Re: How to catch a cracker in the US?
On 3/13/2014 8:22 AM, Sholes, Joshua wrote:
On 3/13/14, 12:35 AM, "shawn wilson" <ag4ve.us@gmail.com> wrote:
A note on terminology - whether you know what you're doing, actually break into a system, or obtain a thumb drive with data that you weren't supposed to have - it has the same end so I'd refer to it by the same term - hacking. Trying to differentiate terms based on skill, target, or data type is kinda dumb.
If one came up in this field with a mentor who was old school, or if one is old school oneself, one tends use the original (as I understand it) definitions--a "cracker" breaks security or obtains data unlawfully, a "hacker" is someone who likes ethically playing (in the "joyful exploration" sense) with complicated systems.
People who are culturally younger tend use "hacker", as you are doing, for the former and as far as I can tell no specific term for the latter.
If you ask me, this is something of a cultural loss.
Not sure I can agree with that. I have been in this game for a very long time, but for most of it in places where the world's population cleaved neatly into two parts: "Authorized Users" who could be identified by the facts that they had ID cards, Badges, and knew the door code; and "trespassers" who were all others. Then you new kids came along and (pointlessly, in my opinion) divided the later group into the two described above. -- Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics of System Administrators: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to learn from their mistakes. (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)
On Mar 13, 2014 7:37 PM, "Larry Sheldon" <LarrySheldon@cox.net> wrote:
On 3/13/2014 8:22 AM, Sholes, Joshua wrote:
On 3/13/14, 12:35 AM, "shawn wilson" <ag4ve.us@gmail.com> wrote:
A note on terminology - whether you know what you're doing, actually
break
into a system, or obtain a thumb drive with data that you weren't supposed to have - it has the same end so I'd refer to it by the same term - hacking. Trying to differentiate terms based on skill, target, or data type is kinda dumb.
If one came up in this field with a mentor who was old school, or if one is old school oneself, one tends use the original (as I understand it) definitions--a "cracker" breaks security or obtains data unlawfully, a "hacker" is someone who likes ethically playing (in the "joyful exploration" sense) with complicated systems.
People who are culturally younger tend use "hacker", as you are doing, for the former and as far as I can tell no specific term for the latter.
If you ask me, this is something of a cultural loss.
Not sure I can agree with that. I have been in this game for a very long time, but for most of it in places where the world's population cleaved neatly into two parts: "Authorized Users" who could be identified by the facts that they had ID cards, Badges, and knew the door code; and "trespassers" who were all others.
Then you new kids came along and (pointlessly, in my opinion) divided the later group into the two described above.
Sorry for my note. Didn't mean it to sidetrack the question (I probably should've). /me o_O
On 14 March 2014 05:14, shawn wilson <ag4ve.us@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mar 13, 2014 7:37 PM, "Larry Sheldon" <LarrySheldon@cox.net> wrote: ..
Sorry for my note. Didn't mean it to sidetrack the question (I probably should've).
/me o_O
Social perception of hacking affect law-making. Computing security is controlled by moral panic and security theater. Maybe someday a young men will enter prision, for "possession of hacking tools"... a compiler and a debugger. Fighting paranoia and moral panic is something we should be doing. Making the distinction hacker vs cracker is like a small effort for this. -- -- ℱin del ℳensaje.
On 3/13/14, 7:35 PM, "Larry Sheldon" <LarrySheldon@cox.net> wrote:
Not sure I can agree with that. I have been in this game for a very long time, but for most of it in places where the world's population cleaved neatly into two parts: "Authorized Users" who could be identified by the facts that they had ID cards, Badges, and knew the door code; and "trespassers" who were all others.
Then you new kids came along and (pointlessly, in my opinion) divided the later group into the two described above.
See, the way *I* learned it was that part of the creed of the "hacker" involved "why would I want to play with your systems, mine are much cooler."; that is, by definition a "hacker" is in the first group. --Josh
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Sholes, Joshua <Joshua_Sholes@cable.comcast.com> wrote:
On 3/13/14, 7:35 PM, "Larry Sheldon" <LarrySheldon@cox.net> wrote:
Not sure I can agree with that. I have been in this game for a very long time, but for most of it in places where the world's population cleaved neatly into two parts: "Authorized Users" who could be identified by the facts that they had ID cards, Badges, and knew the door code; and "trespassers" who were all others.
Then you new kids came along and (pointlessly, in my opinion) divided the later group into the two described above.
See, the way *I* learned it was that part of the creed of the "hacker" involved "why would I want to play with your systems, mine are much cooler."; that is, by definition a "hacker" is in the first group.
The point is that 'computer security' involves innovation as much as is done at hacker spaces (which can be geared to hardware or computer security or whatever). I think the difference you're trying to argue is the legality and not the task or process. I think calling the illegal form of the study of computer security "cracking", the legal form "hacking" and people who are "cracking" who don't know what they're doing "script kiddies" is irrelevant, useless, and causes useless debates (that I started) like this.
participants (4)
-
Larry Sheldon -
shawn wilson -
Sholes, Joshua -
Tei