Slashdot Mirror
The Happy, Benign Strivers of 2600
westfirst writes "The Washington Post has a front page story on those nice young boys in the food court from 2600. Here's one choice sentence: "Patrick thought 2600 would teach him how to hack. Instead, it taught him about job hunting, stock options and business plans." The press and the government were wrong along. 2600 isn't about learning how to launch the nuclear missiles at that fascist gym teacher-- it's about working hard and getting ahead. So, is 2600 better off with a reputation as Wally Cleaver or Eddie Haskell?" All I know is that it's good to see positive coverage of hackers/hacker culture.
Even though I don't agree with you, I have but one thing to say. Please, please PLEASE stop it with the house analagies [sic]. Please use something else.
This is such a good point that it needs some attention drawn to it beyond yapping about the typo. Houses are physical and in the real world, and so many things don't match up. First of all, every host on the internet is potentially a server, and potentially contains useful, intended-for-the-public information. How can you tell if a given host is meant to be accessed remotely? Well, you connect to it and look. This isn't the equivalent of checking the doorknob of a house -- it's more like looking in a shop window to see if they're open. (And that analogy is full of flaws too.)
Sure, we could depend completely on centralized human-created directories, but that puts control back in the hands of the few. The internet isn't supposed to be Just More Television. If it becomes illegal to connect to port 80 of someone's machine to see if they're running a web server, that's a huge loss for us all. You might think http is different somehow, but do you really want the goverment maintaining a list of what ports are legal to use for services?
Are those Saltine Crackers or Graham Crackers?
As far as Hacker, it's a negative word. In the computer world it refers to someone who is not particularly adept. To hack code means to work by trial and error until it works.
Then look up the definitions of 'hack writer', 'political hack', 'hacker' as in poor golf.
Otherwise I think the term you want is just plain Geek.
I'm a Geek. I'm also a Software Engineer.
I'm definately not a Hacker or a Cracker.
*cough* *cough* handle *cough*
You'll also notice people referring to Emmanual Goldstein - the false prophet in 1984 - as the publisher of 2600, while other people call him Eric Corley.
--
Why can't I moderate something "Wrong" or at least "Grossly Misinformed"?
Hmmm, 2600 doesn't seem to be teaching the young crackers too well. You do not sniff crack. You smoke it, in a crack pipe. At least they're not sniffing the pot too.
That's because his father is:
(There. This should score points with the "government is evil" types)...
--
It was a doomed fight because the "hackers" chose a very stupid label to tar their opposition with.
The NY Times is never going to run a headline with the word "Crackers" in it, so the True Hackers might as well be trying to call the people who break into computers "Wetbacks" or "WOPs" or something.
Also, as the Steven Levy book pointed out, the so-called positive use of the term Hacker is based in a MIT/New Jersey tradition and is primarily limited today to the Unix subculture. Most professional programmers probably would view being called a "Hack" or "Hacker" as an insult, although they might "Hack" (a specific activity) at some code now and then.
So, until Hackers can think of respectable term for themselves and for The Other, it is a doomed battle.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Among the senior members of the 2600 group in Washington who have found themselves in this
situation are Guy Montag, 39, an information systems analyst who works for a government
contracting company;
I thought Guy Montag was a "fireman" who used to burn books for the government but then began to be discontented with his distopian society and one day picked a book up and began to read and read and eventually (quite, um, dramatically) left society when caught...
Is Farenheit 451 old enough that a 39 year old's parents may have named a kid after a character in the book?
--
Tweet, tweet.
Ugh - quit moderating trolls up. People ranting about them (without providing any real information) block any real content.
Exploits are very valuable. I was explaining to my co-worker about teardrop a year or two ago. He thought it was moderately interesting, but that nobody would have made that error, making the bug theoretical. It wasn't until I downloaded a ready-made exploit and took out his server, twice, with him watching, that he decided it was worth getting a patch for.
Now, if some hacker hadn't written that exploit, which enabled a bunch of no-skill kiddies to crash computers at random, some skilled attacker could have combined it with other exploits to reliably remove any computer on demand as the part of a larger coordinated attack.
