Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Military Seeks Skilled Hackers and Crackers
The Inphidel wrote, "Hackers, and maybe even crackers, the goverment wants YOU.
Seems the pentagon wants to make sure enough GEEKS are on hand to kick some technological [redacted]. Sounds like fun to me." Story at Wired; another one on the same topic at Yahoo! News was submitted by Doofus.
But try to teach the average grunt how to code.
It's a trap!
X-Files enthusiasts, it is here we must make our united stand against diabolic government tricks.
------
If a tree falls on an anonymous coward yelling 'first post' in the forest, does anybody hear?
redacted is a word, and can be adequately used in that context.
Corporate America pays higher salaries - that's the reason for the end of the cold war.
Military script kiddies!
"Dare we use our superior forces against our enemies to demonstrate how l33t we are? Is that fair?"
"Hell if I know, r00t the bastards!"
:-/
Ben
My usual seat in the cluetrain is at A HREF="http://pub4.ezboard.com/biwethey.ht
Too bad I never bothered to study up on any of it.
:(
I would consider it fun, and heck, I'm not even a U.S. citizen!
Still, I find it hard to believe that they would just enlist people to hack from the continental U.S. alone. Many of the networks that would need to be hacked would be secure networks. Someone would have to go in and splice/tap lines or use something like a TEMPEST. This raises the quesion:
How are the geeks going to gain access to the secure networks?
I ask this because its really the closed/semi-closed networks that are of major importance (although as we know network security as a whole over the world is shoddy).
For some strange reason I envision people parachuting onto a building at night and splicing cat-5 cable into extra nodes... (I have probably been watching too many movies.)
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
- Break into non-military computers, like banking or sewer control, and scew things up.
- Do website vandalism for purposes of propoganda or psychological warfare.
- Break into the computers of banks and manufacturing companies to try to figure out how much of what weapons and stuff are being made.
However, I don't think that these types of things are what the military is hoping for (and the third thing would be handled by the CIA, wouldn't it?) Was this idea thought up of by some brass that doesn't have knowledge in the area of hacking/cracking? Or maybe this has some other purpose?Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
What are they going to do, spoof Saddam's homepage?
You know, I hear that Matthew Broderick is an Ace hacker. Maybe they should get him in on this.
We're on the road to Tycho.
It's obvious the US government wants the best minds working for them in criptology and cyberwarfare. This is a great position to work, because these people will receive a very good pay(at least I think so!), will have at their disposition the best equipment, laboratories and information and also an entry in the curriculum who certainly will give prestige.
But when these people suceeds in decrypting a secret code or penetrating and disrupting a foreign network who control communications and the electrical sector of a country, they are surely killing human beings as if they dropped a bomb in them. So if you think you can assume a position in the army, don't forget that you are taking a choice in my view immoral, because nothing can transform a war in a good cause(unless you believe in holy wars). If you are really a hacker with an ethical code(like RMS or ESR) then think twice before getting this job.
Oops! I forget to post as an Anonymous Coward! Now the US government will punish me to preach against military and war... But I'm lucky to live in Brazil, Uf!!!
"Learning, learning, learning - that is the secret of jewish survival" -- Ahad A'Ham
U H4V3 B33N 0WN3D, B1330000tCH!
We're on the road to Tycho.
This just adds fuel to the predictions that the next world war will be fought in cyberspace.
At the moment the term 'hackers' brings nice warm thoughts of late night tinkering on the net to geeks, and a distant, unknown, but not that menacing thought to system administrators. If the government start re-training them, aren't they going to turn into something more like guerilla soldiers?
It would give hackers a bad name - I mean, worse than now.
Yes, many hackers have un-tapped skills, but taking these jobs would just bring forward a new age in warfare.
Cyberwarfare isn't like conventional warfare, where one side can simply win on bigger firepower. The net has always claimed to be a level playing field. Surely three hackers working for a third-world government (providing a decent level of resources) are as powerful as whole teams of hackers in a western-world country? It comes down to the abilities of an individual.
What's being proposed here is getting hackers to disable the enemy's defenses. This would lead to hackers aiming to turn opponents weapons back on their own country. Think about it for a minute. The more missiles you've got ready to launch on-command, the more firecrackers you've got waiting to blow-up in your face. And who's got the biggest number of firecrackers on the planet?...
It seems the US are setting out to hold the dog by the ears.
insignificant sig
...I am not a skilled hacker, I sit on the other side of the conflict ;-) This could be a fun job - you get to hack the coolest targets, you get the best equipment, stuff they don't even have in the commercial world I am sure, and it all has the romantic "Sneakers" feel. You'd finally find out just how many backdoors they put into Windows. All with total impunity. Sounds cool to me. Too bad that you'd never be allowed to brag about your exploit.... so that kinda kills the spirit.
Unable to read configuration file '/bigassraid/htdig//conf/14229.conf'
Geocrawler error message.
doing what every cracker does all day and being payed for it!!!!!
Seriously though, there is a useful nature to this. It can be expensive to train up technical staff to the level or /real/ hackers.And the script kiddies could be useful for taking down / DOS'ing enemy sites for propoganda purposes. The more people you have working for you the more likely there is that someone will know how to do xyz or break such and suches codes. As long as we dont see Chinas web page defaced with the slogan "w3r3 m0r3 l337 7h4n y0u - luv un(13 s@m" -that is all
I personally have a hard time condoning any of this. First of all, I find the ethics of xackors to be questionable to start. Xacking a system isn't necessarily always wrong, but the the majority of the typical website tagging, snooping, and trashing has no ethical ground to stand on. Claims that if it was meant to be secure, then they should have secured it are as logical as claiming you should be allowed to break into a house because the door isn't made of reinforced steel.
But then the U.S. military wants to hire Xackors. This pushes the ethics from the realm of mischevous anarchy to malicious calculated coordinated intent: xacking for a major powerful government body for the purpose of maintaining its agenda. This is far more insideous than changing the front page of Microsoft to say "Bill Gates lick my balls". Actions taken on behave of any government's military have consequences that can easily end in the death of many people. Sure you might save lives in some cases but will you always know which actions you take will result in the preservation of like over the loss of it. Will be able to back down on a mission that you feel will result in needless death.
We, as individuals, have to make ethical choices for ourselves. If you are a xackor then I hope you give it up for more constructive past times, but I'll settle for you not accepting a military offer.
-no broken link
Quoting from the yahoo article...
"Those same tools would likely be a bigger threat to our systems than to those of any potential opponent,'' said Kawika Dagui of the Financial Information Protection Center, a Washington-based industry trade group. "
Who said they won't look for flaws in our own systems too? Im sure the door would swing both ways on how we could use their skills.
