Dallas police lose 8TB of data, impacting criminal cases
pwenzel 2021-08-17 16:13:19 +0000 UTC [ - ]
https://www.startribune.com/as-the-third-precinct-burned-min...
The lack of accountability at the MPD is astonishing (not to mention other departments), and is the reason they are being investigated by the Department of Justice.
kodah 2021-08-17 17:25:15 +0000 UTC [ - ]
I'm not quite tracking here. What does this MPD have to be accountable for with respect to this incident?
Disposing of PII and sensitive information is pretty standard procedure if you're losing control of a controlled area. When I was in the military we had similar procedures for cryptography, which are in the same realm of PII and sensitive information such as informants or case details.
Edit:
This link speaks to the federal standard pretty well: https://www.marines.mil/News/Messages/Messages-Display/Artic...
I don't know how or if this pertains to city police, but I imagine there's similar standards.
Edit again:
I'm getting two vibes from this:
- some amount of people want zero accountability for the police
- some amount of people want to provide the police with zero room for understanding
Both of these groups need to introspect as to what exactly you're trying to accomplish and how you're going about it affects the outcome.
dghlsakjg 2021-08-17 18:10:47 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Police departments do not have "the enemy" and should not have a contingency for evidence destruction. Ever. There is no circumstance where it is reasonable to assume that frantically shredding documents serves the public interest. They certainly shouldn't be destroying evidence in a building that isn't the target of protests.
kodah 2021-08-17 18:27:39 +0000 UTC [ - ]
> IN LIGHT OF RECENTLY ESTABLISHED CROSS-AGENCY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO ISSUES SURROUNDING THE LOSS OR BREACH OF PERSONAL INFORMATION BY FEDERAL AGENCIES, THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET HAS ESTABLISHED ONE STANDARD TO DESCRIBE PERSONAL DATA.
I don't think I'd want to be tried on evidence that fell into the hands of protestors or rioters. Provenance is a pretty important part of the evidence of any court case.
It's probably safe to assume that they have confidential informants at play that could be involved in serious crimes like human trafficking or drug trafficking. The consequences for this data getting in the wrong hands would be life and death.
Whether you want to call the people who would do bad things with that information an "enemy" or not I think is entirely up to you, but at the very least you could think of it as risk-mitigation.
It also seems the government has some amount of intent to try to contain the leakage of PII, however ineffective they may be at it aside, given this statement
> IN LIGHT OF RECENTLY ESTABLISHED CROSS-AGENCY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO ISSUES SURROUNDING THE LOSS OR BREACH OF PERSONAL INFORMATION BY FEDERAL AGENCIES
ashtonkem 2021-08-17 20:19:47 +0000 UTC [ - ]
The issue is that a lot of us don’t think that that precinct was in any actual danger of falling.
dragonwriter 2021-08-18 01:35:10 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Maybe. If there is no reasonable way to safely move the sensitive material to someplace safe. Of course, the set of situations ever where that would be the case and it would be even practical to destroy the material rather than abandoning it to effect a safe retreat is really stunningly narrow. You can construct highly-contrived scenarios, but...
kodah 2021-08-17 20:23:29 +0000 UTC [ - ]
ashtonkem 2021-08-18 00:22:03 +0000 UTC [ - ]
So, we actually do know that the 2nd precinct never came anywhere close to falling. The question now is whether they’re lying about destroying evidence maliciously, or lying about having panicked.
dghlsakjg 2021-08-18 01:27:18 +0000 UTC [ - ]
The police are fundamentally different from the US Marines in almost all ways, in practice and in reality.
My position is that there is NEVER a situation where it makes more sense for the police to devote manpower to destroying evidence over restoring order. Police agencies shredding files on the way out the door are, historically, not doing it to protect anyone but themselves.
ashtonkem 2021-08-18 04:20:31 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Either way, it’s pretty clear that Precinct 2 never got anywhere close to such a convoluted hypothetical. That leaves the question why they did it, to which I believe the Roman jurors said it best: cui bono?
gsk22 2021-08-17 18:35:45 +0000 UTC [ - ]
If rioters had been advancing on the building, then surely their actions would be justified. But there was never any danger to property or persons at the second precinct.