When WinNuke still worked I got hit twice, a small price to pay to now be able to run a semi-reliable ftp server from the windows machine at work.
(And the same thing effects Linux servers, but there you don't have to impress every user, just Linus, AC, or the maintainer of whatever code base is weak and it'll go into the main codestream. Exploits still help though, so they can see an attack isn't just a theoretical posibility, but a skilled user could use it NOW.)
The difference is, I guess, when Stratavarious (proper spelling) violins were made, there weren't any Big Bad Corporations... but now that we have corporations making toys like the Cue Cat, we can't "hack" anymore, for fear of lawsuits and such... (view the latest Apple lawsuit as a good example). Quite silly. Things progressed thanks to these 'old time hackers'... now they only progress with money I guess.
You're absolutely right, I honestly meant to spell it Stradavarius but I guess I wasn't paying attention - oops.
Well, you have to remember, there's more then one kind of 'hacker'. First, there's the ones that snoop around and tell us that, indeed, yes, Windows 2000 has a bunch of security holes that need to be addressed. (Who says they HAVE to be snooping on someone elses computer, by the way?) Second, there's the ones that do the same time of snooping, then exploit those holes for their own purposes (the ones we -should- be scared about). There's also the 'hacker' who takes things apart to learn about them for their own knowledge and/or does things seemingly impossible (ie, beetle bug on a roof, gets a business tower's room lights to spell a word, etc.). We neededn't be word about two of these types of hackers, so by you saying that all hackers are bad and that they all cost billions of dollars, well, you're just wrong.
Hackers are the people who put the internet together, they are not the ones who are going to take it apart.
Yes, that would be me. No it is not my *real* name, just my handle that I have used for a few years.
http://www.dc2600.com
Visit DC2600
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
Sorry to dissapoint, it is just my handle. My parents named me something else ;-)
Visit DC2600
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
I been getting this mag for years now.
At first this was an excellent starter point for new and interesting stuff now it it tripe not even worthy of the name "The Hacker Quarterly".
Is it me or did this start about the time "FREE KEVIN" stuff was ending. Not putting down the cause or anything but it is true
Elephant: a mouse built to government specs
Yep.
Like the title of your comment,btw, looks familiar...
Best Slashdot Co
Wrap the threads
Best Slashdot Co
Yeah, lots of people find God following bomb making recipies in that book. You see, there are some important safety steps it leaves out...
Best Slashdot Co
Sorry, but when you connect your computer to a network and run a server of any kind, you are inviting people in. It's your responsibility to either not connect, not run a server, or run with at least some minimal security that makes it clear what the limit of the invitation is.
If you invite people into your house and don't lock the closet where you keep your porn collection, you don't have much right to complain when someone who's poking around looking for a place to hang their coat - or who's curious about the construction of your house - finds it. OTOH, if you lock that door and someone picks the lock and starts digging around, then you have cause to smack them upside the head.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | http://www.infamous.net/
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
True, but irrelevant. When you connect a computer to a network, we can only assume it is because you wish that computer to communicate with other computers.
When you run a server on a computer connected to a network, we can only assume that it is because you wish to make some services or data available to users of other computers.
What services or data did you wish to make available? As we are not telepathic, the only way for us to figure that out is to poke around a little. For example:
- "Gee, I see this guy has an interesting website about Quake. Is there a Quake server there? (tries to connect) Nope."
- "Hey, http://foo.com/~you/cutepuppies.html is a nice web page. I wonder if there is more stuff in that same vein there? Maybe I can get a directory of http://foo.com/~you/ and see what else is there."
- "Wowsers, that site seems to have awesome perfomance! I think I'll go use Netcraft's "What's that site running?" service to find out how it manages to do that!"
There is, of course, a difference between poking around a little and breaking in, which most people are well able to recognize.Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | http://www.infamous.net/
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
I belive I was talking about computer networks, not buildings?
