Yes I have, however neither of those are relevant. Even if the perp was hosting his porn off-site, every time he viewed it or it touched his computer, a copy of the image would wind up on his hard drive, usually in the page file. Also, all of the file names and the location from where they had been accessed would still be on his computer, regardless of where they were hosted. And using a proxy server might hide the IP address of the downloading computer from the server end, but does not affect what is stored on the host computer.
I've been working with computers and computer security for almost 20 years. I know what can and can't be done to hide your tracks, and how long it takes. Other than using strong encryption and refusing to provide the password, anything you have accessed on your computer cangenerally be located pretty quickly. The only quick solution is to physically destroy the drive. You may have prosecuted these cases, but it is clear you don't have a strong understanding of the technology behind it. That's okay, I don't have a strong understanding of the legal process used to prosecute them. We are just experts in different fields.
Adobe Scene7.
Apparently, in your internet world, dynamic flash-container image delivery doesn't exist. Sadly, in the real world, it does.
There is robust, illicit cottage industry that exists - an industry that does know how the internet works - that is dedicated to nothing but allowing child pornographers to hide from authorities.
"Also, all of the file names and the location from where they had been accessed would still be on his computer, regardless of where they were hosted. "
Terrific. And, what happens when those locations are in China or Russia or some other far away place where the US federal government enjoys virtually no access?
"I've been working with computers and computer security for almost 20 years. "
Ruth Bader Ginsburg has been practicing law for over 50-years, that - unfortunately - doesn't mean she's any good at it.
"ou may have prosecuted these cases, but it is clear you don't have a strong understanding of the technology behind it."
And yet, with my admittedly limited understanding of "how computers work", I've managed to poke large, gaping holes in your "theory". How about that.
Well if they guy was fancy...he could have an encrypted system that has two passwords.
One password reveals benign info. The second password gives the dirt. But if the benign password is used it proceeds to electronically destroy the illegal content by writing random 0’s and 1’s over the disk 10 times. Depending on how much stuff he has it may be fairly quick to do. But that would still require the investigator to log on to his machine with his OS loaded so the program could load. If the drive was removed it would be a bit tougher. But he could have the drive linked to his TPM chip on his computer and that would require them to use that computer to open it. So unless you get really fancy you’ll probably just use his system to unlock it and at the same time walk right into his trap.
Or what if he used an SSD drive? I believe those are even easier to clean.
And he could have used an onion router to hide his origins. Or he could use an onion router and then use terminal services on a hijacked computer to view the content. Now it would be really tough to track back.
I’m just saying there are still ways to destroy or hide. If you know of ways to track back in the scenerios I detailed I’d like to learn about them.