....and you thought punching the clock for Bill was selling out?? At least Gates & Co. doesn't kill people--that we know of.
Go and read up on your history, and come back when you've learned a thing or two about how espionage averted WW III during the Cuban missle crisis.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Once the false hacker ( or cracker or whomever) is lured into their parlour, he will be tortured and his trade secrets extracted.
And then they will be imprisoned for life, and the DoD admins will never have to worry about network security issues again.
A stick or two, I think you mean.
...Cuz, y'know, he's, like, wooden, wants to be a real boy someday....teehee....
Oh, man, I kill me.
Your mouth is like Columbus Day.
This is a great way for uncle sam to get to know all the potential c/hackers out there.
This is a 'big brother' check for the stupid.
I'd really like to know what competitive salary and benefits the Air/SpaceForce (who I believe have wrestled the prize of tech-defense from the others) will offer to attract talented people from industry. Given that the insurance and big 5 accounting firms are snatching up people with half a clue about network security would the military be competitive? Perhaps they would appeal to old fashioned patriotism (which excludes all the imported talent from India/China/etc) but essentially they are trying to convince the defense firms (who do most of the balls-busting code on real-time systems) to give up their engineers. I've heard a rumor that the national labs are chock a block full of talented programmers but its hard to see them giving up 6 figure incomes and a cushy academic style job to babysit the defense system. Better still for their talents to go into a good robust design.
Fundamentally I would ask the fundamental question to what extent is a heavy-hardware offensive-oriented force necessary. While it's nice to had some muscle to back up world posturing, there are many other demands for public funds (education, health, legal aid, etc). The point about computers is that it reduces transaction costs and according to transaction economic theory, the key factors are price, opportunity and safeguards. With improved information (which includes laws, social habits, conventions, etc), safeguards can be reduced thus decreasing the price/cost for everyone. If CNN can identify potential conflicts and make world opinion unplatable for tin-pot dictators, perhaps there is less need for the iron fist and more for velvet diplomacy (not that I'm accusing the US of being particularly talented in this area either).
Anyway, if people are interested in outside opinions, take a look at Cato's policy analysis, or foreign studies to broaden your views on defense matters.
LL
Be damn careful. Let me tell you a story.
Back in the 1980s, there was a guy who hacked a database language called MUMPS (multi-user, multi-person system, I think). He worked mainly on healthcare patient record systems, but he was hooked in to the general Brit programming contractors' grapevine. He had a few friends who were more in the realm of FORTRAN, scientific computing etc.
One day, the word spread through this group of friends that the Ministry of Defence was hiring FORTRAN for big numbers. This chap seriously considered learning FORTRAN to get on the gravy train. Then a big record shop decided to use MUMPS for stock control, and he decided that would be cooler.
By 1990, he was the only surviving member of that group of acquaintances. None of the others had died of a disease or medical condition. Two had died in a series of car accidents, despite always having been careful, even cautious drivers. One had electrocuted himself on a kettle, despite having a degree in electrical engineering. One had fallen (or jumped) from a high window. And one had just been straight out murdered by a mugger who stole £10 and left his credit card.
Coincidences happen all the time. But this guy believes he owes his life to his mastery of that sucky database language. I personally wouldn't touch military work with a long stick
Anonymous for obvious reasons.
hackers are computer experts and are the only ones who should be hired to do things like secure computers. crackers, if you watch them can show you their tricks. Next on slashdot: US hires soldiers to enlist in army.
It never fails to amaze me how slow the government is to catching on to new technology or new trends within society. They should have used these kinds of tactics long ago. I mean think of all the brain power (resources) we are letting go to waste. Its no wonder why there are so many hackers, I mean what do you do when you get bored? You usually start messing around in things that get you into trouble. All that these hackers are, are extremely intelligent individuals who have become bored with life around them. They are looking for a challenge so they start hacking at bigger and bigger targets such as the Pentagon. We need to harness this excess of brainpower and employ it in our national defence or other similar tasks. Hackers and crackers are usually not criminal at heart they just need to focus their energy into more productive activities. I applaud the US government on taking a stand in their quest for computer and security whizzes. I mean lets face it these guys are the best. If they can hack into a secure site like the US military or the Whitehouse then obviously they are the best. So why not pay them what they are worth otherwise they will use their talents in other places. Its simply a matter of harnessing our resources, and one of America's greatest resources is its highly intelligent crackers and hackers.
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
"register your domain for only $55"
How comes I always get the impression that those guys at the Pentagon seem to have little creativity? Everytime there's a new movie coming out showing them some nice possibilities to glantly get more control they seem to bring up some new ideas of turning that into reality. This time it's Enemy of the State, huh?
I think what they need is a skilled, creative head or maybe department.
Besides: I think this is just a little joke again...
Turn me loose boss!
I'm the perfect agent to bring down WINDOWS
Actually, I'm no super-guru or anything. You could put me in Q&A testing as the ultimate stability tester. Turn me loose on the system and see what I can fsck up. If it CAN be fscked up, I WILL find a way to do it! Usually, completely by accident.
Oh no!
BAD HAIKU INSPIRATION!:
A government job
Sit on my butt and break things
That's my kinda job
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
couldn't help but notice that that sounds an awful like one of matt damon's monologues in good will hunting
(where he talks about why he turns down a government crypto job)
-- Went home. Had to feed the kids.
Thats the problem the average grunt is too focused on military brewhash to spend the hours upon hours in front of a computer learning the art/science of hacking and cracking. I mean lets think about it what kind of person is your average hacker? He sure isn't that stereotypical gungho GI JOE we are used to. Pyscologically the average GI is not well suited for this kind of job. Lets face it Hackers and Crackers are a specialized lot who for one usually have an IQ or 160 and two don't care a whole lot for institutionalized training such as the army/military provide. Mentally they're far beyond that, its demorallizing to them. Trust me I know. I went to boot camp myself when I enlisted in the national guard (a very stupid choice on my part) and it amazed me that some of the other recruits actually found the training "fullfilling". I found it time wasteful, redundant, and the practicality of it pretty much useless. I don't mean to put down the US military but this kind of institutionalized training and environment does not give way to thinking and actually challenging one self. I found my biggest challenge in life came when I started my own company... thats when I had to use my "smarts" to their max. Your point is a very good one. I hope what I said makes sense.
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
"Get your domain name for only $55"
During WWII the Britts employed a large number of math geeks (Including Alan Turing) to decrypt the German codes. (Enigma etc). This probably won the war for the allies. It was also responsable for some of the first computers.