kodah 2021-08-17 18:52:40 +0000 UTC [ - ]
I can also see how this could be an opportunistic tactic to coverup wrong-doing. The two can also be simultaneously true.
gsk22 2021-08-18 00:28:32 +0000 UTC [ - ]
If you don't trust my word - you can go look up a map of damage from the riots yourself.
ashtonkem 2021-08-17 18:55:26 +0000 UTC [ - ]
kodah 2021-08-17 18:59:16 +0000 UTC [ - ]
ashtonkem 2021-08-17 19:46:04 +0000 UTC [ - ]
There is a lot that MPD could’ve done, and instead they decided to destroy evidence at a precinct uninvolved in the disturbances. Given how bad of an excuse that is and their history of misbehavior, it is perfectly reasonable to not give them the benefit of the doubt here.
kodah 2021-08-17 19:57:37 +0000 UTC [ - ]
To me, I can see it being a reasonable response given the nature of the situation. That said, I can also see it being a coverup. There's no details that are very illuminating here, but hopefully an investigation filters out the mud for those interested.
ashtonkem 2021-08-17 20:00:03 +0000 UTC [ - ]
> but you sound like you fall within one of the groups mentioned in my original comment.
I’d prefer if you spared the patronizing attitude, thanks.
kodah 2021-08-17 20:21:56 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Sure, spare your attitude in the future as well.
ashtonkem 2021-08-17 20:23:43 +0000 UTC [ - ]
That leaves the question about why they’re lying, which is where losing the benefit of the doubt matters.
kodah 2021-08-17 20:27:55 +0000 UTC [ - ]
- there's no direct evidence that says the precinct was in danger, but it's also reasonable to assume a group of rioters would attack other precincts in the area and that they acted based on proximity.
- there's no evidence to suggest they're covering up for something, but it's reasonable to assume that this would be a good opportunity for someone looking to do that.
In Afghanistan I was part of three base attacks. All three were a surprise and two quickly overwhelmed our defense forces on the perimeter and they breached the base. One was in Musa Qalah, the other is one that made headlines in Camp Leatherneck. The chance to act is a very slim window and that's something you're reminded of continually. So yeah, I don't see it as totally unreasonable but I can see the other side of this argument as well.
ashtonkem 2021-08-17 21:59:55 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Its reasonable assumption to assume that they might attack another precinct, not a reason to assume that a precinct will fall. If they say, barricaded the bridge between the two precincts or setup a cordon, that would seem like a prudent response. If the rioters were at the gates and they initiated this policy, that also would be reasonable.
Jumping straight to destroying evidence in the precinct is not a reasonable response. They need to provide evidence that the situation was so dire that they had to resort to their last ditch policies, and they have not done that. Pointing towards riots miles away is an insufficient excuse; they need to provide evidence of an immediate threat of the precinct falling.
> there's no evidence to suggest they're covering up for something, but it's reasonable to assume that this would be a good opportunity for someone looking to do that.
You’re sidestepping the issue. I think they’re lying about why the destroyed the evidence. Once I believe that they’ve lied once, why should I continue to give the benefit of the doubt to them?
More investigation is obviously needed, but I personally smell a rat.
kodah 2021-08-17 23:15:18 +0000 UTC [ - ]
We're also dealing in hindsight. I still think given the climate back then and that a group of people stormed a police station is a pretty incredible circumstance to be dealing with. Now, whether their bias to action was innocent or correct is up to investigation to determine.
It's perfectly okay to speculate and ask for investigations. It's less okay to speak in very definitive terms about something that is quite in flux. That's why I'm a bit wishy-washy on what I believe happened, because any number of variables can produce each outcome -- or both.
I am not "side-stepping" the issue. You think they lied and now you're into searching for an MO to match that. To me, that's pretty improper and it's not how I come to conclusions.
I don't give them the benefit of the doubt, that would imply a conclusion. This, to me, has not concluded. Both theories are still plausible based on the information we have today.
ashtonkem 2021-08-18 00:04:12 +0000 UTC [ - ]
The entire purpose of the justice system, including the police, is to judge people in hindsight. Why can’t we judge them in hindsight?
thisisusa1 2021-08-17 20:04:14 +0000 UTC [ - ]
kodah 2021-08-17 20:46:17 +0000 UTC [ - ]
> Buildings along a 5-mile stretch of Lake Street in Minneapolis and a 3.5-mile stretch of University Avenue in St. Paul's Midway area experienced some of the heaviest damage.
