VPN and IP spoofing

[Uspring]

The law firm my friend has to deal with, handles 100's maybe even 1000's of similar cases every year. I'm sure, their procedures have already been contested by others and if their contests have been successful, they very likely have tightened them up to be legally bullet proof. I also believe, that my friends subletter actually committed the copyright violation while living in her apartment, since he had access to her router.
But lets assume, the law firm actually has a pcap file. Can they know from inspecting it, whether the subletter was the culprit or my friend through a VPN connection from a remote location going through her apartment? If this is the case, then the judge might force the law firm to disclose this file.

[Hydron]

How far away was she at the time? If she was on the other side of the world then there might be evidence of unrealistically short round trip times for packets to travel via a VPN (i.e. faster than the speed of light, or at least faster than a realistic intercontinental internet connection).

[Uspring]

She was in the UK at that time, her apartment being in Germany.

[plasma]

Thanks for explaining it Hydron
 If the person was using Linux and a web browser, the src port will be about 32000 instead of Windows of about 1800, windows clients like utorrent use the higher numbers by default, but maybe they were browsing will downloading, you will be looking at 3 hops for that distance, there will be more but they would have decreased the counter. You could get anal and use a packet from there computer with a new connection close by to workout the syn number, which is justed grab from the amount of clock ticks that loops around.
It is a 56bit number the x86 asembly returns and if the processor is between 2-3.2Ghz and in the pcap file it has two starts of the TCP handshake (syn-ack-syn/ack)you can workout within errors the processor speed, the ack replies can workout roundtrip
Quite often for quicker download speed the programs open up multiple ports

I don't understand how the were out of the country and its still a court case

[Uspring]

An analysis in terms of timing is an interesting idea, possibly difficult due to the proximity of Germany and the UK. Wrt the operating systems used, the law firm will likely argue, that the defendant will have utilised, whatever will suit their case.

I don't understand how the were out of the country and its still a court case

Yes, I too. Moreover the game downloaded was a first person horror zombie shooter, not likely a game women are fond of. Anyway, the judge has announced a decision this month. If it is to the favor of the law firm, I will advise my friend to appeal. I'll keep you posted and thank you for all your advice.

[MRMILSTAR]

A similar analogy exists in my state with speed cameras. The camera only takes a picture of the rear license plate. The ticket is sent to the registered owner of the car. It is the responsibility of the owner to pay the ticket regardless of who was actually driving the car. The ticket doesn't affect the owner's driving record but he has to pay. This has been challenged in court in my state and it has been upheld. It stinks but that is the way it is.

I have read many stories over the years of people challenging the copyright infringement charge claiming that someone else downloaded the file. I have never heard of that defense working but I suppose that there's a first time for everything.

There are shady law firms that make almost all of their money by shaking down people that have allegedly downloaded copyrighted material. They are relentless. It sounds like one of these firms may have gotten this case. They are usually looking for a quick out-of-court settlement from the alleged offender. It might be worth asking what the out-of-court settlement amount would be. It might be cheaper in the long run than taking this to court. Can the person who actually downloaded the material be convinced to pay an out-of-court settlement? You've got your work cut out for you.

Unfortunately none of this is what you wanted to hear but that is the reality once someone gets caught up in the legal system buzz saw.

[Uspring]

Wrt speeding cameras: In Germany front licenses plates are compulsory, so the cameras take front plate pictures together with a driver face shot. I believe you can challenge a speeding ticket, if it is not you on the picture, but you certainly have to identify the culprit.

Wrt copyright infringement: Occasionally these cases go to court, as in our case. Particularly, if there is a lot of evidence pointing at somebody else. The law here explicitly mentions an obligation of the ISP customer to provide an explanation of who else is at fault. Precedence cases do not seem to require a confession of the actual perpetrator also. An intention of legislation to punish the culprit instead of simply the IP address owner is noticeable.

[Uspring]

An update:
My friend lost the case. The decisions substantiation is based mainly on 2 grounds:

1) The defendant, my friend, was not able to name the persons, who the subletter might have given her wifi password to. So, in the courts view, the number of possible suspects is unbounded. But law requires, that the number of suspects should be narrowed down by the defendant in order to prosecute the real perpetrator. Since the subletter refused any information to my friend about how the copyright violation might have happened, she was indeed not able to name possible other copyright violators. In any case, I think, if the subletter has disclosed the password to somebody else, it his his responsibility and not hers.

2) The defendant might be herself the violator, since she might have used a VPN connection. The court argued, that she is capable to set one up, since she had experience with this. My friend indeed had once used a VPN connection, since that was required by the university she worked at. The procedure for this is simple: She had to download some software and enter the domain name of her university. In my view, the capability to follow these instructions is not equivalent to setting up the server side in her apartment. Also, my friends "VPN experience" was gained after she had left her apartment. Since the VPN server side had to be configured before she left, she would have needed to employ her "experience" before she had gained it.

I've finally some doubts about the "capabilities" of some courts. She'll appeal.

[shrad]

I wish her to success...

Don't forget that anyone with physical access to a WPS button can have access to the network, and that this process itself can be spoofed from the street... I don't recall references but I read that once in Hackaday.

An idea : are there some white hat association in her country that would be able to back her off with technical justifications? Maybe some bottle at sea would be of some use... Hackaday security community seems also interesting to contact, try their hackaday.io chat you'll certainly have some reactions there.

Good luck!

[Uspring]

Thank you for your wishes. Good luck is certainly what she needs. The burden of proof looks reversed. Exotic assumptions on part of the plaintiff and even the judge are ok, while the defendant has to furnish a proof.

[Zipdox]

I can help, but lick I said, you need to ask there lawyer for a pcap file, that should break off the conviction.

I think the idea here is showing you're actually serious about contesting it and also technically competent (by asking for the actual evidence they allegedly have - this is the pcap file) - if they rely on people not having a clue then it might put them off going forward.

Asking for solid evidence is always a good defense.