LeMond and Trek Settle

[Race Radio]

Originally Posted by Digger

See what that absolute d***head Coolhand has wrote:

"Not sure how favorable to either party.
Lemond has to eat the considerable legal fees, gets no money and has the bad PR from his questionable at best EP dealings exposed. Also he said he was doing this for one reason and that turns out not to be true in the eyes of some- possibly losing more supporters.

Trek loses a brand, spends legal fees and then gives money to a charity (but which it then deducts from its taxes) and has its dispute in the open, losing the few remaining die hard Lemond customers.

Conclusion- neither party really wins. Lemond's attorneys probably concluded he could not win or that Trek would win. Trek probably concluded that the cost of trial would exceed the probability of recovering anything from Lemond (who could just file Chapter 11 if he lost), not to mention negative PR to boot.

Winner: the charities. And the lawyers on both sides."

Coolhand, fat, angry Masters racer



thinks that by tossing Lance's salad he will have meaning in his life.

[RTMcFadden]

Originally Posted by The Crusher

There's no proven connection between Floyd and the hacking of the website. Furthermore, no one ever alleged anything about altering any documentation (unless you include random idiots on the internet alleging it).

Didn't know all of the details. Anyway, my issue is more with the science. I have a folder of information to wade through, but just don't have the time at the moment to focus on it. I'll post somthing when I do. Hopefully you'll still be around.

[Big GMaC]

Originally Posted by Race Radio

Coolhand, fat, angry Masters racer



thinks that by tossing Lance's salad he will have meaning in his life.

that dude looks pretty much like a douche. strange eyes too

[Digger]

Originally Posted by Big GMaC

that dude looks pretty much like a douche. strange eyes too

He has single handedly reduced 'his' forum to 99% pro Lance / Anti Lemond posts, by banning anyone with a dissenting viewpoint. Saying you disagree with someone having a pro Lance post is practically considered a personal attact, thus a ban, whilst the other side have carte blanche to say and do what they like - including himself of course. And anytime he is asked for evidence to back up a claim, or if he has been caught out - he locks the thread.

[The Crusher]

Originally Posted by Race Radio

Just because you do not understand it does not mean it does not make sense. It is very easy to see the ip address of the sender of the email. A selection of media did receive an email with the documents from unknown address that was using Arnie's IP address.

Actually, it doesn't make sense precisely because I have a deep understanding of how email works. It would make perfect sense if you don't understand email.

They might refer to information found in headers. This information usually consists of domain names, not IP addresses. Either way, these headers are easily forged, and are of zero forensic value, unless verified by going back to other webservers and examining those logs directly. Although the header information for the last hop the email took when arriving at the recipient's server is usually valid.

They might also refer to log files on the recipient's mail server that list all incoming email connections. These would be reliable.

But the real problem is that any hostname or IP address on the recipients server, either in the log file, or as part of the email header, is going to be the address or hostname of another mail exchanger, something that is not directly associated with any individual, but with an organization. If I send my mail through Verizon, for example, all you'd know is that a Verizon customer sent the email. You'd need the cooperation of Verizon, and the luck that Verizon actually kept these enough log files around to figure out who sent which message. Or suppose I owned thecrusher.com, and sent email from there. In this case the mail exchanger would be a generic server run by my web hosting service, shared not just across multiple users, but multiple domains. Again, you'd need to hope that the hosting service kept sufficient logs, and would cooperate, or there's no way to connect any IP address to any individual.

The cooperation part is the real sticking point. The privacy agreement of any reputable ISP or hosting provider will not allow them to pass out this information without a court order. I've seen domestic cases where records were requested, and it's really hard, and takes a really long time. Internationally, I'd imagine that it would be almost impossible. And if it were possible for France to get a U.S. court order for such records, then they'd also be able to get a U.S. subpoena for the appearance of anyone they connected to the case, and none of them seem to be in prison right now.

Originally Posted by Race Radio

As for the changing of the documents this was discussed at trial. Under oath employees of the lab said that they never wrote some of the emails that were sent from their address, that they contained grammatical errors that indicated they were not written by a native French speaker.

Right. The cover letters alleging to be from the lab were forged. But the documentation that went with the cover letters was unaltered.

[Race Radio]

Originally Posted by The Crusher

Actually, it doesn't make sense precisely because I have a deep understanding of how email works. It would make perfect sense if you don't understand email.

They might refer to information found in headers. This information usually consists of domain names, not IP addresses. Either way, these headers are easily forged, and are of zero forensic value, unless verified by going back to other webservers and examining those logs directly. Although the header information for the last hop the email took when arriving at the recipient's server is usually valid.

They might also refer to log files on the recipient's mail server that list all incoming email connections. These would be reliable.

But the real problem is that any hostname or IP address on the recipients server, either in the log file, or as part of the email header, is going to be the address or hostname of another mail exchanger, something that is not directly associated with any individual, but with an organization. If I send my mail through Verizon, for example, all you'd know is that a Verizon customer sent the email. You'd need the cooperation of Verizon, and the luck that Verizon actually kept these enough log files around to figure out who sent which message. Or suppose I owned thecrusher.com, and sent email from there. In this case the mail exchanger would be a generic server run by my web hosting service, shared not just across multiple users, but multiple domains. Again, you'd need to hope that the hosting service kept sufficient logs, and would cooperate, or there's no way to connect any IP address to any individual.

The cooperation part is the real sticking point. The privacy agreement of any reputable ISP or hosting provider will not allow them to pass out this information without a court order. I've seen domestic cases where records were requested, and it's really hard, and takes a really long time. Internationally, I'd imagine that it would be almost impossible. And if it were possible for France to get a U.S. court order for such records, then they'd also be able to get a U.S. subpoena for the appearance of anyone they connected to the case, and none of them seem to be in prison right now.



Right. The cover letters alleging to be from the lab were forged. But the documentation that went with the cover letters was unaltered.

I would think that an expert in email like yourself would know that in most cases it is very easy to get the ip address by checking the info in the header.
http://aruljohn.com/info/howtofindipaddress/#yahoo

In addition to the forged info that was sent with the documents forged emails were also sent from LNDD employee's email accounts.