Erlang Developer and podcaster
I wold consider defeting Hitler and Nazi Germany a very good and Moral cause. While war is never pleasent it is sometimes better than the altertives. Like letting tyrants kill millions of people.
But I should also say that my Grandparents live in a building with a fair number of people who have numbers on their arm and who havent worn a short sleve shirt since 1945.
Erlang Developer and podcaster
As a past member of the armed forces all I can say is "Well said my friend". I thank-you for your thoughtful comment.
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
"Get your domain name for only $55"
to a glorious new era!
Will one have to submit a portfolio of previous cracking work?
11.0010010000111111011010101000100010000101101000
This story reminds me that one about Bill Clinton's call for crackers to stay put during the turn of the year. That sounded to me like a bait for script kids. Picture a scenario in which a lot of unimportant web pages had been defaced. The media would make a lot of noise around it, and then the government would come up with this story. All in perfect synch. Unfortunately for them, the kids were probably all well-oiled that evening. Serious hackers knew that was not the right time for cage-rattling (everyone was complaining about having to work on new year's eve, right?).
An evidence showing that this is not 100% serious is that one of those 3 articles (there's one in CNN too) claims that millitary computers were subjected to +- 18.000 attacks last year, IIRC. That means almost 50 a day! No way, unless you consider every single port scan attempt as an attack.
-------------------------
-------------------------
"People ask FAQs all the time". - David Allen
Oops, Sir, I have accidentally launched our enemy's nuclear warheads while trying to degrade their launch system...
Hmmm... with all these military articles lately, looks like these two might become regular characters:
Private Jones: Sir, the enemy has just brought up a web server revealing the truth about the motivations for our war. Permission to prosecute?
Sergeant Smith: Go ahead... give 'em hell!
PJ: OK... submitting enemy URL to Slashdot now.
Five minutes later...
PJ: Target eliminated, sir. Total DOS.
SS: Good work, son. There's a medal in this for you.
Good... bad... I'm the one with the gun.
ProofReading Markup Language - and yes, I find typos.
The best 3dgamers will soon be recruited to control robotic killing machines, bringing our casualties in any war to zero.
Capturing a German sub only gave the codes for the naval enigma. The Air Force and army used a different set of codes.
And anyway, they changed the enigma code books every month. The skill in codebreaking was working out what messages were being sent.
So, this is an example of why I should -trust- my gov't? :-/
..of course, they'd rather you didn't.
The enigma machine was cracked by the British working in Bletchley Park (sp?) outside London. To be precise, the variant of the machine with 3 rotating tumblers and a patch board was cracked. There were other variants which were not cracked.
This is approximately how it was done:
1. The French obtained through espoinage in the early days of the war an instruction book of how to use the machine. After the French and British were not able to find anything in it to significantly assist their attacks on the enigma, the book eventually found its way to a Polish team of scientists.
2. One Polish guy had an insight on a weakness which had eluded others studying it. This weakness was a combination of the enigma design and the German standard operating procedure. The team passed the work on to the British because (a) they couldn't continue in Poland, and (b) the weakness still required a lot of brute-force checking - ie. automation was required. The British had Turing et. al. working for them. (c) the German codes changed every day, so this attack had to be run on the first interceptions of the day, every day, to be able to read the rest of the day's messages.
3. UNKNOWN TO THE ENGINEERS/MATHEMATICIANS, some code books for particular months were captured. The "management" decided to keep this info from the engineers, and to persist with the daily automated cracking as a defence against the majority of the time when they didn't have the books of keys.
So in summary, the cracking of the enigma machine was the result of a clever mathematical insight, and operational predictability to do with the initial alignment of the tumblers. This made possible a brute force attack, which was automated with banks of electro-mechanical "computers".
Did the Australian government hire a bunch of
crackers? Are they hiring crackers now? If they
did, would we know about it? If the Australian
government is allowed to break into computers,
and the American military is looking for people
with cracking skills, what are they both
planning to do with it? Who is going to be the
victim? To hackers, and crackers with some
morals, I say: Don't work for big brother,
you will not help anyone.
TomG
Does this mean that governments will resolve the next major conflict though a game of Quake III Arena?
The next thing you know, Pentagon, FBI and the rest will want "help" from people who can make kitchen-bombs to help in their war against Saddam Hussein...
They come crawling to me :).
Slay a dragon... over lunch!
"1999-12-27
The military is launching an IT-offensive
The defence force will in a few years have the ability to hack into those computer systems that can threaten national security. This is the orders given to the military by the Swedish government.
- We should first be able to protect our own IT-systems, but in the future we should also be able to disrupt or disable others, say colonel Michael Moore at the defence HQ in Stockholm.
Modern societies are dependent on and controlled by the help of computer During the growth of information technology new threats have emerged. One such threat is distant computer warfare. That means that a hostile state or group could use so called hackers and IT-soldiers to penetrate and destroy the military and civilian networks of states. Confusion, and eventually destroying the ability to rely on important systems, are the goals of offensive IT-units.
In October a Swedish military delegation visited Pentagon. Important connections were made in Washington.
- For several days we were given a look into the problems and possibilites in the area of information warfare. My impression is that the americans have decided to share their information and experiences in the area much more than they used to, says Ingvar Åkesson.
As a consequence of the USA-visit, the government has decided that the military and the military university shall perform a first exercise to increase security in civilian infrastructure systems next year. During the exercise it is permitted to try to break into the two agencies computer systems. A group of experts on computer security will be hand picked from several areas of the defence.If the exercise works well, another step will be taken in 2001. The government wants the military to perform a large test as the one previously done in America.
The "Eligible Receiver" test was performed in the summer of 1997, and it gave the Pentagon a nasty chock. 35 government computer experts were given the task of hacking into the most sensitive information systems in the US. The experts were able to crack codes to several military bases and battle ships using software freely available to anyone.
**********************
1999-12-27
Försvaret satsar på IT-offensiv
Försvarsmakten ska inom några år ha förmåga att tränga in i främmande datasystem, som kan hota landets säkerhet. Det framgår av regeringens senaste uppdragsbrev till Försvarsmakten.
- Vi ska dels kunna skydda våra egna IT-system, men också på sikt kunna störa eller slå ut andras, säger överste Michael Moore vid försvarshögkvarteret i Stockholm.
I det så kallade regleringsbrevet till Försvarsmakten heter det:
"Försvarsmakten skall stärka förmågan att motstå informationskrigföring samt öka informationssäkerheten inom sina IT-system. Försvarsmakten skall även utveckla sin förmåga att genomföra informationsoperationer."