Fine! Then you won't be running any servers, you're quite safe from the big bad hackers, and we're in perfect agreement, so there's no need to be frightened. Take a deep breath and have a beer.Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | http://www.infamous.net/
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Congratulations, you've been co-opted. Now go get your standard issue pair of GAP khakis and reversible Old Navy jacket.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
And just recently I had a DVD that I purchased and wanted to watch on my Linux box so I used DeCSS. Weeeeee!
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
If I was part of a group of people who came into your house and just looked around, claiming they were only testing the security of your locks and so on, what would you do?
Just the other day someone knocked on my front door to tell me I had left me car outside unlocked. I said thank you and then locked my car. He must have either looked into the car to see the physical position of the lock, or else he tried the door. Either way, he was uninvited. What would you have done?
Slightly less recently, I was given directions to a friends house on a piece of paper. I drove to the street only to discover that the number of the house I had written down was smudged. I took a guess, but it could have been wrong. I went up the pathway to the front door and knocked, (remember if I was wrong, then i was on somebodys land uninvited here) There was no answer. I tried the doorhandle and it was unlocked. I shouted hello through the door. Nobody answered. Just as I was going to leave, my friend appeared from the back garden. Did I do anything wrong? I potentially entered a property without permission. Some people I know would have walked right in to check of things were okay when they got no answer. Would that have been wrong? What if my friend was lying injured somewhere in the house? Is it still not allowed because i might accidentally be in the wrong house.
My point is this... I agree there are parallels between cars, houses etc and computers. But in all these cases there are legitimate reasons for entry other than simply invitation. If you have a car/house/computer in a public place (yes, the internet is a PUBLIC network) then expect that to be the case. Even if you get rid of all malicious hackers, you still find people entering your systems for various reasons (accidentally is probably the most common) so you MUST be prepared for it with proper security. And we all (I hope) know by now from experience that understanding how to make a system secure follows from knowing how to exploit an unsecured system. Thats the way it is - like it or not. You WILL NOT be a good security admin until you know how to crack systems yourself. Anyone who tells you otherwise is an academic.
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
All right! One guaranteed sale. Woohoo. All I have to do is get my book banned and you'll buy it. Yippee! (Note to self: yippie.com as a competitor to yahoo?)
OK, Don. As soon as I get my book written and I can figure out how to get it banned (Note to self: Figure out what gets books banned. Thoughts: sex? profanity? saying bad stuff about religion? Follow on note: Read some banned books. Look for common themes.) then I'll send you an email. I figure that if I can tell my publisher there's at least one sale, they're bound to take a chance on me.
Thanks, Don. You've given me new hope!
--
You can['t fool me! those 2600 boys hacked into the New York Times! That's what happened!
I'm an hacker. I write code as an hobby. I...oops.
:P.
Wrong definition.
"Security holes are only an issue because of the damn hackers. Hacker: 'Hey, we're helping you exposing security holes so you can fix them'. Dude: 'And why should we fix the holes?.' Hacker: 'Um uh. To protect you from us.' That's great isn't it. WITHOUT THE HACKERS THIS WOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE."
Hackers expose security holes. Why? Hackers work on code. Hackers write code. *You* are referring to crackers. Without widespread *open* and *public* dessimination of security holes by people who write, use and develop software, said information would only circulate amongst the dark, underground of illegal electronic intrusion and what not. The bad guys (eg the script kiddies, the people who steal credit card nos. etc) already know about security codes. *They* certainly don't bother informing securityfocus.org about the new hole they just found, exploited and punched through in your spanking new e-commerce website that runs whatever combination of software.
Who does?
People who care. People who write code. Use code.
People who at this very moment are contributing patches, time and effort to the development of the Linux kernel. The FreeBSD kernel. The KDE project. The Apache webserver. Mozilla.(i think/hope?
I am a hacker.
Be kind. There are too many mean people out there already.
Then he met the 2600 Club.
Gee, if I hadn't known any better, I would have thought that they were preaching for an online evangelist. Maybe hackers are just 1900 times better than Pat Robertson.
- passion
Good troll, dude.
