law enforcement contacts

JC Dill nanog at
Wed Nov 12 02:03:03 UTC 2003

At 11:23 PM 11/10/2003, Dave Stewart wrote:

>At 02:13 AM 11/11/2003, J. Oquendo wrote:
>>Uhm... Correct me if I missed something, but LEO's get paid to uphold the
>>law BY ACTING on crime in their expertise and if it's out of their range
>>(juridstiction) an `LEO` should have better contacts than someone on the
>Perhaps they will have contacts, but c'mon... how many of 'em do you 
>really believe care?

And even if they do care, (and have clue) if it's not obviously within 
their jurisdiction they can't justify working on the case.

>They don't care to get involved in a problem that could potentially 
>involve multiple jurisdictions... it's just too much hassle, and they have 
>plenty going on locally.

Some do care, but generally they can only become involved in one of two ways:

A)  They have clear reason to believe a crime was committed in their 
jurisdiction (and thus reason to "open" a case and investigate), or

B)  A LEO in another jurisdiction has done A, and calls them in because the 
crime crosses jurisdiction boundaries.

For instance, I have a friend in the SFPD who would care, but if you call 
him from Tulsa OK and want him to help investigate a DDoS on servers hosted 
at Equinix in Ashburn VA, he's not going to be able to do a thing, unless 
you can give him a "clear reason" to suspect that part of the crime took 
place within SF and thus that investigating *that part of the crime* is 
within his job description as a SFPD.  And as much as he may care and have 
contacts, he's not likely to have contacts in Ashburn.


More information about the NANOG mailing list