text:
|20 Jan 2013
This is with no headset plugged in and the drivers uninstalled. I was also not running Teamspeak either. I'm almost out of hair to pull out!
|My System Specs
|22 Jan 2013
What games is this problem occurring on? I'm thinking, what with all the work you've done on the graphics drivers and it's still showing up the graphics drivers as the problem, I'm believing we got a hardware issue, and that will not manifest in crashdumps. Since hardware tests also aren't showing up anything, then I suspect one of the following: Motherboard, PSU or Graphics Card. You've said your system is fairly old, which I would venture to guess the PSU or Mobo can be to blame, especially since PSU's degrade in both reliability and wattage output overtime. If your PSU is old, whatever it was able to churn out to get your system running back in the day may not be the same to get your system running now. Mobos can also have popped capacitors or other internal failures that happen with wear and tear. Of course, we can suspect your graphics card most of all because this has been consistently pointing blame at it, but if the PSU or the Mobo aren't up to snuff, then they won't be able to handle the GPU's activity, and will break under pressure and blame the GPU on it.
|My System Specs
|22 Jan 2013
Arma II and other intensive games. The parts were ordered in July 2012. I don't consider that an old system seeing as the problems started in September. Also as I stated before, I took the PC to a technician who said he couldn't find anything hardware related wrong with it.
|My System Specs
|23 Jan 2013
Then the tech did not do his job well. There are no software-related problems induced here, as the crashes don't show such a pattern, nor the fact that reinstalling a clean copy of Windows several times didn't resolve anything. Just because the parts are relatively young does not exempt them from being bad - a part already in the state of going bad can take anywhere from a minute to a year to actually show up problems. Consider you were already suffering problems only over about a month or two after using the new parts gives credence that it's hardware.
The only unfortunate thing is that crashdumps cannot be used to ascertain which part is causing it. If previous hardware tests haven't shown up anything, then I often have found the problem to be caused by CPU/Mobo/PSU, since there's no entirely reliable method of hardware testing them outside of hardware swapping or a multimeter and mobo testing kit for the PSU and mobo, respectively. I'd tack GPUs on there as well since there also isn't any true diagnostic tool for it also (benchmark software only goes so far).
This is just one of those moments where you're going to need to go at it through process of elimination, either through returning items via warranty for replacement, or by swapping them with spare alternatives that you know are stable. I'd start with the PSU first, after that it's really up in the air.
|My System Specs
|25 Jan 2013
PSU is already on the way. I really hope that is the problem. It would actually be a major relief. I got this: Newegg.com - XFX ProSeries P1-1000-BELX 1000W ATX12V V2.2 & ESP12V V2.91 SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS PLATINUM Certified Full Modular Active PFC Power Supply
The psu I have now is a 1100w, but apparently (after reading around) mine is about as good as having a 800w. This leads me to believe you might be right about it dying. I'll be sure to get back to you as soon as I get it all put in and play around with it.
Fingers crossed.
|My System Specs
|31 Jan 2013
I'm going to 100% kick myself in the head for such a simple mistake as this:
It isn't 100% confirmed yet, but judging by the looks of it....I know exactly what the problem was. I blame myself for not checking this sooner. I didn't figure something this elementary would be the problem. I will say that I didn't install the CPU. I had a store do it for me since it was my first liquid cooler. I plan on giving them a call with some strong words. I want to thank all of you that were patient enough to help me out. I can say I feel like a PC diagnostic whiz after chatting with you all.
Once again. THANK YOU!
|My System Specs
|31 Jan 2013
Ouch. Evidently the damage has already been done. I coulda sworn we checked temps in the past. Oh well, anyways, glad to be able to work it out with ya. Hope things turn out better!
|My System Specs
|31 Jan 2013
Yea I'm pretty sure my cores are cooked. Kinda makes me lose faith in that stores professionalism. Adding new paste didn't help. It still ends up BSODing. As far as checking temps, they were running normal, but they spike so fast that it was hard to notice. I almost didn't catch it myself. That particular game just works the CPU so hard.
Thanks again.
|My System Specs
|31 Jan 2013
I repasted the CPU. I did a prime95 test on the CPU and at 100% load I got maximum of 60 degrees. Unfortunately I still experience crashes. Should I go ahead and replace the CPU?
Latest dumps.
I've installed another CPU and GPU. Both yield the same results. A BSOD after a few minutes to an hour. Temperatures were all in check. CPU never exceeded 55 and GPU 60. I'm assuming at this point I have a bad motherboard? Seeing as my ram passed the memtest. Or could it possibly be my hard drives even though they passed disk checks twice with no errors.
|My System Specs
|01 Feb 2013
I'd blame the motherboard if that's the case. Btw, having the CPU reach 60 degrees is stretching it. It isn't critical, but it will accelerate degradation of the CPU and shorten its lifespan. I guess if it's only hitting 60 that's fine, but any more and it shows it needs more cooling.
The crashdumps won't help much without Driver Verifier, and even so if it's a hardware issue it's not going to help much at all period.
|My System Specs
|Thread Tools
|Similar help and support threads
BSOD while playing intense games such as ARMA, error 0x000000d1
Hi, These BSOD's have been going on for a considerable amount of time now and I am getting extremely aggravated with them. The error was DRIVER IRQL NOT LESS OR EQUAL stop:0x000000d1 or 0x00000124. I am sorry I cannot post a Mini Dump file as I am not an admin on my computer. Any help will...
|BSOD Help and Support
Getting BSOD 0x0000003b(most common), 0x0000001e, 0x000000a,0x0000007e
hey, i m getting BSOD when the laptop starts and just after the start. Also, i get BSOD every time when i try to restart my laptop. The most common BSOD is 1. 0x0000003b (SYSYTEM_SERVICE_EXCEPTION) - 14 times The other BSOD are : 1. 0x000000d1 (DRIVER_IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL) - 3 times 2....
|BSOD Help and Support
BSOD when playing all games, error 0x0000003B
Whenever I play online games, like s4 league or some Mmmorpg, I eventually get a blue screen after hour(s) of playing. To narrow down the problem, I would say that I have been getting these blue screens pretty much a couple weeks after getting this computer. Meaning it's likely not because I...
|BSOD Help and Support
BSOD playing Skyrim, error 0x0000003B
Hello This happens a fair bit whilst playing Skyrim. Any help is appreciated :)
|BSOD Help and Support
BSOD playing SWTOR, error 0x0000003B
Hello, Im new on this forum. I get random bsod Service system exception 0x0000003B while playing Star Wars: TOR, like 3-4 / 24h. I badly need your help. Specs: Corsair CMPSU-850HX Samsung 1 TB SATA-II 7200RPM 32MB rpm Spinpoint F3 Thermalright Silver Arrow 4 x A-DATA 4GB DDR3 1333MHz...
|BSOD Help and Support
BSOD playing Battlefield 3, error 0x0000003b
Since some days I started getting BSOD's while playing Battefield 3. I'm using Windows 7 Ultimate x64 I have this rig about 6 months. Someone can help me and tell me what could possibly be the problem? Thank You.
|BSOD Help and Support
|Our Sites
|Site Links
|About Us
|Find Us
Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.
© Designer Media Ltd
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 17:44.


text:
No Face Latex MaskItem #: 17617
Fitting for this:
Add the product directly to your basket by clicking the checkbox
Add the product directly to your basket by clicking the checkbox
No Face Latex Mask
skinned face mask made of latex
The No Face Latex Mask looks very realistic high-quality processing.This man was attacked by bloodthirsty zombies that have eroded his facial skin and hollowed out his eyes. The corroded Latex Mask is the ideal gun for Halloween.
The No Face Latex Mask shows a man who is going to own hungry Zombie to mutate and inflicting the same suffering other.The skinned mask goes to the chest and can be well hidden under the Halloween costume.With something Film Blood / FX Blood 30ml allows you to No Face Latex Mask more real and act disgusting.More creepy zombie masks like our Dr. Zombie Mask you'll find in our offer.
Material: Latex,

subset: commoncrawl


text:
National Down Syndrome Society8 E 41st Street, 8th FloorNew York New York 10017800-221-4602[email protected]
On 11/12/12, two months early by emergency c-section, I gave birth to my fiancé and my third child, Xander Parker McPherson. He was born at 12:57 pm, 1.5 pounds and 11.5 inches. The memory of his first glance at me has left an everlasting mark that can never be replaced or forgotten: our baby blew me a "kiss" - he puckered up his lips, sucked in, waved his little arm over his mouth and made the sweetest popping noise. I knew then that our son was something special, some kind of wonderful. XP was diagnosed with trisomy 21, Down syndrome, not too long after he was born - the blood vessels to and from his heart were leaking, he had kidney and liver problems, he had bowel issues, he had many blood transfusions and the list goes on and on. Though he was two months premature in spite of all of these issues Xander pushed on and stayed strong, he proved so many wrong about him, even myself. The doctors told us that they were amazed by his strength and his willpower to live. Xander taught me to hope for the impossible and to keep pushing forward with life, no matter the obstacle and the people who might not believe in you. He truly showed me just how precious life is, and to never take the things I cherish and love for granted. I think the thing about Xander that has left an everlasting mark on my heart, other than the first time I laid eyes on him, would be his many facial expressions. I've never seen such a young tiny baby have so much personality, and boy did XP ever have it! Even when I would hold him, he would try his hardest to look up at me and around at his surroundings, he was so curious. He brought smiles to everyone, even people who have only seen him through photos or who only heard of him. He had so many visitors and people asking about him. That boy was loved by all. Our baby boy passed away, early morning, on 12/8/12. For two days he fought his hardest, but his kidneys couldn't keep going, his little body failed him. Though it still hurts us, more than words can ever describe, we are more than thankful that we got the time we did with our baby boy. I believe things happen and come to you for a reason, and XP gave us a reason, a most wonderful beautiful reason - life! "Though he be but little, he is fierce!"
[email protected]
National Down Syndrome Society, 8 E 41st Street, 8th Floor, New York, New York, 10017Copyright © 2012 National Down Syndrome SocietyPrivacy Policy | Terms and Conditions