Den sista meningen leder till en ny offensiv uppgift för Försvarsmakten. Traditionella frontkrig med militära styrkor stående mot varandra får allt mindre betydelse i internationell militär planläggning. På 2000-talet handlar det mera om vad som kan utspelas i cyberrymden.
Moderna samhällen styrs och leds med datorns hjälp. Under informationsteknologins framväxt har nya hot tagit form. Ett sådant är datakrig på distans. Det betyder att en illasinnad stat eller grupp med hjälp av så kallade hackers och IT-soldater kan tränga in och förstöra staters militära och civila ledningssystem.
Förvirring och på sikt oförmåga att använda viktiga system, är målet för offensiva IT-förband.
I oktober besökte en svensk militär delegation försvarshögkvarteret Pentagon.
Gruppen leddes av Försvarsdepartementets rätts - och expeditionschef Ingvar Åkesson. I gruppen ingick bland andra FOA-chefen Bengt Anderberg, generalmajor Staffan Näsström från FMV och departementets säkerhetsexpert överste Ingvar Hellqvist.
Viktiga dörrar öppnades i Washington.
- I flera dagar fick vi inblick i problem och möjligheter inom området informationskrigföring. Mitt intryck är att amerikanarna bestämt sig för att i större utsträckning än tidigare dela med sig av sina erfarenheter på området, berättar Ingvar Åkesson.
Som en konsekvens av USA-besöket har regeringen beslutat att Försvarsmakten och Försvarshögskolan nästa år ska genomföra en förberedande övning för att öka säkerheten i samhällsviktiga informationssystem.
Under övningen ges möjlighet att försöka tränga in i de två myndigheternas datasystem. En grupp experter på dataintrång och IT-kontroll ska handplockas från flera myndigheter i totalförsvaret.
Om övningen faller väl ut tas ytterligare ett steg år 2001. Då vill regeringen att Försvarsmakten genomför en stor dataövning efter amerikansk förebild.
Sommaren 1997 genomfördes övningen "Eligible Receiver", som gav Pentagon näst intill skrämselhicka. 35 statliga dataspecialister fick uppgiften att tränga in i USA:s mest känsliga informationssystem. Specialisterna kunde med hjälp av vanlig civil programvara knäcka källkoder till flera militärbasers och hangarfartygs ledningssystem.
************************************************ ***
Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die
Then you could go for one of those great paying jobs & work for Blondie Wong on the side. I don't know about you, but I'd just love to help overthrow Communist China!
Do we need another Vietnam to make kids distrust the gov't again? This entire discussion is really disturbing.
Psst..hey kids, Uncle Sam runs...Windows! Run away!
You remind me of my friend who kept saying "Social Insecurity" instead of Social Security. It was a valiant attempt to sound critical of a flawed behemoth which is a part of all our lives, but he just ended up sounding like an idiot.
The lesson: New words and phrases are best coined unintentionally.
Three Step Plan:
1. Take over the world.
2. Get a lot of cookies.
3. Eat the cookies.
Hmm... I wonder what the government will do if it discovers a fatal security bug in a widely used application through this project?
:(
:).
I mean, if they tell everybody about it, then that really does not help them in attacking anyone...
However, if they don't tell anyone, then they have this situation:
A) There is a fatal security problem in a widely used application.
B) Knowing this gives them an advantage if they should at any time wish to be aggressive towards anyone else.
C) Software is global; People all over the world tend to use the same software, nomatter where they are physically situated.
D) If someone else knows of this problem, they will have the exact same advantage as the US army does, should this someone choose to be hostile towards american computer installations.
E) The US army knows that since they found the bug, it's possible to find this bug.
F) Any cracker/hacker in the world has a small chance of finding this fatal flaw; it's not a question of wheter this bug will be discovered by someone, it's a question of when.
-------
If all of the above is true, then by logic the below must also be true (assuming my logic is not somehow flawed, of course):
1) The US army will be witholding information that would benefit not only America as a whole, but everyone in the world that uses this software (ok, by a small degree, but still).
2) Keeping this information secret only gives the US army a transient advantage, as this bug will eventually be discovered by someone else.
3) If terroists smarten up and begin cracking instead of blowing stuff up (or behaps blowing stuff up through their cracking), then if they find this bug, they will not hesitate to exploit the possibilities this opens to them.
Imagine a terroist cracker finding a fatal flaw that works in all versions of Windows. This flaw allows him to break in and do whatever he wants to any Windows maschine.
Now, I happen to know that atleast we have an american battleship somewhere that runs windows NT... He'd have total control of this thing for atleast a few minutes, perhaps hours if he's very lucky and skilled.
Imagine what a terroist might like to do with such a ship...
Also, he'd probably be able to access alot of confidential information, perhaps even getting access to all the other security bugs and techniques the US army never told anyone about!
I just don't understand how people can think combat over the net can be a good thing. It leaves every country in the world very vulnerable. It opens up the possibility that one person, with enough information, acting completely on his won, can take down alot of stuff.
A group of skilled hackers could do to a country what some people thought the Y2K bug would do to the world (ok, let's say a small country
All that this requires is that they find enough security errors in programs in wide use, preferably an OS.
Of course, this hasn't happened yet, which would seem to indicate that it will never happen.
I don't find that argument very good, as this simply tells us that the crackers we are facing today are not really out to sabotage larger areas.
However, alot of people really, really hate (in the strongest sense possible) the US. Imagine if all fundamentalists suddenly stopped training for physical combat, and instead began learning cracking... There are alot of fundamentalists in the world, you know... And, well, fundamentalists are not known for showing restraint when they have the ability to cause harm to things and people in the USA, or anyone else they happen not to like.
Therefore, I really think what the US army should be consearned about is defending themselves. Security of computer installations is a matter of national security (for any country), and global stability.
If everyone has great defences, aggression will logically be less beneficial, and it won't be as much of a problem.
This issue will become more and more important as everyone gets more and more dependant upon technology.
Bjarke Roune
What people should consider is this, if you aren't prepared to pick up a gun and kill the ENEMY face to face, you shouldn't be working for any organisation that will do it for you using something you made/designed/invented.
Also, just because you can't SEE the people you are fighting doesn't mean it's OK to hurt them. The're still suffering!
Wow - Viruses written in Ada with mil-spec documentation.
A "Cyberspace Virtual War CVW" will be far more humane than the bullets and bombs reality option.
...? Stay paranoid and safe.
By the way Brazil has a government and military
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
YO!
