clicked the link. If multiple people live in one house and they all use the same computer is the FBI going to prosecute them all for the actions of one? And then there is the ever present IP "borrowing" where someone with Wifi (say on a laptop) in one house can click the link but their web service (and the Ip provided) is being taken from their neighbor.

Many have criticisized this procedure as entrapment but by the legal deffinition of entrapment this is incorrect as no one (members of the government or police) is forcing the suspect to click on the link. Also keep in mind that while age of consent may vary from state to state under law anyone under the age of 18 is considered a child, so where someone to have pictures of say a naked 16 year old that does not reasonibly serve any medical, scientific or artistic purpose when these "raids" happen then they could be charged with having child pornography.

So Dakka? What do we thing about this type of sting being used by our governemt? Personally I think it would be a good idea if it didn't have so much potential to "frame" someone who is innocent and shoulden't deserve any of the attention or prosecution they would recieve. There are so many reasons why someone who has no intention of searching for, viewing or partaking in child pornography would click on one of these links and while if they don't have any child pornography (or other illegal items) they have nothing to worry about should the FBI or police raid their house. But at the same time they shoulden't have been raided in the first place.

How do you just happen upon child pornography?

halonachos wrote:How do you just happen upon child pornography?

Google.

I'm feeling lucky!

halonachos wrote:How do you just happen upon child pornography?

He clicked on this site that actually went nowhere......
seriously, i say any means needed to remove that specific kind of scum.
and i don't just say that as a father of 2 daughters....

undivided wrote:

halonachos wrote:How do you just happen upon child pornography?

Google.

I'm feeling lucky!

Well putting 'kids' in the search box and pressing the 'I'm feeling lucky' button is just asking for trouble.

Agreed. It's not like people are getting locked up because they accidentally clicked a link. They will get locked up for having Child Porn on their PC or in their house though.

This is full of win!

Go FBI, get those perverts who deserve to get their lives destroyed!

No I'm not being sarcastic, these people are sick.

halonachos wrote:

undivided wrote:

halonachos wrote:How do you just happen upon child pornography?

Google.

I'm feeling lucky!

Well putting 'kids' in the search box and pressing the 'I'm feeling lucky' button is just asking for trouble.

I tried it, and this is what I got: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113540/

Oh goody, a link to cli.... wait a second.

Good try Chris Hansen.

Ooh, have I scared off Dakka with my ominous hyperlink?

This will not end well.

I'm not clicking on it

But people can happen upon it the same way you can click a link on many websites and instead of taking you to something innocent like you think it will it takes you to a porn page and every time you exit another pops up.

I clicked on it.

Kids

An amoral, HIV-positive skateboarder sets out to deflower as many virgins as possible while a local girl who contracted his disease tries to save his next target from her same fate.


What kind of fethed up move is that?

Amaya wrote:I clicked on it.

Kids

An amoral, HIV-positive skateboarder sets out to deflower as many virgins as possible while a local girl who contracted his disease tries to save his next target from her same fate.


What kind of fethed up move is that?

The kind that makes you feel lucky?

undivided wrote:

Amaya wrote:I clicked on it.

Kids

An amoral, HIV-positive skateboarder sets out to deflower as many virgins as possible while a local girl who contracted his disease tries to save his next target from her same fate.


What kind of fethed up move is that?

The kind that makes you feel lucky?

except they're tracking him now! i saw "Eagle Eye"! i know how this works...

My only problem with this is that they don't set the child porn traffickers on fire when they catch them.

Monster Rain wrote:My only problem with this is that they don't set the child porn traffickers on fire when they catch them.

It shall be done.

The potential problems with this system are very frightening.

Actually, I think this is pretty clever. Just clicking on the link isn't an offence in itself, and thus there is no real need to prove 'who' clicked the link. This is so that the FBI can have reasonable grounds to search the computer, and if there IS Child pornography stashed on there it's going to be impossible to claim it was an accident.

I see this going horribly wrong.
I mean, as soon as /b/ gets a hold of one such link...

Actually, how did you find out about this?

Wolfun wrote:I see this going horribly wrong.
I mean, as soon as /b/ gets a hold of one such link...

Well yes, I mean you can read about the news story here -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12313320

halonachos wrote:How do you just happen upon child pornography?