text:
Business Law
Ask a Business Lawyer. Get Business Law Questions Answered ASAP.
Thank you for your question and welcome to Just Answer.
You need to have them sign an investment contract with the payment schedule and the resulting ownership they will have obtained once the 12 payments have been completed. You can stipulate that the investment is required regardless of the financial performance of the LLC during the period the payments are due.
I will be happy to follow up with you if you have additional questions. In the meantime, please click ACCEPT so that I can get credit for answering your question. Of course, if you really liked what I could help you with, please consider a Bonus, too!
Nathan Moore


text:
Here's the Retail version of SSDlife Pro from TE. Enjoy it!
SSDlife Pro 2.2.39 Retail
SSDlife is a small and intuitive SSD diagnostic tool that helps users obtain comprehensive information about their SSD drives and take timely action if any problems are detected. If you take SSD's seriously and have replaced hard drives with SSD units, don't forget that their life expectancy is considerably shorter than that of regular hard drives. So if you want to know the approximate time frame for the swap, SSDlife will be a perfect choice. It's a shame when a drive failure results in all your personal data being lost. SSDLife allows you to control how worn your SSDs are in an easy and convenient way, which means you can control how safely and securely your data is stored on them.
SSD lifetime calculation
SSD Life analyzes how actively you use your solid-state drive and uses a special algorithm to calculate its estimated lifetime. Of course, the date of the lifetime expiration is corrected depending on how intensively you keep using your drive.
Full drive information
The entire information about your SSD — from general (manufacturer, model) to technical (whether your drive/system supports TRIM) — is displayed in the main window of SSD Life. Sometimes you may need it to find out how many hours the drive has already been in operation, for example, when you buy a used SSD.
Compatibility with SSDs
SSDLife supports practically all SSDs that are in use – from the latest Intel models to the time-proven first Vertex models. SSDLife has been tested with solid-state drives from most SSD manufacturers – such as Kingston, OCZ. And even with Apple MacBook Air!*
Function SSDlife
• Show general information about SSD
• Show technical information about SSD
• Check SSD health status working in background
• SmartCheck™ - check SSD health status on schedule (each 4 hours) on program startup and exit if no changes in health, shows message only if health changes.
• Show S.M.A.R.T. attributes in program window
• Show detailed online SSD health status report online


text:
Mrs. Baker was a consistent Christian, having professed faith in Christ and joined the Baptist Church at an early age. She had been married two years, and before her marriage was Miss Willie Price of Wood County.
The funeral was from the residence on Tuesday afternoon, conducted by the Rev. Lee Sanders, with burial at McWright Cemetery.
Deceased leaves a husband and a baby boy to mourn her loss, who have the sympathy of a host of friends and neighbors in this sad hour of affliction.


text:
> > I only have the docs there, I'll take care of the faq's and stuff later > > when I have slightly better connectivity. There will be alot more in > > that section. The index page needs to be changed and I need to put it into > > cvs. > > Now where are the 6.5 docs you mentioned above?? > > They are in CVS, and I'll copy them in. What I think I'd like to do is > provide docs for (up to) several recent versions of Postgres; would it > be possible to put move the docs stuff in the "users-lounge" down one Hey, where's the users lounge. No one told me. :-) -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
Next: From: Tom Lane Date: 2000-04-13 07:07:00 Subject: Re: [HACKERS] TODO doc items Previous: From: Thomas Lockhart Date: 2000-04-13 05:38:27 Subject: Re: the Chinese version docs


text:
Jackie Kennedy's Pink Suit
– 0 Comments
Q Whatever happened to the dress and pillbox hat that Jackie Kennedy was wearing the day President Kennedy was assassinated in 1963?–Don Lampman, Kansas City, Mo.
How Well Do You Know the Presidents? Take the Quiz
A The First Lady's bloodstained pink Chanel suit, a terrible relic of one of the nation's most tragic days, is stored in a special container in a temperature- and humidity-controlled vault in a National Archives facility in College Park, Md. "It was disturbing to see it the first time," archivist Steven Tilley tells us. Under terms set by the Kennedys, the clothing cannot be viewed by the public until 2103. The whereabouts of Mrs. Kennedy's pillbox hat are unknown.


text:
Fail Zero BCG (Bolt Carrier Group) thoughts and comments?
Anyone try one of the Fail Zero BCG. Is it all hype? Thanks
I use one and like it a lot. I still lube it however. It rides in the upper on my 18" SPR like rifle and has been flawless since building it this past winter. Worth every penny.
Thanks for the advice. I have a Bush M4 that cycles fine when using brass ammo but when using steel case it starts not cycling after 20-30 rounds. I was wondering if the Failzero would help correct that. It only has about 300 rounds through it since new.
I was having issues feeding steel as well. I thought I had mag or feed ramp problems, but they disappeared when I switched to brass. Maybe there was another issue, but I'm done with steel cased .223 for the foreseeable future. Buy AE XM193, it's almost as cheap as wolf or bear steel case.
I ordered the Fail Zero BCG and they sent me the full auto carrier so I sent it back and got the AR carrier. Put a few hundred rounds of Wolf through it without a hiccup. I,m impressed.
Why did you not want the FA carrier?
I did,nt want the auto part on my AR.
|All times are GMT. The time now is 04:16 AM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.


text:
BP Comment Quick Links
|Strength of Schedule Report
June 28, 2012
Future Shock
We still don't know when Player X is going to get called up, as injuries and ineffectiveness at the big league level, as well as the constant spectre of service time calculations, can play a far larger role than simply looking at minor league performance. We can, however, get some clues from the flurry of minor league promotions that come at mid-season. Here are ten recently promoted players, and what we can learn from them.
Jackie Bradley, OF, Red Sox
Cody Buckel, RHP, Rangers
Tony Cingrani, LHP, Reds
Gerrit Cole, RHP, Pirates
Kaleb Cowart, 3B, Angels
Corey Dickerson, OF, Rockies
Nick Franklin, SS, Mariners
Miles Head, 3B, Athletics
Danny Hultzen, LHP, Mariners
Dan Straily, RHP, Athletics
A version of this story originally appeared on ESPN Insider .
Kevin Goldstein is an author of Baseball Prospectus.
10 comments have been left for this article.
BP Comment Quick Links
Curious what you think the Red Sox will do with Bradley - they are fairly well set in CF at present, and have Ellsbury under control until the end of 2014.
Jun 28, 2012 04:56 AM
Miles Head's physical description brought to mind Kevin Youkilis.
Jun 28, 2012 06:42 AM
Dan W.
Or Benny Agbayani.
Jun 28, 2012 12:13 PM
Still of the same mind about Bradley as in your Top 11 "not star level"?
Jun 28, 2012 09:10 AM
What's Dickerson's speed like? He seems to hit a lot of triples for a guy who doesn't run well.
Jun 28, 2012 09:32 AM
Tony Cingrani - Finally had that Dominant start for Pensacola at AA last night. Graded a 90. 12K's 8 innings 3 hits no walks or runs. Cincinatti has to be feeling good finding this guy in the 3rd round from Rice.
Jun 28, 2012 10:18 AM
Not a subscriber? Sign up today!


text:
Sakarya Sokak No:5 Büyükada Adalar / İstanbul
The best cove of BUYUKADA will be openning in june. Free boat transport and entry free will be provided. Putting up in our hotel will be enough to benefit from this service. We have restaurant on the beach, you can get food and drinks in our restaurant for extra.