Do you have the mad skillz to break your enemy's NT box like a cheap toy? Can you use someone else's program to wreak havoc? Do you know how to type in 31337-5p34K? Apply today, because the U.5. R00|z, b0Y33!@#$
Uncle Sam wants YOU...to ping -s 65536
-Legion
For example, at a recent college recruiting convention, the CIA was passing out fliers on their CITO (Clandestine Information Technology Office). The flier stated that CITO's mission was to exploit foreign information technology. They even advertise for these types of positions on their employment web site at:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/employment/ci aeindex.htm
I had attempted to set up a hackish Vulnerability Assessment Team, as a first step to developing a offensive capability, back in 1996-7. I even had people at OSD (Office of the Secretary of Defense) who liked the idea. But, alas, I was a peon at one of the many Beltway Bandits, and corporate leadership didn't think that this was a reputable business to go into. Instead, they wanted I.T. to concentrate on embedded MS Access applications for network use.
Mind you, nowadays I teach network engineering to government people, and at least THEY learn to hack their own systems to reduce their own vulnerabilities. It's just irritating that years later, my team was finally vindicated. . .
Hasn't anyone noticed that the psychology required to be a great hacker is the opposite of that required to function effectively in the military?
The only people less suitable to the military than hackers might might be scientists, and we know the military could never do anything on a big scale with scientists.
Ok... with that point made...
"Now we're all son's of bitches" - Kenneth Tomkins Bainbridge to J. Robert Oppenheimer after the first atomic test.
Do we really want hackers to join that club?
--Mike--
I can just see this now..
W4R3Z K1DD13: 3y3 w1ll h4x0r th3 3n3my
Army d00d: Okay, your target is the Iraq Military Command.
W4R3Z K1DD13: 3y3 w1ll punt th3m
Army d00d: Uhh.. they don't use AOL
W4R3Z K1DD13 0h, 0k4y... 3y3 w1ll s3nd th3m 4 w1nd0ws v1rus
Army d00d: they're not using windows, they're using a unix server
W4R3Z K1DD13: 0h gn0! l3mm3 g0 f1nd 4n 3xpl0it
Army d00d: Out! Get the hell out of here, your not a hacker... your a lame ass script kiddie
--
Insert Witty Sig Here
We all should think long and hard about starting the arms race in Cyberwarfare. The world has lived far to long under ther MAD policy in respect to nuclear bombs. Do we want to legitimize (sp) the internet as a target in war? Who has the most targets on the internet? The US, no? People in glass (digital) houses should not be the first to throw stones (Cyberwarfare). As other have pointed out, you don't need massive Goverment Military spending to conduct Cyberterrerism, any individual with the right equipment will do. LOpht claimed that any one of the group can bring down the internet in 30 minutes. Certanly not all computer genisus(sp) live and work in a Democracy and have strong moral convections that Cyberwarfare is wrong. The Military has opened a Pandora's Box by introducing cracking as a wepon of war and we are all going to be worse off because they did. Perhaps the only sane response is for the Open Source community to adapt FreeBSD's philosophy of 'security is number one' and concentrate on makeing GNU/Linux and all GPL applications as secure and crack proof as possiable.
zenray
Just to let you know.
http://www.freebsd.org
One of the most important parts of the GNU license and open source definition is that you cannot place clauses in a license that restrict the distribution of the software to specific groups.
Now, consider which kind software a developing nation is going to prefer. What's reliable, secure, free, and mostly unhindered by export law?
You got it. In the not so distant future, these "cyber-soldiers" will be trying to break and subvert the very stuff we write and give away. They may even, posing as real hackers, try to sneak trojans into some software to make their jobs easier. And you certainly can't expect them to tell us about the security flaws they find.
And if the military finds it is too hard to break the worldwide infrastructure of open source software, they may just pressure the bureaucrats into making laws that restrict its distribution. Hey, it happened to encryption, right? And supercomputers. And certain types of radio equipment.
We should protest this sort of thing now, before it comes back to bite us on the ass.
One had electrocuted himself on a kettle, despite having a degree in electrical engineering
I once watched two EE PhD candidates from MIT try to jump-start a car. I know these guys, and they're both smart people, but it took them a long time to get the car going. EE (the one guy was working with quantum dots, for example) is one thing, and appliances are another thing entirely. The kettle accident does not surprise me.
Operation Desert Storm. We were fighting for the freedom of the Kuwaiti people...oh wait, Kuwait is a strict monarchy with all the oil wells in the ownership of said monarchy (who likes to seel that oil to us).
According to some news reports (yeah, I know...media...take it for what its worth), the "generic" Kuwaitis had more freedom under the Iraqi(sp?) occupation than under their own monarchy.
But Saddam is evil...he gas bombs the dissidents in his country and we call it genocide. (which, imo it is)
The US just fire bombs its dissidents.
Of course the US would never carry out a mission of genocide against any group of people within its claimed borders. See Native Am.
This is off the original topic but I'm responding to this one post. .... MICROSOFT!!! (check out the list in the article). ... surprise, surprise ... brokerage groups, who want to cash in on the increased commissions. Here is a great article from The Nation about this issue.
Check out Cato's opinions, but be aware that Cato represents corporate-style libertarianism.
In this article by the media watchdog Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting, you'll see that Cato is funded by big oil, pharmaceutical, tobacco, and other big corporations including
I recommend the foreign policy sections of Z Magazine's web page for analysis of defense matters and to learn what ordinary people are doing for peace.
Still, when people say that it is good to cut defense spending and stop imperialist military actions, I will agree with them, right or left.
These conservative think-tanks get quoted all the time in the media, without mentioning who their funding comes from. One of their latest projects is to "reform" Social Security. This means to convince people that Social Security won't be there for them when they retire and that we need to be able to invest the money in the stock market instead. The major funding comes from
This guy doesn't sound tooo bright, but I don't see anything in his blathering post that looks like flamebait...????!!!!! I mean WTF, what kind of a moron moderated that as flamebait?
wow, just think about finally getting to use that NSA key in WinNT which no one understands fully... ...vengeance is mine, my old high school WILL pay for their insolence. :P - goon (ty)
Before working for the U.S. military in any way, check out the book "Killing Hope" by William Blum. Blum worked in the State Department until the Vietnam War, when he quit in disgust. ... the list goes on and on.
The corporate/wealthy establishment running the government was able to convince Americans that there was an "international communist conspiracy" to enslave the world. The USSR actually had little role in many of the countries attacked by the U.S., especially in Latin America.