Actually, once whilst *ahem* using a forum for regular porn, one of the links I followed led to something other than that which was advertised. It was quite shocking and unpleasant, as it was a number of thumbnails, large enough to clearly see the images. Technically, as those images were stored in my temp folder so as to be displayed on the screen, I briefly had child porn stored on my computer. This was about seven or eight years ago whilst living in Japan. I reported the disguised link to both a UK-based and US-based agency, though I can't remember which ones. Neither ever replied to me, and the website I had followed the link from remained open. I didn't actually check the site I had stumbled across to see what had happened to that, as I didn't want to see it ever again. Had I been living in either the UK or US at the time, I am not sure I would have reported it, for fear of the consequences.

@Warboss any links to source?

If true then the FBI are seeming to do something without actually doing anything at all.

Such a trap would likely net the morbidly curious, the curious, and the totally unaware.

I assume that active paedophiles, child molesters, human trafficers, general scum are well aware of such efforts to catch them, they do seem to escape capture even though they must obviously be trawling the net for their deviant acts using such keyword strings as:

kiddie+porn+really+for realz+

What disturbed me about that recent case of the fella who had those three women in nurseries doing child porn for him was that he met them, and co-ordinated their activities via Facebook. That is really scary.

Howard A Treesong wrote:

Wolfun wrote:I see this going horribly wrong.
I mean, as soon as /b/ gets a hold of one such link...

Well yes, I mean you can read about the news story here -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12313320

Something went wrong. Horribly wrong. I hate you

Fifty wrote:

halonachos wrote:How do you just happen upon child pornography?

Actually, once whilst *ahem* using a forum for regular porn, one of the links I followed led to something other than that which was advertised. It was quite shocking and unpleasant, as it was a number of thumbnails, large enough to clearly see the images. Technically, as those images were stored in my temp folder so as to be displayed on the screen, I briefly had child porn stored on my computer. This was about seven or eight years ago whilst living in Japan. I reported the disguised link to both a UK-based and US-based agency, though I can't remember which ones. Neither ever replied to me, and the website I had followed the link from remained open. I didn't actually check the site I had stumbled across to see what had happened to that, as I didn't want to see it ever again. Had I been living in either the UK or US at the time, I am not sure I would have reported it, for fear of the consequences.

Yeah, I've had similar things happen to me. I guess the answer is to jerk-off analogue style, like our dads did.

I'm thinking Razzle.

Tim the Biovore wrote:

Howard A Treesong wrote:

Wolfun wrote:I see this going horribly wrong.
I mean, as soon as /b/ gets a hold of one such link...

Well yes, I mean you can read about the news story here -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12313320

Something went wrong. Horribly wrong. I hate you

Haha. Always hover over links. =P

Well, I can see potential problems with this...the biggest being that /b/ gets its hands on it, and starts posting it everywhere, so people everywhere keep accidentally clicking on it, and the recording just gets swamped with information, 99% of which is just poor innocent people clicking on a link that advertises something completely different. I mean, even here on dakka I could create a hyperlink that I say will show you an awesome model, but actually takes you somewhere else. I won't actually do that becaue I like this site and getting banned is not high on my priority list, but still....it has potential to happen.

That being said, as long as clicking the link in and of itself does not become a crime, then using it to gather the occaisonal search warrant is fine in my book. Sometimes it does concern me though....sex offense laws in the US are very, very strict as is...and they do hurt people the same as they help...I'm just a tad bit concerned about where this might be going.

Emperors Faithful wrote:Actually, I think this is pretty clever. Just clicking on the link isn't an offence in itself, and thus there is no real need to prove 'who' clicked the link. This is so that the FBI can have reasonable grounds to search the computer, and if there IS Child pornography stashed on there it's going to be impossible to claim it was an accident.

The question is whether simply having apparently clicked on a link does provide actual reasonable grounds for search.

Who among us has never accidentally clicked a link that we didn't intend to? If you use a laptop it often has a touch pad which acts as the mouse and mouse click button. It's quite easy to accidentally click a link.

There are some websites so littered with pop-ups, ad links in the banner, the side columns and embedded in the text, that it is hard to actually navigate the text without some other crap being shoved in your face before you even know it's there. You go to move the cursor out of the column of text and bingo, an advert opens up.

I think there needs to be a repeated pattern of clicking on child porn links in order to build up reasonable suspicion.