text:
Pharmaceutical Care for Asthma Control Improvement (PHARMACI)-Study
This study has been completed.
University Ghent
Information provided by:
University Ghent
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
First received: December 6, 2005
Last updated: December 19, 2007
Last verified: December 2007
- Full Text View
- Tabular View
- No Study Results Posted
- Disclaimer
- How to Read a Study Record
Detailed Description:
The objective of this study is to evaluate the therapeutic effectiveness and cost-effectivity of pharmaceutical care for asthma patients.
|Procedure: Pharmaceutical care for asthma patients
|Study Type:
|Study Design:
|Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)
|Official Title:
|Pharmaceutical Care for Asthma Control Improvement
Further study details as provided by University Ghent:
Primary Outcome Measures:
- The difference between study groups in the change of asthma control from baseline and follow-up visits [ Time Frame: after 1, 3 and 6 months ]
Secondary Outcome Measures:
- Peak flow [ Time Frame: after 3 and 6 months ]
- Knowledge of asthma and treatment [ Time Frame: after 6 months ]
- Asthma quality of life questionnaire (AQLQ) [ Time Frame: after 6 months ]
- Therapy adherence
- Inhalation techniques [ Time Frame: after 6 months ]
- Smoking [ Time Frame: after 6 months ]
- Asthma exacerbations [ Time Frame: after 6 months ]
- General Practitioner (GP) visits, emergency room visits and hospitalisations
- Working days lost and school days lost
|Study Start Date:
|January 2006
|Study Completion Date:
|October 2006
The objective of this study is to evaluate the therapeutic effectiveness and cost-effectivity of pharmaceutical care for asthma patients. Patients will be randomly allocated to the control group (= no input from pharmacist) or intervention group (= with pharmaceutical care at baseline and follow-up visits over 6 months).
|Ages Eligible for Study:
|18 Years to 50 Years (Adult)
|Sexes Eligible for Study:
|Accepts Healthy Volunteers:
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patients with persistent asthma
- Asthma treatment for at least 12 months
- Regular visitors of the participating community pharmacy
Exclusion Criteria:
- Severe co-morbidity
- > 10 pack-years smoking history
- Asthma Control Test score < 15 or =25
Contacts and Locations
Choosing to participate in a study is an important personal decision. Talk with your doctor and family members or friends about deciding to join a study. To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the Contacts provided below. For general information, see Learn About Clinical Studies.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00263159
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00263159
|University Hospital Ghent
|Ghent, Belgium, 9000
Sponsors and Collaborators
University Ghent
|Principal Investigator:
|Guy Brusselle, MD, PhD
|University Hospital, Ghent
More Information
Additional Information:
Additional relevant MeSH terms:
ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on September 19, 2017
Additional Information:
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
|NCT00263159 History of Changes
|Other Study ID Numbers:
|Study First Received:
|December 6, 2005
|Last Updated:
|December 19, 2007
Additional relevant MeSH terms:
Bronchial Diseases
Respiratory Tract Diseases
Lung Diseases, Obstructive
Lung Diseases
Respiratory Hypersensitivity
Hypersensitivity, Immediate
Immune System Diseases
ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on September 19, 2017


text:
Customer Reviews
* FTC Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed by contributors of the product reviews are their own and not necessarily those of Netrition.com. These reviews should not be taken as recommendations but rather customer opinions of the products that they may or may not have used. Furthermore, Netrition.com makes no warranty or representation, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy or sufficiency of the information contributed by outside sources, and assumes no responsibility or liability regarding the use of such information. Netrition.com does not warrant the performance, effectiveness or applicability of any materials listed or linked to on Netrition.com.
November 07, 2010Reviewer: Cemre in Turkey* Not very useful as Netrition's other shaker. But it is cheap.
0 of 1 people found the following review helpfulSeptember 27, 2010Reviewer: Daniel in Texas* So my first protein shake was made fine. I held the top on because of the other reviews saying it came off. Tonight in my hotel I now have a filmy chocolate concoction all over my mirror.
If you shake it you literally have to hold the top on, this thing is a piece of crap really. It's not even worth 10 cents considering the top just pops up if you shake it. Netrition needs to stop selling this thing. I'm either throwing it out or giving it to a friend as a gag and am going to laugh at him when the chocolate protein shake comes spewing out all over the place.
Editor's note: Make sure top is pushed on hard until it clicks, then always hold your fingers over the top and begin shaking slowly.


text:
Please contact Poddi if you have something for this family.
What is your family situation? I am a single mother of 2. I was happy that we were finally not going to need assistance this year. Life was starting to look up in terms of need. Now I find myself with an unplanned pregnancy. Unfortunatly, I am now again seeking assistance and help. I want so bad to be able to give my kids presents for the holidays. Before getting pregnant I was also going through a divorce (from an abusive relationship) and it has added up so far in the thousands of dollars. I had given away all my baby items thinking I was not going to have another baby again. The current pregnancy is unwanted and not supported by the father. On top of all of that a cyst that I have had for over a year has now changed and they are thinking it might be cancerous.
1. cloth diapers assorted cloth diapers in newborn and small size sent
2. baby toys a couple of toys sent
3. baby clothes, gender neutral Items sent
(Please add additional pregnancy sections if you are expecting multiples)
1. size 6 clothes 2 tops, 1 dress, 1 pajama top sent; 1 pair capris, 2 skirts, 3 shirts, 1 undershirt, 1 pair of leggings sent
2. size 7 winter coat Item sent
3. a craft kit Craft supplies sent
Child #2:
1. size 3 clothes items sent/to be sent
2. size 4 winter coat Item sent!
3. 75 piece puzzle 1 puzzle sent
Items requested:
1. size 8 1/2 non slip work shoes Item sent!
2. maternity clothes (size lrg/xlg - 14) items sent!
3. baby sling item sent/to be sent
Needs for Your Family As A Whole:
Items requested:
1. gift card to store to help with non food items (toilet paper, tissues, batteries, etc) - walmart, meijers
2. large, warm blanket for us all to snuggle under on the couch Item sent!
Of the items requested above, please prioritize the top 3 overall needs of your family:
|All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:04 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 5.56%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.


text:
CybertronPC Quantum TSVQJA1322 4U Rackmount Server - Intel Celeron G530 2.40GHz, 4GB DDR3, 500GB HDD, Gigabit LAN, DVDRW, No OSItem#: C122-12560 | Model#: TSVQJA1322
Currently Out Of Stock!
You May Consider This Alternative
Additional Resources
CybertronPC Quantum Intel 4U Rackmount Server Product Details
Additional Resources: Product Manuals
Related Items
Manufactured by: Cybertron
Warranty provided by: Cybertron
UPC No: 844750018379
Mfg Part No: TSVQJA1322
Box Size:
( Length:23, Width:24, Depth:15)
Shipping Weight: 70.0000 pound(s)
Click here for full warranty and support information
- Cybertron logos are registered trademarks of Cybertron. All others trademarks and copyrights mentioned herein are the property of their respective owners.


text:
11 days ago i got hit in the eye (left lower eye socket)since then my left upper jaw under eye to center of nose has been numb i considered it a "minor blow"but it is still numb . will feeling come back and if so how long before it does
How Long Will my Face Be Numb
Doctor Answers 1
This is not a minor blow.
I would recommend that you are assessed for your trauma. Since this is not an emergency, I recommend that you have your regular doctor refer you to a facial plastic surgeon for an assessment. This specialist will be able to provide you guidance regarding what to expect. It is important to rule out a fracture caused by your trauma that is responsible for the loss of sensation.
Learn more: http://www.lidlift.com
These answers are for educational purposes and should not be relied upon as a substitute for medical advice you may receive from your physician. If you have a medical emergency, please call 911. These answers do not constitute or initiate a patient/doctor relationship.