You might be able to say that various people did all the damage, but to my knowledge a smaller group of folks were responsible for the larger damage done.
ashtonkem 2021-08-17 23:56:21 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Not exactly the map of a station in dire straits worried about getting overrun.
technick 2021-08-18 01:41:07 +0000 UTC [ - ]
ashtonkem 2021-08-18 04:15:06 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Plenty of Americans can walk a few miles. Besides, it’s not like rioting is something that doesn’t take significant cardio vascular fortitude in its own right. Something tells me that individually lots of those rioters were more than capable of walking five miles over level, paved terrain.
The real question is not whether or not a rioter could walk from there to here, but whether the riot will come here without being stopped or dissipating into smaller and easier to stop groups. If the riot disperses and 5% shows up at the other precinct, that’s a pretty easy thing for the cops to deal with; and if it isn’t I have questions about what all the public safety money is being spent for.
And that's of course before we look at the terrain. The 2nd and 3rd precinct are on opposite sides of the river. That means that even if you were certain that the riot was coming for the 2nd precinct next, you have a very small number of bridges that you could defend to stop the riot. In fact, cops regularly prefer bridges to kettle and mass arrest both riots and protests, and that would have been the perfect opportunity had it happened.
crummybowley 2021-08-17 17:12:31 +0000 UTC [ - ]
But you obviously did not read the article you posted or might have sympathy to the folks lives that could be in danger if such documents were released to the public. But ACAB, FTP right?
pwenzel 2021-08-17 17:43:02 +0000 UTC [ - ]
The department has for decades shown aggressive conduct and forced Minneapolis to pay out $71M in settlements in recent years. If anyone is doing the defunding, it's the MPD defunding Minneapolis.
There is more nuance than can fit in a Hacker News comment, but I do see the need for public safety while at the same time demanding accountability from our police department. I will be voting yes to change the charter.
https://m.startribune.com/minneapolis-third-precinct-served-...
edit: I recognize that this comment/thread may steer discussion from the original intent of the article here. Mods, please let me know if I can remove if needed.
bnj 2021-08-17 17:20:28 +0000 UTC [ - ]
google234123 2021-08-17 17:35:34 +0000 UTC [ - ]
joshstrange 2021-08-17 18:05:57 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Are you honestly making that statement with a straight face? If it takes a full summer of protests to get justice for 1 man then that is not justice and anyone pretending it is is either not paying attention or is complicit. What about Breonna Taylor or the other people (black AND white) killed or harmed at the hands of the police? Where is their justice?
The police get off /all the time/ using qualified immunity and aren't held to anywhere near the same standard as the general public. To pretend that police are regularly prosecuted for their crimes is disingenuous at best.
bastardoperator 2021-08-17 17:39:52 +0000 UTC [ - ]
This has nothing to do with police so I'll assume your emotions or politics are getting the best of you.
crummybowley 2021-08-17 21:00:37 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Are you blind to a building being set on fire because some people feel some way?
Side note, yes, the IT department failed them 100%.
CobrastanJorji 2021-08-17 17:33:15 +0000 UTC [ - ]
crummybowley 2021-08-17 20:58:16 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Its completely insane that everybody is just okay with millions of tax payer dollars being destroyed. Its insane that folks are okay with completely shutting down probably one of the best invention of man kind and reverting back to pure mob rules barbarism.
coldcode 2021-08-17 12:05:30 +0000 UTC [ - ]
I've seen data migrations that took a year of effort and multiple practice sessions before working flawlessly. I've also seen places where every single backup for years was empty because no one ever tested them, causing major lawsuit losses.
kiba 2021-08-17 12:20:39 +0000 UTC [ - ]
hoppyhoppy2 2021-08-17 12:41:43 +0000 UTC [ - ]
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28149283
onychomys 2021-08-17 16:19:10 +0000 UTC [ - ]
appleflaxen 2021-08-17 14:37:55 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Unfortunately there wasn't much discussion on any of them.
