>From - Sat Mar 02 00:57:18 2024
Received: by 10.204.77.84 with SMTP id f20mr86835bkk.25.1241742554002;
Thu, 07 May 2009 17:29:14 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <mark..._at_gmail.com>
Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.158])
by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 15si47291bwz.6.2009.05.07.17.29.12;
Thu, 07 May 2009 17:29:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of mark..._at_gmail.com designates 72.14.220.158 as permitted sender) client-ip=72.14.220.158;
Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of mark..._at_gmail.com designates 72.14.220.158 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=mark..._at_gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) head..._at_gmail.com
Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so26666fgb.7
for <TSCM-..._at_googlegroups.com>; Thu, 07 May 2009 17:29:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references
:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=bGCPrZr9G6e2xne9Hq+0IbESVo5iNXNeiEQ1woZlq3k=;
b=rquEzIaUMxdtnqLmS/d7yo+5omp8BVgmfHYG01qyIekBaCfj+iYCZw3VwFhqGaqLpv
mdonTlbYxSBEKp4OVsOuE55war+oNbSajmQzrowpGOXY6WWMBilQPDEWrS1ev8zUr+PJ
JCP6YC/ptkuPSpS6FRzyFYYdmW3jAKJmCeaPQ=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
b=sO5zjbl+Vcj1GuLJdaeqsZ8wS7vaXXYqSufsHrJO6AH0oCDdiHez3QQ9DK0Z4kBtaV
qoDyj+jbBb1liZnktaDvWZWaczwCobl8A9ZYOZgmm2gBDN9FVJfqNDTW/j1ee2LRFfZq
j4PG2Lt65hhEb0lDLhU4HYu7Eb6HDPi+M/5mI=
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Received: by 10.86.90.2 with SMTP id n2mr3093170fgb.61.1241742552847; Thu, 07
May 2009 17:29:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <000001c9cf6a$8768b8c0$6401a8c0_at_oem>
References: <000001c9cf6a$8768b8c0$6401a8c0_at_oem>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 19:29:12 -0500
Message-ID: <79db5b260905071729q7659658dq610e4e03612948ce_at_mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [TSCM-L] {3674} TSCM Licensing
From: Mark Pelts <mark..._at_gmail.com>
To: TSCM-L2006_at_googlegroups.com
Anyone know about Texas? I know that computer forensic investigations
in Texas must be done by a licensed PI and there was some hub bub
about that in the infosec community here not to long ago. It's still
a little vague if you ask me.
http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/80R/billtext/html/HB02833F.htm
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 6:21 PM, TSCM/SO Group <Mit..._at_tscmusa.com> wrote:
> If Im not mistaken there are 2 states of I know that have it
>
> North Carolina and Nevada, there may be more by now, not sure
>
> Its called a counterintelligence license in NC,not sute about Nevada
>
> Hope this helps
Received on Sat Mar 02 2024 - 00:57:18 CST