text:
While Renowned for Its Forensic Capabilities, the Digital Evidence Program Faces Challenges and Needs More Controls
April 30, 2008
Reference Number: 2008-10-106
This report has cleared the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration disclosure review process and information determined to be restricted from public release has been redacted from this document.
Phone Number | 202-622-6500
Email Address | firstname.lastname@example.com
Web Site | http://www.tigta.gov
April 30, 2008
FROM: Michael R. Phillips /s/ Michael R. Phillips
Deputy Inspector General for Audit
SUBJECT: Final Audit Report – While Renowned for Its Forensics Capabilities, the Digital Evidence Program Faces Challenges and Needs More Controls (Audit # 200610029)
This report presents the results of our review of the Field Services computer forensics portion of the Criminal Investigation (CI) Division Electronic Crimes Program (E-Crimes).[1] The overall objective of this review was to determine whether E-Crimes properly controlled the collection and timely analysis of digital evidence in support of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) special agents. This audit was included in our Fiscal Year 2007 Annual Audit Plan and related to the Major Management Challenges of tax compliance initiatives and taxpayer protection and rights.
Impact on the Taxpayer
While E-Crimes enjoys an excellent reputation throughout the law enforcement community for digital evidence forensics, the absence of some Program-level processing controls has created risks that could compromise investigations in worst-case scenarios. As the volume of digital evidence significantly increases, the IRS must ensure that it treats this evidence properly and consistently to ensure its continued admissibility in court.
E-Crimes' prominence in the investigative process has grown quickly, primarily because evidence of financial crimes is increasingly stored on computers, on portable electronic media, and at Internet storage facilities. Approximately 100 Computer Investigative Specialist (CIS) agents stationed across all field offices provide technical expertise on digital evidence during the course of IRS criminal investigations.
We believe that the CIS agents' reputation for expertise and self-reliance has led E-Crimes to forgo establishing some common and necessary internal controls. For example, digital evidence is not backed up offsite, CIS agents are not required to keep a detailed record of their activities relating to an investigation, and digital or physical evidence in the possession of CIS agents is not periodically validated.
While our audit objective did not include a detailed assessment of the forward-looking strategies to maintain and advance the E-Crimes digital evidence program, we identified issues that could become problematic without management's attention, as demand for E-Crimes' services increases. The continued conversion of experienced special agents to CIS agents could intensify staff attrition concerns, requiring the CI Division to balance the need to have sufficient human capital resources to work criminal investigative priorities with the growing need for CIS agents. In addition, the Division's initiative to develop a new information technology infrastructure is considered essential to advancing digital evidence processing capabilities. Although information technology oversight is in place, the CI Division needs to ensure that non-technological risks are identified and systemically mitigated and that contingency plans are prepared, in case the new system does not provide the expected operational benefits or is delayed. Finally, the change to the supervisory structure for CIS agents will expand the administrative responsibilities of Area Lead Investigators, which must be considered when determining an effective span of control.
Grand jury secrecy rules precluded our review of whether E-Crimes analyzed digital evidence in a timely manner or followed appropriate legal provisions when seizing and processing digital evidence. The CI Division could not provide us with documentation or information relating to any grand jury investigation, which was the prevalent type of investigation in our audit's scope. Without such access, we could not satisfy our responsibility under generally accepted government auditing standards to obtain sufficient, appropriate audit evidence to provide a reasonable basis for findings and conclusions in these two areas.
We recommended that the Director, Electronic Crimes, protect digital evidence by 1) implementing a near-term disaster avoidance plan for digital data, 2) developing effective quality control guidelines and documentation standards for the forensic process, and 3) clarifying the role of the management information system as an evidence inventory control subject to periodic validation. In addition, we recommended that the Chief, Criminal Investigation, assess challenges to maintaining and advancing the digital evidence program by 1) testing the option of using non-law enforcement positions to benefit the field office role, 2) assigning responsibility to a task force or project management team regarding development of and contingency management for non-technological aspects of technology modernization, and 3) continuing to assess the span of control for first-line supervisors as the recently approved direct-line authority is implemented and experienced.
IRS management agreed with Recommendations 2 through 6 and partially agreed with Recommendation 1. E-Crimes plans to 1) establish policy directives to require periodic validation of evidence data through supervisory operational reviews, 2) review its standard operating procedures annually, and 3) conduct operational reviews to develop quality control and documentation standards to include in future policy directives. In addition, the CI Division will monitor, re-evaluate, and adjust the span of control for the newly created direct-line supervisory positions as needed after standup of the organization. The CI Division will also ensure that project management teams for the information technology infrastructure project remain in compliance with the risk management process.
However, the CI Division believes that the information technology infrastructure project is near-term enough to facilitate the disaster avoidance plan we recommended, dependent on appropriate funding being available. Therefore, the CI Division does not agree that a distinct, near-term plan should be implemented prior to the completion of the information technology infrastructure project. The CI Division will continue to identify roles that can be accommodated with non-law enforcement personnel at E-Crimes' centralized support sites. However, the Division continues to believe that its current model of having experienced agents as CIS agents is most prudent and does not agree that non-law enforcement personnel can be considered for field offices. Management's complete response to the draft report is included as Appendix VI.
Office of Audit Comment
In two instances, we do not believe that the CI Division's corrective actions address the concerns in our recommendations. The Division plans to begin building data centers for the long-term data backup solution when funding is available. However, that will be only the start of implementation, not the completion. Funding for the data centers is scheduled for Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010, but funding for technology initiatives is dependent on the budget and might be at risk of not being fully approved. Without interim procedures, risks that could materialize from incidents or disasters will continue to exist over the next 2 years, or longer if the system is delayed. In addition, if the option of blending non-law enforcement personnel with experienced agents in the field is not piloted, CI Division management will be missing a valuable opportunity to maximize resources and minimize the risk of continued conversion of experienced special agents to CIS agents, thus exacerbating staff attrition concerns.
Copies of this report are also being sent to the IRS managers affected by the report recommendations. Please contact me at (202) 622-6510 if you have questions or Nancy A. Nakamura, Assistant Inspector General for Audit (Headquarters Operations and Exempt Organizations Programs), at (202) 622-8500.
The Electronic Crimes Program Has Not Established Sufficient Controls to Protect Digital Evidence
The Electronic Crimes Program Faces Challenges in Maintaining and Advancing Its Digital Evidence Program
Grand Jury Secrecy Rules Precluded an Effective Review of Data Analysis Timeliness or Application of Seizure Provisions
Appendix I – Detailed Objective, Scope, and Methodology
Appendix II – Major Contributors to This Report
Appendix III – Report Distribution List
Appendix IV – Glossary of Terms
Appendix V – Electronic Crimes Program Post-of-Duty Map
Appendix VI – Management's Response to the Draft Report
Criminal Investigation
Computer Investigative Specialist
Electronic Crimes Program
Electronic Crimes Management Information System
Internal Revenue Service
The Electronic Crimes Program (E-Crimes) provides guidance and resources in securing, documenting, processing, maintaining, and presenting digital evidence[2] in support of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) criminal investigations. E-Crimes was established as a formal organizational component in 2001.[3] Since then, its role in the Criminal Investigation (CI) Division's law enforcement investigative process has expanded beyond digital data forensics at the field office level to include broad involvement in developing innovative uses of information technology. At the same time, there has been a large increase in demand for the more traditional mission of supporting the field office special agents in the collection and analysis of digital evidence. The digital evidence forensics services were the scope of this review.
The IRS enjoys an excellent reputation in the digital evidence forensics area. For example, in 2004 an industry journalist described the IRS as arguably having the most sophisticated and efficient computer forensics teams, which are emulated by other government agencies.
The E-Crimes Field Services Program guides the efforts of approximately 100 special agents designated as computer investigative specialists (CIS agents), who are stationed across all CI Division field offices to provide technical expertise during the course of investigations. The CIS agents are not the lead IRS case agents for criminal investigations. Conceptually, they can be described as co-agents on a case. The degree to which digital data exist as a potential source of evidence in a particular investigation dictates the extent to which one or more CIS agents are involved in an investigation.
CIS agents often extract and secure digital evidence from computers and other data storage devices when conducting court-approved search warrants at a person's residence, business, or other property.[4] The CI Division policy for collecting electronic records is to "image" information from a computer or other data device onto Federal Government digital hard drives but not to confiscate the electronic devices unless necessary. CIS agents will take possession of physical components only if they encounter problems accessing the data onsite or if a device itself is needed as evidence. CIS agent expertise includes using specialized equipment and techniques to preserve digital evidence and to recover encrypted, password-protected, or hidden financial data. Normally, CIS agents will analyze the digital data collected and convert extracted evidence into a useable format for the investigating case agents. The information provided to case agents can include common word processing and spreadsheet files, database files, collections of image files, email system content, or even the creation of a virtual workstation that simulates the specific computer environment as it existed at the time of the data seizure.
Prior to establishment of E-Crimes, expertise and experience in computer technology had evolved in a decentralized manner, as agents provided technical support for field office operations. Tactical, day-to-day control of CIS agents remained with the respective local Special Agents in Charge. This supervisory arrangement continued after E-Crimes began operations. However, part of the restructuring involved the addition of geographically based Area Lead Investigators who report to the E-Crimes Headquarters Field Services Program, monitor CIS agents' workloads, and provide oversight and functional supervision to ensure proper coverage within their respective areas for all activities requiring the assistance of an electronic crimes investigator. A diagram of the posts-of-duty for E-Crimes personnel is presented in Appendix V. Because initial collection of digital data can require the efforts of several CIS agents working at the same site or simultaneously at multiple sites, large degrees of coordination and cooperation are necessary among individual CIS agents in the same vicinity and, at times, on a nationwide basis. This coordination is a significant part of an Area Lead Investigator's responsibilities in the Field Services Program.
E-Crimes' prominence in the investigative process has grown quickly, primarily because evidence of financial crimes is increasingly stored on computers, on portable electronic media, and at Internet storage facilities. E-Crimes estimated that the volume of digital data seized by CIS agents increased tenfold between Fiscal Years 2001 and 2003, and the upward trend has continued each year since (see Figure 1). This growth in volume represents hundreds of search warrants and the contents of thousands of data storage devices seized as evidence. E-Crimes management considers the increasing volume of digital evidence, which requires the use of specialized technical resources to support modern criminal investigations, as a major challenge to the Program.
Figure 1: Digital Data Seized Yearly by E-Crimes
Figure 1 was removed due to its size. To see Figure 1, please go to the Adobe PDF version of the report on the TIGTA Public Web Page.
We performed this review at the Electronic Crimes Technology and Support Center laboratory in Springfield, Virginia, and at IRS office locations within the Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Massachusetts; and Oakland, California, field offices during the period November 2006 through August 2007. We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. However, due to grand jury secrecy rules, we could not satisfy the Field Work Standard regarding sufficient, competent, and relevant evidence for some of our audit sub-objectives. The final section of the report presents an additional explanation of the scope limitation. Standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objective. Except for the areas affected by grand jury limitations, we believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objective. Detailed information on our audit objective, scope, and methodology is presented in Appendix I. Major contributors to the report are listed in Appendix II.
The Electronic Crimes Program Has Not Established Sufficient Controls to Protect Digital Evidence
We believe that the CIS agents' reputation for expertise and self-reliance has led E-Crimes to forgo establishing some common and necessary internal controls. While CIS agents are renowned for their processing of digital evidence, the absence of specific Program-level controls has created risks that could compromise investigations in worst-case scenarios. The ultimate value of evidence in a criminal investigation is its admissibility in court. The process used by CIS agents to collect and secure digital data must protect the original image from inadvertent damage and allow the data analysis results to be authenticated as having come from the exact data that were initially obtained. Comprehensive internal controls are a means for ensuring that data are protected.
The computer forensics principles that CIS agents are trained in are the basis for the processes they follow.
Since 2005, E-Crimes has used a task force to create and periodically revise standard operating procedures for the handling of digital evidence. E-Crimes personnel explained that the procedures were intentionally general enough to address the basic steps in collecting and processing digital evidence, without restricting the flexibility needed for each investigation's circumstances. Because of the experience and professional training that CIS agents have, E-Crimes management did not believe that they needed to, or could, dictate in detail how CIS agents should do their jobs. However, we believe that some procedures do not warrant being designated as discretionary actions and should not be omitted from the standard operating procedures.
Digital evidence is not backed up offsite
CIS agents were not safeguarding a backup copy of the original evidence at a secure, offsite location. CIS agents made working copies of the digital data for analysis purposes, reserving the original images for any forensic authentication purpose that could become necessary to successfully prosecute the case. Both the original evidence images and the working copies were routinely stored within or near the CIS agents' workspaces. CIS agents retain custody of and safeguard the original digital evidence images from the time they are collected during a search warrant, or obtained through consent, until the completion of the investigation and any subsequent judicial actions.
Digital images are normally written to and stored on digital hard drives similar to this example. Multiple images might fit on one hard drive, depending on their sizes.
Disaster avoidance and continuity principles require that effective data backup procedures include moving copies of critical data to an offsite location that would not be affected by a local catastrophic event such as fire, flood, natural disaster, sprinkler system malfunction, vandalism, or other intentional destructive acts. The location of the facility where the original evidence is stored can also increase the importance of offsite data backup. During our interviews, we observed that two of eight CIS agent workspace locations were below ground level. The IRS experienced the consequences of the risk inherent in below-ground facilities when its National Headquarters building was severely flooded in 2006. Data backup measures help to avoid situations that might otherwise cause loss of data, significant recovery expenses, decreased prosecution potential, or, ultimately, a loss of confidence in E-Crimes' reputation.
E-Crimes management does value the concept of having an effective data storage and archival system for their Program. As described in a later section of the report, E-Crimes expects to implement within the next few years an information technology solution that would provide for dual location storage of digital evidence. However, in the current environment, E-Crimes management considers offsite backup for all digital images to be cost-prohibitive because the duplication of images would require additional physical space, equipment, data storage devices, and staff resources.
However, backup measures do not have to be costly or time-consuming. The most basic offsite backup process might require only data hard drives, which have become relatively inexpensive, and shipping postage for transport to another E-Crimes location. Digital hard drives can be recycled when data are subsequently determined to not warrant backup. In addition, E-Crimes could consider moving the current original evidence images to an offsite location to avoid the step of creating an additional copy. We believe that E-Crimes should identify interim procedures to help minimize or eliminate risks that could materialize from incidents or disasters.
CIS agents are not required to keep a detailed record of their activities relating to an investigation
While documentation principles are part of computer forensics training, the absence of specific baseline requirements in E-Crimes' standard operating procedures has left the methods and substance for documenting case activity during the course of an investigation to the discretion of individual CIS agents. The reporting requirement in the standard operating procedures simply states that CIS agents write memoranda and reports, as necessary, to document activities and to transmit the results of digital evidence analysis throughout the investigative and judicial processes. Our interviews revealed a variety of opinions held by CIS agents as to the necessity for case documentation. Most stated that they did not keep detailed written documentation to support their analyses or review results.