optimalsolver 2021-08-17 14:29:56 +0000 UTC [ - ]
literallyaduck 2021-08-17 18:06:43 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Demand the government follows its own recommendations and put penalties for governments out of compliance.
technick 2021-08-18 01:54:12 +0000 UTC [ - ]
cs702 2021-08-17 17:00:19 +0000 UTC [ - ]
The shame is that for very little money, the Dallas police could have easily backed up all that data with a third-party service -- e.g., daily snapshots on cperciva's tarsnap would have cost a few grand a month.
novok 2021-08-17 16:29:47 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Alterations from the government with fake evidence or cases lost with hacks they don’t even realize. Or even better, shit stirred up within government cases by planting fake evidence to put arrows to someone’s enemies.
webinvest 2021-08-17 20:46:41 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Maybe one day they’ll decide to hire a college-educated IT major.
dogma1138 2021-08-17 22:21:15 +0000 UTC [ - ]
liokoch 2021-08-17 16:29:49 +0000 UTC [ - ]
csydas 2021-08-17 12:41:36 +0000 UTC [ - ]
https://regmedia.co.uk/2021/08/16/dallas_county_memo.pdf
Reading the actual memo, there's another interesting aspect on whatever "TechShare" is; a quick look suggests this is the site of the software in question[0], but there is absolutely no technical information available about it at all. Based on the blurbs, it looks like some project tracker but custom made for law enforcement, but again it's a complete black box as to what the software does, how it ensures data integrity, etc.
The memo is very specific about ensuring data gets uploaded to this TechShare, but this just makes me wonder "how does TechShare guarantee data integrity?", and I question if it really would have helped, but it's impossible to know because both the Dallas County's data processing methods and any information on TechShare are complete black boxes. This adds no value to security for them, and in fact probably just makes it worse as the software is never really audited nor are the IT practices.
Combined with the fact that this data-loss was not announced for 4 months after the fact and that cases that may have been affected by the data-loss (e.g., missing evidence), I come away with a very bad picture of law enforcement technology. I'm not sure why there isn't more publicly available scrutiny on the IT practices of law enforcement †, particularly when it comes to handling evidence/case data.
[0] https://techsharetx.gov † As I'm very cynical of US law enforcement in general (many more of course, but right now focusing on US), my own answer for this is that it's intentionally done to obfuscate the process, but this is just the cynical and myopic part of me, which I want to separate from the rest of the post.
nonameiguess 2021-08-17 15:26:38 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Don't overestimate Dallas. I can't speak to what the heck we're doing with actual tax revenue, but the city services and infrastructure are terrible. I actually don't have many complaints about the police, but it's not like my information is rooted in research and statistics. I've just lived downtown for a while and seen quite a few interactions between homeless and police and they seem unusually good at de-escalation and not just rushing in and beating people up as seems common in other big cities.
But ... our infrastructure is terrible. A quarter-inch of rain and over half the street lights in the city stop working. Any bit of wind knocks out power lines constantly, and it's pretty windy. Partly because they're all above ground, partly because the poles are old and falling over, partly because the city doesn't trim trees nor force property owners to do it, so branches are constantly overhanging and destroying things.
We had a somewhat notorious incident a few years ago where someone managed to set off all the tornado alarms citywide for a full day. They managed to do this because the control system was just radio. Not encrypted, not authenticated. Just direct the right channel at the right receiver and you could set off all of the city's tornado alarms.
City infrastructure here is an absolute mess, and if they cut costs on everything else by buying crap and not performing any maintenance, it doesn't surprise me one bit they do exactly the same thing with IT infrastructure.
jmnicolas 2021-08-17 15:53:20 +0000 UTC [ - ]
nonameiguess 2021-08-17 18:55:30 +0000 UTC [ - ]
1) Municipalities aren't allowed to run budget deficits, so whenever there is any sort of economic downturn and revenues are short of what they projected, maintenance is often the first thing to get cut. They call it "deferred maintenance" but in practice it's just a disguised form of borrowing because you need to do it eventually and it's only going to get more expensive, which is effectively a different kind of interest. In contrast, whenever revenues exceed projections, there is tremendous pressure to just cut taxes rather than build up any kind of rainy day fund.