Millions have been killed for trying to organize alternatives to U.S.-dominated capitalism. The people tortured and killed include teachers, priests, nuns, folk singers, labor unionists, students, mayors, and actual communists - although many of the communists were completely unconnected with the USSR (which didn't invent communism - remember). If you don't want to read the book, read up on the histories of Greece, Indonesia, Guatemala, Chile, El Salvador, Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Brazil, the Phillipines (sp?)
You can be part of all this if you help the military. At least if you like Corporate America you wouldn't have to make a tough choice, you'd still be working for them!
My statements "Sure you might save lives in some cases but will you always know which actions you take will result in the preservation of like over the loss of it. Will be able to back down on a mission that you feel will result in needless death." touched on this topic lightly. You can help save lives by taking lives, such as in a Just War. But even if the War is just, a particular battle may have aspects of injustice. Even if you are justified in killing to save lives, not every kill necessarily saves a life.
There are other inherent problems to the concept of a Just War. "Just" is a matter of perspective and in most cases both sides feel Just. If an invader attacks us, are we Just in defending ourselves? Is our culture pure enough that it should survive along side others? How about Iraq's culture? Was Iraq Just in defending itself against the US in the Gulf War? I really wish I had more time to talk about this but I have a demo at 12.
Back to the original topic, you have to ask yourself if you want to play a role in esclating a crisis to a War. My main point is that this tpye of thing should not be taken lightly. I see a lot of posts in here saying "Wow that would be a great job. I'd have so many great toys." But you have to think of these real issues before jumping into something like this and even then you have to contiue to think every day if what you are doing is right.
-no broken link
Ohhhh yeah baby... This is perfect for me. Give me a fucking rifle and a laptop and turn me loose on the friggin evil enemy.
.. die you fucking pigs... I'll shove a fucking bamboo shoot through your pithy little brain, then I'll syn-flood your pithy little network....
RAT a TAT TAT you motherfuckers... I'L RIP YOUR FUCKING LUNGS OUT THEN I'LL HACK YOUR HOMEPAGE YOU FUCKING RAT BASTARDS.
I can't think of a better way for me to vent my mis-directed geek anger. KILL KILL KILL
A genius writes code an idiot can understand, while an idiot writes code the compiler can't understand.
Better to have your enemy inside the tent pissing out than outside pissing in.
You people talk about killing people like it is wrong. There are often very legitmate reasons for killing people. For example it would be right to kill someone who is trying to kill you. now extending this it would be corect and proper, and even LEGAL(in the US) to kill someone who was trying to kill a friend or relative. Also in many countries, including the US, it is legal to kill someone who breaks into you house. It is legal for a woman to kill a man trying to rape her. I am not sure if it is legal or not, but I have never heard of anyone being charged with murder for killing a man raping a woman. feel free to rip apart my arguments. Yes if one took a military job regardles of the job their purpose would be to kill other people. I would not feel safe if my governmet was NOT willing to kill every other living being on earth to protect it's intrests. I know that statement is going to be flame bait, so flame away. That doesn't change the truth of the matter. We only know what is precious by what we are willing to die for, and what we are willing to kill for.
I strongly beleive that the ONLY criteria for a just war is that it be fought for just means. Any degree of evil is appropriate to defend oneself. Oh well, who am I to say what is moral or not, I'm just a guy who for his entire life wanted nothing more than to serve in the military, then was regected becaue his eyes were to bad. I was willing to do or die, but they won't let me. That, not that they want to expolit a new weapon (crackers) is my only axe to grind with the military.
While you are mulling over the implications of what I said, rember that you are reading this thanks to a US MILLITARY PROJECT!!!!!!!!! That's right kiddies, the internet was started as ARPANET, and that was an ARMY BRAT.
Please tell me if I got any details wrong. I am limited to the best of my knowedge on witing this, however even if some of my facts are wrong, my moral and ethical stace stays where it is.
I regret my lack of knowledge and experience makes me totaly unqualified. Also, my open attitude of reality and self-directing ethics does (I believe) limit my job prospects with any military group.
The pay and benifits packages would be poor, job satisfaction very if'ee.
I hope they realize that a distributed (home-office with 90-120 TDY to locations maybe) group would be the best approach for a robust, reliable, suvivable option in any CVW.
I'm interested, but unqualified.
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
(By the way, this should be a story found on ZDNet, but I couldn't find it).
Bizar technology?
I spent 6 years in the Army - and yes, much of the training is 'mind-numbing' (that's part of its purpose, actually. During certain times in a combat situation, stopping to 'think' can be very detrimental to your life and the lives of others).
One thing that I discovered during my tour in the army, and my later time spent as a programmer, is that people are people, no matter what their walk of life is. I've met absolutely brilliant Infantry Sergeants and some pretty lackluster "Software Engineers" proclaiming themselves to be master hackers/crackers.
Our Friend (AC) makes a claim that Hackers "Mentally they're far beyond that, its demorallizing to them". Actually, I believe it takes a certain mental and physical discipline to sit in a foxhole in subzero temperatures (I speak from firsthand knowledge) for days on end.
Just like all Linux users are not "skript kiddies", not all soldiers are brain dead.
Just my $.02. Your mileage may vary.
From the Battle of New Orleans:
"Damn the firewall, full speed ahead!"
From the Philippines, WWII:
"I shall redial."
From Dec. 7 1941:
"A day that will live in cache."
General Patton:
"Now I want you to remember that no hacker ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb hacker die for his country."
From Berlin, 1961:
"Eich ein cDc."
Khruschev at the UN:
"We will DoS you!"
Winston Churchill:
"We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never order pizza."
President Reagan, circa 1983:
"I've signed legislation outlawing Microsoft. We begin hacking in 5 minutes."
===
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Background: Eight months ago I was supposed to be working in the Air Force Information Warfare Center at Kelly Air Force Base in San Antonio. I don't how many of you know the defense chain as it applies to cyberspace but the AFIWC runs point on all cyberwarfare operations for the United States.
Patriotism? I have had five uncles and my grandfather all serve their country in varying wartime capacities. I do have a sense of patriotism and what my country has given me if was using some of the skills that I have learned well I was going to my darnest to help. BTW, getting a Top Secret security clearance and play with things nobody had ever seen was another perk of the job. I wasn't alone though in feeling that way. The others selected for the internships inside the AFIWC and who I talked to were some of the best and brightest America had to offer including a guy who was weened on Unix and had been working with Linux since 94 with a speciality in penetration, a genetics student, a student at Stanford who could blow the doors off coding as well as others. I'll be the first to admit setting up hardware and networks was why I was there and while not glamourous, I do my job very well.