Several risks are inherent when careful records are not kept. Possible situations include 1) a CIS agent having to duplicate the analyses if it subsequently becomes necessary to provide detailed documentation or 2) difficulty in reassigning ongoing work to different CIS agents after analysis has begun. A practice of preparing reports only when necessary could prove detrimental to the investigation, with the passage of months or years between a CIS agent's analysis, recollections about such, and an eventual referral for prosecution.
The Justice Department concluded "a well‑documented case is much more likely to result in a guilty plea, saving valuable prosecutorial and court resources."
E-Crimes must be prepared to help a prosecutor establish both the admissibility and persuasiveness of digital evidence. The Justice Department National Institute of Justice has issued a series of guides for law enforcement agencies that suggest general principles for handling digital evidence.[5] These guidelines are not mandated or official policy, but they represent the consensus of a computer forensics working group convened to consider common situations encountered during the examination of digital evidence. Repeated throughout these publications is the principal that documentation should be an ongoing process during the forensic examination. Digital forensics examiners should fully document all actions taken to process digital evidence and make examination notes available for review, discovery, or testimony purposes. The guidelines also suggest preparing a written report at the conclusion of an examination that outlines the process and pertinent data recovered. The rationale for these suggestions is that the examiner might need to testify about not only the conduct of the investigation but also the validity of the forensic procedures used.
E-Crimes management considered the responsibility for creating reasonably relevant processing notes to be inherent in computer forensic principles the CIS agents are trained in. E-Crimes management did not want to dictate a burdensome degree of documentation and report-writing requirements throughout an investigation because CIS agents collaborate with case agents as the theory of investigation evolves and provide additional digital evidence analysis as needed. Management expects CIS agents to provide for accurate recollection during the course of the investigation in the form of processing notes of steps taken, automated logs kept in forensic processing applications, and written transmittals to case agents. Management believes that lack of adherence to this principle would be a performance issue for supervisors to address.
E-Crimes management stated that the issue involves how to define proper documentation and what form it should take throughout an investigation. We believe that E-Crimes' resistance to specifying those requirements has resulted in an environment in which documentation principles might not always be followed. For example, several E-Crimes personnel commented that the possibility of discovery during a trial was a reason for CIS agents to avoid maintaining detailed notes about their digital evidence processing. The concern was that if processing notes exist that the defense could review, there could be an opportunity for the defense to challenge the process in some manner. E-Crimes management agrees that to purposefully not make or retain notes for that reason is inappropriate and is not the policy of the E-Crimes Program.
We believe that E-Crimes should clearly set forth requirements in its standard operating procedures to ensure that properly documented case records support CIS agent activity at the time the analyses are conducted.
Digital or physical evidence in the possession of CIS agents is not periodically validated
CIS agents input information about digital images and other electronics-related evidence to the E-Crimes management information system (ECMIS). While the ECMIS, which was launched at the beginning of Fiscal Year 2006, was designed to provide evidence inventory accounting and case tracking information, the system has not yet evolved into a complete inventory control to account for digital data or to record disposition of the data. Inventory control principles require a periodic and independent validation of the physical condition of the items under control and reconciliation to inventory records to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the system. Exceptions identified through inventory controls can include missing and uncontrolled items.
Over the past several years, the CI Division has worked on some of the most notorious financial crime investigations in history, investigations that arguably contributed to fundamental changes to our economy and society. We believe that digital hard drives containing confidential and sensitive information, especially for cases of high national law enforcement priority, would be valuable items of contraband in the hands of an errant employee. In the worst case, only a single instance of compromised data in a high-profile investigation could damage the Federal Government's reputation and provide a way to mount a defense against criminal charges.
Chain-of-custody principles require CIS agents to maintain the integrity of evidence in its original condition and to ensure that the evidence is not lost, stolen, or altered in the months or years between the time obtained and any judicial proceedings. During a seizure action, the IRS prepares a search warrant inventory list that itemizes everything it has taken, including any digital images and electronics-related items. These lists are maintained in each investigation's case documentation. However, CI Division policy states that seized records and documentary evidence, including digital images, are not required to be tracked in the main IRS automated accounting system.[6] E-Crimes created the ECMIS to provide its own automated controls over digital evidence. E-Crimes personnel told us during our interviews that they entered evidence items in the ECMIS to capture workload attributes such as the location of the data when seized, the kinds of devices the data came from, and the digital size of the data.
To determine if the ECMIS was capable of tracking the electronic evidence inventory, we conducted a limited comparison of ECMIS evidence records to digital evidence on hand at the locations we visited. We were able to verify that 322 evidence items were present with the assigned CIS agents, as reflected in the ECMIS, and an additional 40 items had been disposed of or moved to a different location. If accountability for E-Crimes evidence was controlled, information on the 40 items would need to be updated. We believe that it is feasible for E-Crimes to use its existing evidence inventory database information for accountability purposes. This would represent an important control in monitoring the original digital evidence.
Recommendation 1: The Director, Electronic Crimes, should implement a near-term disaster avoidance plan for digital evidence in the possession of E-Crimes personnel, until a long-term plan is developed based on future technology advancements.
Management's Response: The IRS agreed, in part, with the recommendation. In Fiscal Year 2009, E‑Crimes plans to transition from the proof-of-concept testing stage to the implementation stage of its long-term information technology infrastructure project for the safe, efficient, and redundant storage of digital data. The CI Division believes that the information technology infrastructure project is near-term enough to facilitate the disaster avoidance plan in the recommendation. Implementation of this, or any, solution is dependent on appropriate funding.
Office of Audit Comment: We do not believe that this corrective action addresses the concerns stated in our recommendation. The CI Division agreed that digital evidence is not backed up offsite but did not agree that a distinct, near-term disaster avoidance plan should be implemented prior to completion of the information technology infrastructure project. The Division plans to begin building data centers for the long-term solution when funding is scheduled to be available at the beginning of Fiscal Year 2009. However, that will be only the start of implementation, not the completion. Funding for the data centers is scheduled for Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010, but funding for technology initiatives is dependent on the budget and might be at risk of not being fully approved. Without interim procedures, risks that could materialize from incidents or disasters will continue to exist over the next 2 years, or longer if the system is delayed.
Recommendation 2: The Director, Electronic Crimes, should include effective quality control guidelines and documentation standards in the E-Crimes standard operating procedures applicable to personnel nationwide.
Management's Response: The IRS agreed with the recommendation. In March 2008, E-Crimes issued revised standard operating procedures that address documentation standards applicable to the seizure and processing of digital evidence. E-Crimes plans to review the standard operating procedures annually. In addition, with the transition to direct-line management, E-Crimes plans to conduct operational reviews to develop quality control and documentation standards to include in future policy directives.
Recommendation 3: The Director, Electronic Crimes, should clarify the role of the ECMIS as an evidence inventory control and require a periodic evidence reconciliation and validation in the E-Crimes standard operating procedures.
Management's Response: The IRS agreed with the recommendation. With the recent transition to direct-line management of CIS agents within the Field Services Program, E‑Crimes plans that one of the areas of focus for supervisors will be periodic validation of evidence data through operational reviews. E-Crimes plans to cover the requirements for such reviews and other administrative matters through forthcoming policy directives.
The Electronic Crimes Program Faces Challenges in Maintaining and Advancing Its Digital Evidence Program
Our audit objective did not include a detailed assessment of the CI Division's forward-looking strategies to maintain and advance the E-Crimes digital evidence program as the demand for E-Crimes' services increases. However, we identified three challenges that warrant management attention before they become problematic:
· The continued conversion of experienced special agents to CIS agents could intensify staff attrition concerns.
· The initiative to develop a new information technology infrastructure is considered essential to advancing digital evidence processing capabilities.
· The change to the supervisory structure for CIS agents will expand the administrative responsibilities of Area Lead Investigators.
The continued conversion of experienced special agents to CIS agents could intensify staff attrition concerns
The CI Division selects from its pool of experienced special agents who have demonstrated information technology skills when filling CIS agent positions. Gaining an experienced agent in the CIS agent position benefits the E-Crimes program but might represent a detriment to the field office that loses the experienced special agent from its ranks. The CI Division prefers this method of in-house staffing as opposed to having technically educated, but non-law enforcement, personnel perform digital evidence analyses. E-Crimes believes that the CIS agent's job is not only to preserve, extract, and analyze the digital evidence but also to know what to look for, what questions to ask, and how to prepare evidence for a trial. In addition, because they are law enforcement agents, CIS agents can carry firearms, execute warrants, and perform searches and seizures.
Selection as a CIS agent dedicates a special agent to a collaborative support role and removes him or her from the primary case agent role.
We agree with E-Crimes' contention that the law enforcement background makes experienced special agents likely to be the best possible CIS agents. However, we believe that the accelerated growth in the volume of digital evidence in the investigative process warrants reconsideration of the alternative of also hiring technologically educated, but non-law enforcement, personnel to blend with experienced agents and fill some aspects of the field office CIS agent role. Because of uncertainty as to how high the volume of digital data seized will rise, how long special agent attrition will exceed hiring authority, and how successful technological solutions will be in maximizing the use of CIS agent resources, we believe that the CI Division will have to balance the need to have sufficient human capital resources to work criminal investigative priorities with the growing need for CIS agents.
Figure 2 shows our estimate that nearly one-half of the CIS agents and Area Lead Investigators on rolls at the beginning of Calendar Year 2007 will be eligible to retire by the end of 2012, based on retirement eligibility dates. Under the current selection process, agents selected to replace retiring CIS agents will be taken from the pool of experienced field office investigative agents.
Figure 2: Forecast of Retirement Eligibility
Figure 2 was removed due to its size. To see Figure 2, please go to the Adobe PDF version of the report on the TIGTA Public Web Page.
Since 2002, overall attrition has exceeded or matched overall hiring in the CI Division due to budgetary limitations. At the time of our audit, the CI Division anticipated losing about 150 special agents in each of the next 2 years, and it expected to hire only 46 and 48 new agents in Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008, respectively. The attrition of human capital is a significant management challenge affecting many parts of the IRS, not just the CI Division. In the past 2 years, we have expressed our concern that the loss of experienced special agents might adversely affect the overall levels of and improvements in productivity that the CI Division had been experiencing.[7] In this environment, we believe that E-Crimes should determine whether a deviation from its policy of in-house CIS agent recruiting is warranted, especially over the longer term. In addition, E-Crimes should contact other digital forensics functions to identify best practices in staffing and recruiting.
The initiative to develop a new information technology infrastructure is considered essential to advancing digital evidence processing capabilities
The CI Division has started an initiative to develop a technological solution because it continues to encounter increasing volumes of digital evidence. To monitor the planning, development, and implementation milestones of new technology solutions, the CI Division has established an Information Technology Executive Steering Committee and Governance Process. This Process provides oversight to the technological aspects of the planned infrastructure, but it is not designed to focus on how the infrastructure will affect non-technological aspects. The Government Accountability Office has issued guidance for agencies to include comprehensive risk management as a key element when undertaking new projects, including the initiative's impact on non-technological elements (people, processes, physical infrastructure).[8]
The IRS should have contingency plans, in case the new system does not provide the expected operational benefits.
The CI Division has obtained funding for its initiative in the IRS Information Technology Modernization Vision and Strategy for Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010. If prototype testing is successful, the proposed system will include the buildout of 2 full-scale digital evidence data centers, estimated at the time of our audit to exceed $3 million each. The data centers will store and archive digital evidence, perform analysis, and deliver results electronically to case investigators in field offices nationwide. The system will leverage state-of-the-art information technology to use available E-Crimes resources to meet the increasing need to exploit digital evidence in complex financial investigations. The data centers will change the handling of digital data but not eliminate the need for the cadre of CIS agents in the field office locations to capture the data at their sources.
As acknowledged in the Modernization Strategy, the IRS has had some difficulty with its overall information technology modernization. Indeed, history shows that Federal Government technology initiatives are prone to various risks that influence the predictability of the eventual timeliness or functionality of a project. For other CI Division technology initiatives, task forces have been created to assist in the projects' formulation.[9] Task force members represented various levels of the organization: managers, special agents, support positions, and information technology specialists. At the time of our review, such a task force had not been formed for the data center initiative. We believe that in addition to the formal IRS information technology oversight in place, the CI Division needs a task force to ensure that 1) non-technological risks are identified and systematically mitigated, 2) personnel are prepared for process changes that will accompany the new system, and 3) contingency plans are prepared, in case the new system does not provide the expected operational benefits or is delayed. This initiative is a significant challenge because E-Crimes officials believe that the advancement of digital evidence processing capabilities is essential to maintaining the CI Division's ability to conduct effective investigations as technology advances.
The change to the supervisory structure for CIS agents will expand the administrative responsibilities of Area Lead Investigators
At the time of our audit, E-Crimes was proposing the formal transfer of supervisory responsibility for the approximately 100 CIS agents from field office managers to a direct line of authority within E-Crimes. This change in management structure was approved by the Chief, CI, on October 24, 2007, and will be implemented over the following several months. The rationale for this proposal was that E-Crimes would manage CIS agent resources better than field office managers who have had no formal training in computer forensics or the peculiarities of digital evidence. In addition, the E-Crimes reorganization proposal outlined the need to add one more Area Lead Investigator position to address the span of control disparity.[10] Figure 3 shows that two of the seven Area Lead Investigator positions had significantly more CIS agents to oversee than their counterparts.
Figure 3: Span of Control for Area Lead Investigators
Figure 1 was removed due to its size. To see Figure 1, please go to the Adobe PDF version of the report on the TIGTA Public Web Page.
Our interviews with personnel in one of the two high span-of-control areas revealed that the higher number of agents and larger geographic coverage issues significantly limited detailed supervisory oversight of the CIS agents. Consequently, the Area Lead Investigator had to rely on the proficiency of the CIS agents to perform their duties without close supervisory involvement. E-Crimes personnel advised us that this situation could become even more challenging as the number of digital evidence seizures continues to rise at an exponential rate, potentially bringing with it the need for additional CIS agents in the future.
Because implementation of direct-line authority between CIS agents and Area Lead Investigators will create additional administrative responsibilities for Area Lead Investigators as the official first-line managers, we are concerned that achieving the proper degree of supervisory involvement will remain a challenge after the management restructuring. We believe that E-Crimes should conduct an online assessment as the new management structure is implemented to ensure that the spans of control, both geographically and staffing related, do not jeopardize the uniform management of the digital forensics program.
Recommendation 4: The Chief, CI, should ensure that E-Crimes tests the option of using non-law enforcement positions to benefit the digital evidence field office role.