2) The existence of cities like Highland Park and University Park. These are entirely contained with Dallas city boundaries, small, and near the city center. They seem to exist for the sole purpose of taking all the largest and most expensive mansions and a few associated shops and public services, and walling them off from the rest of the city to make sure the wealthiest people don't see any of their tax revenue going to benefit anyone except themselves.
trentnix 2021-08-17 16:08:36 +0000 UTC [ - ]
jmnicolas 2021-08-17 16:45:52 +0000 UTC [ - ]
We're not dysfunctional (yet?) like parent described so I'm not sure every problem in Texas can be attributed to bureaucracy.
kibwen 2021-08-17 17:03:36 +0000 UTC [ - ]
jmnicolas 2021-08-17 17:12:18 +0000 UTC [ - ]
So now that you make me think of it, we might actually be as dysfunctional as Texas but we just have better weather so it's not apparent as much.
kkielhofner 2021-08-17 13:19:57 +0000 UTC [ - ]
With physical evidence this has evolved to a pretty tight system where evidence is tracked, sealed, and secured from collection to trial with physical security - relatively secure tamper proof seals, fairly strict chain of custody, logging, etc.
In further conversations with them I was surprised to learn there is essentially nothing when it comes to digital evidence security, of which there is increasingly more and more of (of course). Everything from crime scene photos to phone dumps, entire hard drives, police body cam footage, etc. There is virtually nothing in place to track the chain of custody, detect potential evidence tampering, etc for this evidence.
I'm convinced that if there were a high-profile case today with a modern legal "Dream Team" the lack of these systems for digital evidence verification would be front and center from an expert (and resource rich) defense. On the other side of the aisle, what's to stop the prosecution from actual digital evidence tampering?
This was actually one of the applications that provided the genesis for my startup Tovera[1]. It's still in very early stages but I'm hoping we can make some inroads in law enforcement as I think it has real potential to address the digital evidence verification issue and make for a more transparent and secure justice system (which both sides of the process should value). It remains to be seen if they actually do.
[0] https://www.pasadenastarnews.com/2014/06/08/oj-simpson-case-...
[1] https://tovera.com
csydas 2021-08-17 14:23:21 +0000 UTC [ - ]
This happens apparently already. A few days ago on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27959755
The EFF has already made commentary on this [0], and basically my understanding is that this technology is being advertised and positioned as "expert", and that there is deep science behind it, but in fact it's mostly interpretive, and ultimately state prosecution simply make fanciful deductions based off the results and omit sometimes very important facts.
I think that it is incredibly important that as law enforcement continues to build technology that is only used for prosecution purposes, this technology is heavily public and auditable, as at least with the above, it's quite clear that law enforcement has not been handling the technology responsibly. My personal take is that the technology is only available to those interested in a prosecution, not those you may be saved by it.
[0] https://www.eff.org/pages/gunshot-detection
Offtop with regards to your site:
- As I get it, it's an NFT-esque system, yes?
- For your signup, it would be useful to maybe do the verification code after the age verification has already been done, or at least make it clear that the verification part needs to be done. I found it when I couldn't click "Continue", but the button was kind of in a blind spot for me
- Also, maybe do verification after you've confirmed age already on a separate screen so that 100% any email you collect there was collected under the indication from the user that they were older than 18 as per your requirements in the EULA
- The download button for the test asset I uploaded, or doesn't seem to do anything really.
- Edit cause click submit too soon: You might want to include a visual indicator on your copy to clipboard buttons that it triggered successfully
- I'm not quite sure why you need geographical information to make an account; as I get it, no money is transacted so you don't have an obligation for much user data
kkielhofner 2021-08-17 15:10:33 +0000 UTC [ - ]
- We store the asset ID, additional metadata, and associated checksum in our datastore (for reliability, scalability, and performance reasons). We then essentially mint an NFT with a URI to a JSON object stored in IPFS with a privacy-respecting minimal copy of the above as additional protection against our datastore being called into question. Eventually it may be 100% blockchain-something based but it's such a rapidly evolving space there's no clear "perfect" solution (just yet).