Unfortunantly, if you are in the military you would know this but most do not the agency in charge of background checks the DSS or Defense Security Service has been so backlogged and mismanaged over the past few years none of us who were told we were interning actually did. That's a bitter spot for me and the others but hopefully it will hold out soon. It does make me angry but given the chance I would still like to go back and have that summer at the AFIWC. I think it would have been a very unique learning experience.
One other thing, those that have feeling hacking for the man is wrong. The world is a very ugly and dangerous place. The Chinese have been developing cyberwarfare and we still dont know the extent of their knowledge. Many small 3rd world countries are throwing a bone to cyberwarfare because its the cheapest way of bringing down the U.S.. You don't need guns or missiles you just need a direct modem link into the U.S. power grid. Their are alot of countries that hate the U.S. and would love to do damage to it especially with the anonimity afforded by electronic warfare so dont bash anyone that wants to protect your family whether it be your family dying in a car accident because the power was turned off as they were going through a light, some maniac who thinks it would be fun to grab credit card numbers from an ecommerce site and use them to finance weapons purchases or any other thing your mind can think of or might not think of will happen eventually. Winn Schwauta one of the foremost experts in the security realm has been predicting an electronic Pearl Harbor for a long time. The only questions remain are will the gun implacements on our side be ready and how much damage will someone do when there not isolated to just Hawaii.
If you would like to read about the trials and tribulations of the DSS, you can read the following article in the archives of USA Today
Goto the archives and use the keyword search
security clearance and military and backlog
Goto the 13K document on 06-03-1999 Sorry it only keeps the last search you did in memory
ALSO, the government is interested in patching up its own systems. Check out the DoD SBIR proposals. Half of the Information Warfare topics are about defensive measures.
Actually, I'm against working for the government anyway. I do have moral qualms with giving anything to the US Gov't that could be used to aggrevate an assault. However, I'd rather have a war that kills systems by crack than by bomb. If nothing else, it's a lesser of two evils.
Network Security: It always comes down to a big guy with a gun.
May I remind you that people like us worked in Bletchley Park in the UK and Americans worked on projects like MAGIC. Cracking codes and cyphers contributed to freeing europe and asia from the germans and japanese. So before you stand on your high moral ground, give this a thought. When the invaders come and threaten the safety of your family and friends, are you really gonna sit on your arse and hope passive protesting will work? It didnt for the Jews in the Warsaw ghettos. War is ugly, dirty, but very necessary when someone attacks you. And if you look like a soft target, eventually the school bully will notice you.... Brad
Wake up and smell the roses, pal. The world isn't a nice place. There are nasty people out there, and to defend against them, the members of the armed forces have to be ready to do unpleasant things, while the rest of us sleep peacefully in our condos and semis. (a) If the world is a nasty place, what could possibly be the point of holding up the morality of the US armed forces actions in WWII and Kosovo (a dubious morality, very dubious) as a way of legitimizing their existence. Once you start talking about morality, you have to define your terms. The poster before you did give us a definition (as in: killing is wrong). You, did not (as in: killing is wrong, except when its right, and by the way, the world is evil, so who are you to complain, and, um, whatever.) (b) If the original poster is guilty of dealing in absolutes, you are equally as silly. Contrary to what many people think, soldiers, on the whole, don't look forward to going to war. Soldiers usually don't have any say in the matter. Its one thing to talk about WWII, when thousands signed up because they believed in the "cause" and the need to repel the Axis. My grandfather joined the French in WWII after politicians sold out his country (Czechoslovakia). I respect him for that, and he felt empowered and good about he was doing when he joined, because he knew what he was standing up for. But its another thing to talk about joinng the army in peacetime. In this case, losing your right to dictate what fight you join and how you fight is as good a reason as any not to join the armed forces. Basically, joining the army *IN PEACETIME* is an abdication of your own morality, and a promise to act in accordance with an official morality, whatever that ends up being. That means you do whatever the politicians say. Which is fine for some people, who are happy in their trust of the system and their belief that politicians represent us well. People with a more firm grip on reality and the ability to reason for themselves beyond a high school level tend to understand that the government does not do a very good job of being moral. And they know that when they are under that bridge in Korea, training a machine gun on hundreds of women and children who are innocent refugees, and the order comes down the pike to shoot, they will have to. And they won't feel to good about it on the plane home. I hope you are informed enough to get the reference, but I'm not going to hold my breath. -C
If you only ever avoided one wolf pack of german subs in a convoy, it would have been worth the effort surely. And whose to say that modern cracking might not also be through some clever insight into mathematics. In war , information is your best weapon, not ICBM's (which you cant fire anyway as it would be mutual destruction). Brad
Too many people stereotype the military as they've seen in the movies. In fact, today's military is committed to empowerment at the lowest level possible. There's an excellent article at CNN about why veterans make good IT workers.
This article came out just yesterday. It details how the US has recently decided that "cyberwarfare" is an acceptable war tactic.
:)
So now you know what you're being hired for..
I dont have an issue with the fact that there can be situations where violence (call it war) is the only reasonable and responsible response.
What gives me the creeps is that the government decides which are those situations. And the main interested of government is power- staying in it and acquiring more. That is not the metric I would prefer to evaluate potential wars.
Now I can put "Raided by the FBI" on my resume!!!
Actually, this is a DIA thing.
Go here for the low down on
employment criteria.
On the contrary, joining your military *IN PEACETIME* validates your morality more than any other time. Almost the only thing that makes great nations fall is by sitting back on their laurels (sp?). Look at what happened to the Romans. You must keep your peacetime military almost just as prepared as your wartime military. And all of these PR stunts that you talk about are just that. The governments needs to show that our military can still kick the shit out of anybody, and they need to keep our military trained. It is when the Romans ran out of people to fight that their nation crumbled. That is why we need to invent an enemy to fight until a new one comes along.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
At one time the U.S. did have nuclear anti-aircraft missiles. This was back in the days of large groups of bombers flying in formation and poor missile guidance. One missile could take out an entire formation as long as it was in the general area...
The Code War has begun.
I remember a fictional story in Wired about a team of terrorists using a combination of cyberterrorism and automated systems to nearly bring the country to its knees. They did things like electromagnetic pulse bombs (to cripple computer systems) and taking down power grids and other parts of infrastructure mostly controlled by computers. On the more traditional side, they booby-trapped their (evacuated) base with a machine gun set up with servos and motion detectors to automatically fire at anyone nearby.