Management's Response: The IRS agreed with the recommendation. The CI Division believes that non-law enforcement personnel should be considered where feasible to support or augment the role of CIS agents in the field locations. However, the CI Division is unsure how the recommended option of using non-law enforcement positions to benefit the digital evidence field office role can be tested. It has considered this option but continues to believe that the current model of having experienced special agents as CIS agents is most prudent due to the technological, legal, investigative, and financial requirements of the CIS agent position. However, the CI Division will continue to identify roles that can be accommodated with non-law enforcement personnel at the E-Crimes support center as well as the data centers.
Office of Audit Comment: We do not believe that this corrective action addresses the concerns stated in our recommendation. The CI Division agreed to continue considering non-law enforcement personnel for centralized support positions but did not agree that non-law enforcement personnel can be considered for positions in field offices to benefit the digital evidence role of CIS agents. If the option of blending non-law enforcement personnel with experienced agents in the field is not piloted, CI Division management will be missing a valuable opportunity to maximize resources and minimize the risk of continued conversion of experienced special agents to CIS agents, thus exacerbating staff attrition concerns.
Recommendation 5: The Chief, CI, should ensure that E-Crimes specifically assigns to a task force or project management team the responsibility of having a structured and documented risk management process for the information technology infrastructure project to address non-technological aspects and contingency plans.
Management's Response: The IRS agreed with the recommendation. The CI Division already has in place an information technology project management team as well as an internal E-Crimes team composed of management officials, CIS agents, and technical experts. The CI Division believes that these teams comply with the risk management process that was recommended and will ensure that the teams remain in compliance.
Recommendation 6: The Chief, CI, should ensure that E-Crimes continues to assess the scope of the responsibilities of the revised Area Lead Investigator positions as direct-line authority is implemented and experienced to determine an effective span of control that addresses long-term organizational needs.
Management's Response: The IRS agreed with the recommendation. The CI Division will monitor the issue, re-evaluate the span of control for the newly created direct-line management position after standup of the organization, and adjust the span of control if needed.
Grand Jury Secrecy Rules Precluded an Effective Review of Data Analysis Timeliness or Application of Seizure Provisions
Because of grand jury secrecy rules,[11] the CI Division could not provide us with documentation or information relating to grand jury investigations. Without such access, we could not satisfy our responsibility under generally accepted government auditing standards to obtain and evaluate sufficient audit evidence to support conclusions as to whether E-Crimes analyzed digital evidence in a timely manner or followed appropriate legal provisions when seizing and processing digital evidence. We do not provide any assurances or recommendations in these two areas.
This grand jury scope limitation is prevalent in our audits of the CI Division. Due to the nature of non-tax crimes within the CI Division's jurisdiction, most investigations are conducted jointly with at least one other Federal Government law enforcement agency and use the grand jury process to facilitate the investigations. The CI Division's position, based on advice from the IRS Office of Chief Counsel, Division Counsel/Associate Chief Counsel (Criminal Tax),[12] was that when the classification of material as grand jury or non-grand jury is in question, the ultimate decision to release information rests with the attorney for the Federal Government (such as the United States Attorney Office or other pertinent Department of Justice official). We did not get permission to review supporting documents on grand jury investigations from the applicable United States Attorney's Offices for the IRS field offices we visited.
As a result, the scope of cases subject to our review of supporting documentation consisted of only 11 non-grand jury investigations (9 were in a single field office, and 6 were assigned to a single CIS agent), as opposed to our planned audit sample scope of 30 investigations from 3 dispersed field offices. We did not observe anything noteworthy in the case actions when we reviewed the documentation for the 11 non-grand jury investigations.
The legal provisions applicable to the seizure of digital evidence in criminal investigations are based on the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and other statutory privacy laws. CIS agents help to ensure that appropriate legal requirements are met by assisting the special agents in drafting search warrant applications with proper language to describe computer hardware, software, peripherals, and data stored within the computers to be seized. Subsequently, CIS agents must comply with any warrant and local judicial time requirements for timely review or return of seized media evidence within the scope of the warrant. Even in the absence of judicial requirements, E-Crimes strives for digital evidence analysis to be completed within a short period to minimize the elapsed calendar days for an investigation.
Appendix I
Detailed Objective, Scope, and Methodology
The objective of this review was to determine whether the CI Division E-Crimes[13] properly controlled the collection and timely analysis of digital evidence in support of IRS special agents. To accomplish this objective, we planned to evaluate internal controls regarding the processing of digital data obtained by E-Crimes and to review documentation supporting the activity of the E-Crimes CIS agents during their assignments.
As discussed in the final section of the audit report, grand jury secrecy rules limited the scope of our review for two sub-objectives in our audit plan. The scope limitation meant that we could not conduct some planned tests in accordance with the generally accepted government auditing standard regarding the Field Work Standard for Performance Audits. This Standard relates to our need to have sufficient audit evidence with which to provide a reasonable basis for findings and conclusions. Because we could not have access to any documentation of CIS agent activity on grand jury investigations, we could not conclude whether E-Crimes analyzed digital evidence in a timely manner or followed appropriate legal provisions when seizing and processing digital data.
To accomplish the audit objective, we:
I. Evaluated internal controls relating to digital evidence obtained or seized by CIS agents.
A. Reviewed the Internal Revenue Manual, the standard operating procedures, and other guidance relating to securing and analyzing digital evidence.
B. Used a copy of the ECMIS[14] data as of January 12, 2007, to establish the population of digital evidence assignments in which CIS agents were involved during Fiscal Year 2006. We considered the reliability of data contained in the ECMIS to be undetermined in terms of completeness and accuracy. However, we determined that using the data for informational purposes would not weaken our analysis or lead to an incorrect or unintentional message.
C. Observed the physical environments for digital evidence analysis and storage during onsite visits to three selected field offices.[15]
1. Judgmentally selected the Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Massachusetts; and Oakland, California, field offices as audit sites, based on ECMIS data that indicated high totals for the number of investigations assisted on, number of evidence items seized, and volume of digital data seized. We also considered whether some of the investigations were potentially non-grand jury investigations and ensured that the selected locations were geographically dispersed. At least three different CIS agents within each selected field office had been the primary CIS agent for several digital analysis investigations during Fiscal Year 2006.
2. Judgmentally selected for visitation the posts-of-duty for three Area Lead Investigators and nine CIS agents, located in eight cities, within the three selected field offices. We did not physically visit other CIS agent posts-of-duty within those field offices because they were in outlying geographical locations, were staffed by less experienced CIS agents, or could not be scheduled during the time of our visit.
D. Interviewed each selected Area Lead Investigator and CIS agent to gain their perspectives on various aspects of the digital data forensics environment.
E. For investigations in which 8 selected CIS agents were the primary CIS agents, verified whether 362 evidence items recorded in the ECMIS were accounted for properly. The verification process was limited because all investigation names relating to grand jury investigations had to be covered from our view. Because we could not handle the evidence items ourselves, we had to rely on the CIS agents to translate names into case numbers and to orally read evidence label information for our use.
II. Reviewed documentation regarding CIS agent activity on Fiscal Year 2006 assignments.
A. Reviewed monthly time reports for the period October 2005 through February 2007 for each CIS agent in the selected field offices to determine the number of hours charged to specific investigations, projects, or other time categories.
B. Reviewed relevant case documentation on non-grand jury investigations assigned to the CIS agents visited. Only 11 (12 percent) of the 94 investigations assigned to the 8 CIS agents on the ECMIS were non-grand jury. Of these 11 investigations, 9 were in 1 field office and 6 were assigned to 1 CIS agent. We reviewed paper documentation from the CIS agents' case files for the 11 non-grand jury investigations to evaluate CIS actions and the timeline of the assignment.
C. Via letters, requested the assistance of three applicable United States Attorney's Offices in determining, for grand jury investigations, whether CI Division documents that could be responsive to our audit tests were actually grand jury material.
Appendix II
Major Contributors to This Report
Nancy A. Nakamura, Assistant Inspector General for Audit (Headquarters Operations and Exempt Organizations Programs)
Carl L. Aley, Director
John R. Wright, Director
Diana M. Tengesdal, Audit Manager
Timothy A. Chriest, Lead Auditor
Joseph P. Smith, Senior Auditor
Ahmed M. Tobaa, Senior Auditor
Appendix III
Commissioner C
Office of the Commissioner – Attn: Chief of Staff C
Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement SE
Director, Technology Operations and Investigative Services, Criminal Investigation SE:CI:TOIS
Deputy Director, Technology Operations and Investigative Services, Criminal Investigation SE:CI:TOIS
Director, Electronic Crimes, Criminal Investigation SE:CI:TOIS:EC
Chief Counsel CC
National Taxpayer Advocate TA
Director, Office of Legislative Affairs CL:LA
Director, Office of Program Evaluation and Risk Analysis RAS:O
Office of Internal Control OS:CFO:CPIC:IC
Audit Liaison: Director, Planning and Strategy, Criminal Investigation SE:CI:S:PS
Appendix IV
Area Lead Investigator
Reports directly to the E-Crimes Director, Field Services. In direct coordination with the field offices, the Area Lead Investigator provides national program direction, resource allocation, knowledgeable oversight, and functional supervision of CIS agents to ensure timely and quality workload management, completion of assignments, training, and support.
Computer Investigative Specialist (CIS)
An experienced special agent with excellent financial investigative skills and knowledge of accounting and legal principles. A CIS agent completes a standardized course of study in computer evidence recovery and analysis. The mission of the CIS agent position is to serve as an investigator who contributes computer expertise to criminal investigations. A CIS agent is a member of his or her respective field office and should be used exclusively for CIS agent assignments.
Criminal Investigation (CI) Division
Responsible for investigating alleged violations of criminal statutes regarding tax administration, which is relatively evident because of the widely known role of the IRS as the nation's tax collection agency. In addition to working tax evasion cases, IRS agents often work with financial components of other Government agencies to combat money laundering, corporate fraud, terrorism financing, currency reporting violations, narcotics, or other critical national law enforcement priorities.
Digital Data
Information contained on a digital storage device.
Digital Evidence
Information of investigative value, stored or transmitted in digital form, that may be relied upon in court.
A legal term for the pretrial process during which each party requests relevant information and documents from the other side, in an attempt to "discover" pertinent facts. Discovery methods include depositions, requests for admissions, document production requests, and requests for inspection.
Electronic Crimes Management Information System (ECMIS)
An electronic case management system designed by E‑Crimes specifically to capture workload data related to the acquisition of digital evidence from whatever source and the processing of that evidence by a CIS agent in support of an investigation.
Electronic Crimes
Technology and
The post-of-duty for some E‑Crimes Headquarters management officials and the defacto home location for E‑Crimes. Laboratory personnel evaluate, test, and document the effectiveness and validity of computer forensics procedures, techniques, equipment, and software used in the data recovery and analysis processes. The laboratory also develops basic and advanced training programs for CIS agents.
Field Office
Offices within the five CI Division geographical areas
throughout the country with boundaries that range from a portion of a single State
to inter-State areas. There were 30 CI
Division field offices at the time of our audit. Each field office has a Special Agent in
Charge to direct, monitor, and coordinate the criminal investigation
activities within that office's area of responsibility. Several
Field Services Program
Under the Director, Field Services, supervises the Area Lead Investigators and is responsible for the coordination and direction of E-Crimes Field Operations nationwide.
Involves obtaining and analyzing information for use as evidence in court. Computer forensics involves scientifically analyzing data from digital storage media, including the recovery of data that users have hidden or deleted. Investigators often examine digital data not knowing if the data contain evidence or if any evidence would be incriminating or would disprove an allegation.
Hard Drive
A sealed box containing rigid platters (disks) coated with a substance capable of storing data magnetically in digital format. One or more hard drives can be present inside the case of a computer and can exist in standalone, external cases attached by cables. A hard drive normally stores information such as computer programs, text, pictures, video, and multimedia files.
In a data forensics context, a duplicate copy of an entire digital data storage device exactly as it existed in digital form. When a computer file is saved, it actually exists in randomly scattered sectors on the disk rather than in one continuous block. When a file is retrieved, the scattered pieces are reassembled from the disk in the device's memory and presented as a single file. Imaging copies all the scattered pieces of various files, even fragments of deleted files. In contrast, a file-by-file copy merely creates a copy of reassembled files without including file fragments.
Log Data
As a generic term, refers to a computer application's automated recording of user; computer networking; or computer operating activity that might contain software installation and setting information, user registration data, or a running account of a computer process.
Modernization Vision and Strategy
A tool to support the fulfillment of the IRS mission and strategic goals by establishing a 5-year plan that drives information technology investment decisions. The Modernization Strategy issued in October 2006 will guide the investment priorities of the Business Systems Modernization program for Fiscal Years 2007 through 2011.
Special Agent
A duly sworn CI Division Federal Government law enforcement officer trained as a financial investigator.
Appendix V
Electronic Crimes Program Post-of-Duty Map
The map was removed due to its size. To see the map, please go to the Adobe PDF version of the report on the TIGTA Public Web Page.
Appendix VI
Management's Response to the Draft Report
The response was removed due to its size. To see the response, please go to the Adobe PDF version of the report on the TIGTA Public Web Page.
[1] Appendix IV presents a Glossary of Terms used in the report.
[2] Appendix IV presents a Glossary of Terms used in the report.
[3] E-Crimes was structured to integrate previously distinct Criminal Investigation Division programs under a common mission; establish program authority with a separate budget; and establish Headquarters-level guidance, policy, and direction.
[4] Not every investigation requires the execution of a search warrant. A person in possession of digital evidence can voluntarily consent to allow the IRS to search for and collect data. Other ways to obtain digital evidence without execution of a search warrant include a subpoena or summons, a witness or an informant, or an intercept from the Internet.
[5] Publications of the United States Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice: Electronic Crime Scene Investigation: A Guide for First Responders (July 2001) (www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/187736.htm), Forensic Examination of Digital Evidence: A Guide for Law Enforcement (April 2004) (www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs‑sum/199408.htm), and Digital Evidence in the Courtroom: A Guide for Law Enforcement and Prosecutors (January 2007) (www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs‑sum/211314.htm).
[6] For financial accounting reasons, seized currency, firearms, and property items that meet a specific minimum dollar value are required to be subject to systemic tracking. Digital evidence and traditional paper evidence are not considered to have any dollar value.
[7] Statistical Portrayal of the Criminal Investigation Function's Enforcement Activities From Fiscal Year 2000 Through Fiscal Year 2006 (Reference Number 2007-10-083, dated June 6, 2007).
[8] "Key IT System Acquisition Best Practices" identified and reported by the Government Accountability Office: Information Technology: DOD's Acquisition Policies and Guidance Need to Incorporate Additional Best Practices and Controls, Appendix II (GAO-04-722, dated July 2004) or Information Technology: FBI Following a Number of Key Acquisition Practices on New Case Management System, but Improvements Still Needed, Appendix II (GAO-07-912, dated July 2007).
[9] The Investigative Data Analytics Project and the Scanning and Document Management Project, as noted in the Criminal Investigation Business Performance Report (dated March 31, 2007).
[10] The proposal also establishes a new name and personnel system codes to replace the non-supervisory Area Lead Investigator positions with expanded supervisory positions.
[11] Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C. Appendix Rule 6 (2005) state that persons shall not disclose matters occurring before the grand jury.
[12] A function within the IRS Office of Chief Counsel responsible for providing legal guidance.
[13] Appendix IV presents a Glossary of Terms used in the report.
[14] At the time of our audit, E-Crimes considered the ECMIS to still be in pilot status. E-Crimes had only recently completed a validation effort to gain confidence in the content of the ECMIS, after launching the System subsequent to the beginning of Fiscal Year 2006.
[15] There were 30 field offices designated in the ECMIS at the time of our audit. However, the CI Division was in the process of consolidating some field offices.