- The age verification and jurisdiction stuff are related to COPPA in the United States (and similar in other jurisdictions). It's my first time dealing with it and what we have in place will evolve but EULA or otherwise I don't mind being perhaps a little more cautious on this front until I can get a better understanding of all the issues at play. In any case we could do a much better job explaining why we (probably? might?) need date of birth and country.
- Overall I'm not thrilled with the signup and onboarding process and it's towards the top of the list for something we need to spend some quality time on.
- I'll have to look into the download button issue (not sure how we missed that).
- Great point on the copy to clipboard buttons!
Thanks again for taking a look and providing feedback, I submitted to Show HN[0]two weeks ago but as you can see it never got any traction. Feedback like yours was exactly what I was hoping to get. Still trying to figure out what happened with our Show HN but that's a bigger issue.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28050000
2021-08-17 16:42:03 +0000 UTC [ - ]
dylan604 2021-08-17 14:15:01 +0000 UTC [ - ]
kkielhofner 2021-08-17 15:50:49 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Unfortunately it's probably going to take many more multiple TB losses (resulting in failed prosecutions) for them to take this seriously with digital evidence as well.
ocdtrekkie 2021-08-17 18:30:01 +0000 UTC [ - ]
One of the things I find nontechnical people tend to fail to understand is the importance of organizing and cleaning up data. Often when we are running out of space, I get asked why we can't just buy another hard drive at Best Buy for $50.
Then when people do clean up their data, they don't understand file space. They'll spend hours cleaning up old Word documents, but not touch the decade-old AVI video files which could at least be stored in a better format.
Ask a government entity to buy a SAN, they complain. Ask them to buy a backup storage appliance, they ask why we need another SAN. And then in five years, they ask why you need another SAN if you bought one five years ago...
dylan604 2021-08-17 21:01:42 +0000 UTC [ - ]
teclordphrack2 2021-08-17 15:12:23 +0000 UTC [ - ]
ubermonkey 2021-08-17 12:57:43 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Medicine is one. Law still is, though less so as digital document management has made their lives a little easier.
Law enforcement is a BIG one. You can sell snake oil to LEOs very easily, and many people DO. I think it's a combination of organizational hubris and a sort of "nobody understands our work" bullshit that keeps them from listening to industry authorities and makes them susceptible to ignorant charlatans peddling crap that's Made For Police or whatever.
jamal-kumar 2021-08-17 16:32:36 +0000 UTC [ - ]
There's a fuckboat of this kind of stuff, like you could write a book's worth on it considering how much is coming into the fore.
Reading the parent comment and it being pretty much "Blockchain for law enforcement and justice record keeping" definitely makes me feel a little off here but then again this one actually looks like it's at least trying to approach the problem of record keeping maintenance. I don't really think there's a hell of a lot out there but this field has an interesting and controversial history. Just check out the inslaw/PROMIS (prosecutor's management inventory system) scandal. I think the US Justice Dept concluded there was no wrongdoing but Canada's RCMP has a very different opinion about the compromising of their law enforcement record keeping system breach.
stephen_g 2021-08-17 15:19:56 +0000 UTC [ - ]
1. https://www.itnews.com.au/news/afp-told-to-end-over-reliance...
kkielhofner 2021-08-17 15:40:06 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Thanks again!
[0] https://tovera.com
appleflaxen 2021-08-17 14:39:45 +0000 UTC [ - ]
But it's a big deal when it prevents the state from putting a person who committed murder in jail, right?
Humans make mistakes, but it seems like law enforcement should have a big enough budget to make that /really/ unlikely.
Forbo 2021-08-17 21:57:24 +0000 UTC [ - ]
kkielhofner 2021-08-17 15:33:53 +0000 UTC [ - ]
breckenedge 2021-08-17 14:21:07 +0000 UTC [ - ]
The complete breakdown of accountability is what concerns me the most. Not being forthcoming when something as critical as your evidence system fails is, at best, a huge cover up.
drocer88 2021-08-17 13:44:06 +0000 UTC [ - ]
What's with the Texaphobia?
csydas 2021-08-17 13:59:30 +0000 UTC [ - ]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_and_territories...
addingnumbers 2021-08-17 14:00:26 +0000 UTC [ - ]
It reads to me like any "phobia" over this simple fact is inferred by the reader, not implied by the writer.