I'm surprised that cyberwarfare has taken this long to really become established (although there were rumours about USA-paid hackers and crackers attacking the systems of enemies recently, they aren't confirmed). Most likely the reason is that most of the enemies and potential enemies aren't as reliant on computer systems and networks as most countries. Sure, you could probably mess up the computer networks of your average EU member pretty badly, and that would probably deal more damage than a dozen cruise missiles, but we aren't exactly at war (or likely to be at war) with those countries.
Really, the most vulnerable country is the USA itself. As the article tells us, many critical networks are vulnerable to infiltration. The only conceivable reasons that they haven't been a large target of terrorism are:
A) Terrorists usually don't want to do damage on that large a scale. Terrorism is all about showing strength and instilling terror into the populace, but not doing a lot of damage. Terrorists would rather kill 5 people with a bomb in Times Square, which is a concrete and very real threat and would make a lot of people afraid, than disrupt the power grid of the eastern seaboard. The power grid problem would be big (especially if they could bring it down for days or weeks at a time) but it isn't as 'real' as a bomb or other violent threat.
B) Many terrorists don't have the skills and equipment needed to do that kind of thing. You need pretty good programming skills to infiltrate an important database and disrupt in a concrete, immediately noticeable and threatening way. It is very easy to build a pipe bomb and plant it somewhere, in comparison.
Besides that, you need an internet connection and a computer, which can cost money that a terrorist group doesn't have.
C) The biggest terrorist threat nowadays is groups that aren't making ransom demands, but are just trying to kill people. Fanatical groups that believe that [insert group] is evil, for instance. They won't give any warning, they won't make any demands, and they won't have any sort of logical targets for their attacks.
For instance, the PLO and IRA were political groups who wanted to be recognized as such, and for that reason were relatively mellow, not trying to come across as ruthless or crazy. Since they had political agendas, they made attacks which made sense when analyzed and someone who was studying the situation might make logical guesses as to vulnerable areas. For them, disrupting power grids and such would be a logical target because it isn't very lethal but it is VERY inconvienant and noticeable, and as such gets them press coverage. For a fanatical group, cyberterrorism isn't as useful as violence because it doesn't really kill anyone and the effects don't last very long.
I'm willing to bet that cyberwarfare will be used in more subtle ways than terrorism and direct attacks.
It seems like it would be ideal for espionage (although most important information will be encrypted, ANY information is useful. If you know that something was sent from a certain place to a certain other place, even if you don't know what the message was, you can make logical guesses about what it meant: see Cryptonomicon for a good example of this) and also sabotage (like the man in that article said: it would be excellent to disrupt missile defence systems right before an air raid). Taking down the power grid wouldn't be as useful against a military target, which will likely have generators (remember that decommisioned bunker that got turned into a data storage facility? check it out here. That place has diesel generators that'll last a couple months, i think). But I'd expect that most of the important systems won't be accessible: you'd probably have to physically infiltrate the target to get into a missile control system. A military-only optical fiber network might be common if cyberwarfare is dangerous enough. In that case, you'd need a combination of skilled hackers and crackers (to do the actual cyberwarfare) and normal soldiers (to get into the country and infiltrate the military network).
Hmm, sounds like a cheezy computer game/action flick.
Then again, I could be wrong.
Soldier: "Where ya' goin', General?"
Patton-esqe character: "Goin' ta Redmond! Gonna shoot that system crashin' sonofabitch!"
I suppose you haven't been following the discussion. By the way, are you a historian? Do you even know what you are talking about when you say "sitting back on their laurels" (you mean "resting on..." by the way). Can you be a bit more specific about this supposed complacency? My suspicion is that you cannot, because you are as clueless about what you are talking about, as you are about what was being discussed here. But, since you bring it up, and since you obviously need the vocabulary lesson, what you are talking about in yout post is PATRIOTISM and not morality. You think joining your military is important in that "nations fall" when they let their guard down. So if you care about your country, and you want to support your government, whatever they represent, join your military in peacetime. Sure. And remember that loyalty to your nation is patriotism, and not morality, as many a former Nazi patriot can tell you.
too all you posters who say "well, what about fighting nazi's, huh?? THAT was moral!", i say, war itself is immoral, sometimes the ends just justify the means. In a world where everyone embraced peace, war would be immoral in any circumstances (i.e. the universial soilder, by Donavan, (the guy who sang mellow yellow... you know, the song from the gap commercial) whick basically says the power to prevent war isn't within a dictator, say, hitlers reach, it's the common soilder, who, through his willingness to fight, is to blame for war.).
First, I a would not want to get involved with this. I have heard too many bad stories about spooks. Like the one related in the second or third comment discussion. Second, are these the obnoxious bastards that have been giving us all hell for building radios, surveillance equipment, testing networks, wanting to learn, free source information, etc. Maybe it is just me, but I would say screw you hypocrits.
I don't mean comunst in a contemptuous way (I got that word from babelfish). I'm just looking at the poll..
--
--
Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!
It's no joke.
.Mil have been searching for this kind of people for a long time. They even put up AD's in the Unemployment office database asking "for people who hack our systems and constantly improve the security" and "probe enemy systems for weaknesses". Unfortunately - when i applied, they had this Bullsh*t "Social" criteria which made me fail. So now i'm going corporate and if they ever need my help they can pay (a little more) for it, but i won't communicate with their employment- division.
In my country (and probably other countries as well) the
The Social Competence Bullsh*t have to STOP!
Regards,
Guy in Northern Europe.
I know someone who worked for the NSA and they were paranoid. All the rooms had led insulation and they would conduct searches and all kinds of weird things. They don't pay bad but you can probably get a better job somewhere else.
How long would it be before someone was ordered to shut down the infrastucture of Iraq, causing a slow, torturous death to citizens who were univolved with our oil prices? What will history say about the well-minded geeks who were just working for a paycheck, but who ended up throwing the world back to feudal times by starting a cyberwar with the click of a mouse? I hope that this is just hype, otherwise, keep those generators from y2k on hand, you ain't see nothin' yet.
"Goodbye, Blue Sky. Goodbye..."
miskam evets
Oh, yes, this may seem like a good job (mixes hacking + getting paid), but in reality, it has aspects that *can* come back to haunt you. Say that you're in one of the cracker teams and all of you become something os an elite. You go around bringing down enemy systems and become highly depended on by the military. However, when the time comes that you want to "leave", they "tell" you that you can't. In other words, it's much like the situation with other secretive organizations, that "once you're in, you never come out" (i.e. you knnow too much for your own good). An example is the scientist who helped the CIA develop LSD, who also "jumped out" of his apartment window to become road pizza.