text:
Tampa's pirate season might be months away, but that hasn't stopped a Ybor City bar from devoting an entire week to pirate revelry, starting on Sunday, which is International Talk Like a Pirate Day.
In honor of its seventh anniversary, Gaspar's Grotto is having seven days of parties with free rum tasting, a costume contest and a pig roast. Beads and debauchery included.
Owners Eric and Shere Schiller says it's their way to thank the community for making Gaspar's the go-to bar for everything pirate, especially at a time when many bars and restaurants are struggling.
"We seem to be bucking the trend,'' Shere Schiller said. "We believe it. We want it to be world-renowned. It may sound arrogant, but it will happen.''
The celebration doubles as a kick off for the Galley, the restaurant aspect of Gaspar's Grotto, and its new kitchen designed by Jeannie Pierola, former chef in charge at SideBern's. The Schillers dedicated the kitchen "casita'' to Eric's parents, William and Freda Schiller, who died last year within a few weeks of one another. William lived in the Quarter at Ybor condos and was a fixture at the bar.
The kitchen building marks the latest effort to turn Gaspar's into a dining destination rather than just a pit stop for parading Gasparilla pirates and Ybor regulars. Look for waitresses in new red corsets and costumed hostesses pulling in customers from Seventh Avenue. A $50,000 city facade grant helped redo the bar's exterior.
The greater emphasis on food seemed a natural evolution for Gaspar's, which served only drinks for the first few years, Shere Schiller said. Its Booze Cruize brunches ($24.95 per person) have become Ybor staples, attracting crowds to the patio every Sunday for beignets, mimosas and bloody marys.
The expanded menu has all the obligatory bar grub plus more ambitious items courtesy of chef Craig Smith, from Littleneck Clams Alfredo to Grotto Snapper Mojito to Smokin' Pork Shank Chili.
Some things haven't changed. A shot of bourbon with a draft of Pabst Blue Ribbon still goes for $2. Customers can still call the waitresses "wenches.''


