It’s not just porn, it’s also some of these faux terrorism arrests of dopes who never would have done a thing without an FBI operative egging him or her on. Lots of legal issues to look at:
On the heels of a sweeping federal sting operation targeting individuals involved with the distribution and possession of child pornography, a growing chorus of attorneys and social watchdogs are raising serious questions about the FBI tactics used as part of its “Operation Pacifier.”
Critics suggest that the strategies, which ultimately proved extremely successful, pose a real threat to internet privacy going forward and in actuality produce greater injustices than the crimes they are designed to stop.
Background of Controversial Sting Operation
In the springtime of 2015, the Federal Bureau of Investigation was entrenched in a significant initiative designed to ferret out cyber criminals suspected of distributing and/or possessing child pornography on the “dark web.”
The program did in fact yield real results, as evidenced by the eventual arrest of 186 individuals across the country. However, the tactics utilized in the process are now the subject of real scrutiny, having most recently made their way into a Texas courtroom.
The so-called “Operation Pacifier” commenced in early 2015 when agents identified the server used to operate an unlawful child porn website known as Playpen.
After obtaining a search warrant from a Virginia federal magistrate, FBI agents were granted permission to continue operating the site for several more weeks, employing malware referred to as a “Network Investigative Technique” as a means to determine IP addresses of individuals using it.
Due to these tactics, the FBI was able to learn that in the space of approximately two weeks, roughly 100,000 individuals logged into the website. These users could only get to the site by using the “Tor” web browser, known for its ability to encrypt and disguise the identities of those who use it. Before Operation Pacifier was brought to light, it was widely believed that Tor was essentially unhackable.
Defendant Seeks to Suppress Search Evidence
Among the individuals caught in the IP address dragnet was one Louis Clifford Smith, Jr., a former City of Houston information technology specialist.
After obtaining a search warrant, FBI agents and local police found hundreds of pornographic images in Smith’s possession involving children, leading to his indictment on charges of receipt, possession as well as access with intent to view this illegal material. In October of last year, Smith entered a guilty plea on the entire list of charges.
However, Smith subsequently withdrew his plea and launched the pending effort to suppress all evidence seized as the fruit of the Virginia magistrate’s search warrant. Smith’s efforts and the underlying sting operation have attracted the attention of legions of legal scholars as well as internet privacy advocates everywhere.
Broader Implications of Debate
According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, while the FBI’s sting operation represents the most significant law enforcement-related hacking of a domestic cyber operation, real concern exists about the apparent absence of rules governing such endeavors.
The FBI’s reluctance to disclose precisely how it exploited weaknesses in the Tor technology has already resulted in the withdrawal of other guilty pleas by defendants caught in the sting.
Maryland DUI lawyer Oleg Fastovsky commented, “The potential implications of the Operation Pacifier arrests rulings are substantial, as of course is the future of internet privacy in a broader sense. These issues may have to go all the way to the Supreme Court for any type of final resolution.”