text:
A New Beginning
A New Beginning - Forum
Ad Closes: Oct 15 '12
Estimated Members Requested: 6
Character Creation:
It is a 5th level campaign, your starting money is that of a 5th level adventurer. All Items bought must be run through me first, as well any pathfinder book is allowed. Secondly some 3.5 ed is allowed once it is run by me of course with sources cited. I also have roll 4d6 take the highest three re-roll 1-2's. No Chaotic Evil characters please, I will however make exceptions pending character.
I'm not looking for a character sheet right away, right now I'm looking for a good backstory and character concept. Tying in your backstory to this world is ideal. The application thread in on the forums under "New Applications".
One important note is that if you make a character with faith in any Deity let me know.
Estimated # of Players 6
I'm looking for some good roleplayers as this is a world building campaign. So much of what you do will go down in the history books. I would like a post a day but I am merely looking for a couple times a week. I don't ask for much but I like to see a good character!
Any questions will be answered ASAp!!
Game Description:
Almost all planes across all multiverses have war, battle, strive, and death. People lose lives and are worse off for it. One Planeswalker walked many of the planes with his vast power unable to personally interfere in the wars outcome. He could do one thing though to help those who wanted to leave, make a place for them to go. He created a Hub plane, a place that could reach to almost any multiverse, and he told any who he knew wanted to leave to come to his new world to live. It would have all the biomes needed for any race to live. Word spread like wildfire and all kinds of races, monsters, creatures of legend and more flooded this world to be free of their world's conflict. You are one of these new refugees, you left your home for safety, and you are here to rebuild and have a safe life. But how long can the promised safe realm be when all people from all walks of life live there.
"I have always been there, watching. Yet I have never met you, I am meeting you, and at the same time never will. Time and reality is a funny thing."
-Invictus Juliani
Last edited by Dredge; Oct 7 '12 at 9:32pm..
The character has some mutations to him that I have, in the past, always done for simple fluff. Instead of scales he has a thick leathery hide, and has four arms instead of two. I've also been told that 10 feet might be a bit unrealistic. heh.
Anywho, would this character fly here? http://www.myth-weavers.com/showthread.php?t=184158 All information is on that thread, though it would be very easy to switch out the skills for their Pathfinder variants.
Cleric (worship set or some sort of snake god) + 3.5 Fluff Modified Yuan-ti cultist (Savage Species) = Mostly human although may modify the race if find something, worshiper of ((insert snake god here)), who follows along the modified cultist path in service exploring a safe haven for said god.
if pathfinder have version of their own besides the serphant folk that i saw in in the darkness, than am unaware of them.
Nagaji are PF's answer to Yuan-Ti.
If you're wanting the free +2con with poison & snake form psionics you're going to be disappointed.