Hacking is about learning. It's about getting to know how things work and make them work better. My parents always let me disassemble stuff around the house to learn how it worked. And they gave me computers to play with and to do things with. They knew the other kids and the teacher *supposedly* watching over us at the computer club were the *curious* kind, not the evil kind. It was great to have that patient mathematician to sit with us and teach us tricks, all sorts of things that made our life easier in *normal* school, and gave us the mindset to pursue scientific careers.
It is and always will be about learning to do things. Hacking, craking, white hat, black hat, security holes, etc., there's more to the world than computer networks, and programming is a nice mental exercise that prepares you for school and for work.
adapt
Theres a big difference between academic journals and 2600. One is research oriented, one is practical. you can't say you got more useful information from either one. that's a meaningless statement. If you want information on computer science ACM and IEEE would be more useful than 2600. If you wanted some immediately applicable information 2600 would be more useful. ASM is Computer Science, 2600 is not.
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
Wow, it amazes me that you could be so niave! (Good troll!)
There are two different types of 'hackers' out there: White-Hat and Black-Hat. The Black Hat hacker is the one that costs billions and trillions and gazillions of dollars per year of lost business. The White Hat hacker is the one that publishes security flaws (usually found on thier own test systems) thus allowing GOOD network admins to guard their systems against the Black Hat hackers...
You see, there will always be burglers out there and there will always be malicious hackers out there... this is a fact of nature. Without the properly skilled people out there to find bugs (buffer overflows etc) and security flaws; the network admins would not have the up-to-date knowledge of exploits to secure thier networks effectively!
Applying this to the ill-burgler scenerio that you made: This would be like many skilled burglers out there and you are trying to protect your home with open Windows! (heh... open Windows, get it?!)
My point is that we need the people with the Black-Hat experience to come over to the White-Hat side of things to help keep systems secure and the network administrators ahead of the game. Can you think of a better way of getting this accomplished?
Now, I agree with you that these 'White-Hat' hackers should not be exploiting flaws on other systems. This is illegal and should be dealt with accordingly unless this 'hacker' was invited by the owner of the compromised system for a security audit.
I can relate! The Anarchist Cookbook changed my life though...
I thought that it was going to teach me how to make home-made napalm and exploding lightbulbs out of bubblegum but instead it helped me find God!
Of course I am writing this because after finding God the ER techs got my heart started again....
What is a corporation but a group of people?
If it sticks in your craw so much, form a corporation and spend the money to protect your precious word.
No, really.
--
I think it's about time we, as a community, give this one up. It's tilting at windmills.
I still use "hack" and "hacker" in my normal speech, and sometimes have to explain, but I think it's time to turn off our --pedantic flags.
--
Incidentally, I noticed that Slashdot just escalated the banner war a notch. One of Slashdot's banners is 298 x 60, instead of the usual 300 x 60. That got it through size-based filters. Grr.
Are you talking about the same Washington Post that has demonized hackers for years?
I guess a blind squirrel DOES get an acorn every once in a while.
Now if the Post would just put the political commentary where it belongs, in the Op-Eds and leave it out of their reporting...
DanH
Cav Pilot's Reference Page
Cav Pilot's Reference Page
UNIX - Not just for Vestal Virgins anymore
The kid's father says "Without 2600 (he would) probably be one of those pot-smoking, crack-sniffing guys...
Read the article again. The kid (Patrick) said that, not his father (Michael):
But seriously folks, there are some pretty good books that are systematically being banned from our schools.
--
Wooden armaments to battle your imaginary foes!
Now I have to rush out and grab my copy of Huckleberry Fin, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings and Harry Potter.
--
Wooden armaments to battle your imaginary foes!
"
Security holes are only an issue because of the damn hackers. Hacker: 'Hey, we're helping you exposing security holes so you can fix them'. Dude: 'And why should we fix the holes?.' Hacker: 'Um uh. To protect you from us.' That's great isn't it. WITHOUT THE HACKERS THIS WOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE.
"
If everyone was nice, noone would have to avoid nasty people.
Security holes are only an issue if they can be discovered by someone with malicious intent. If someone without malicious intent discovers security holes and publicises them to get them fixed this is not a bad thing.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. (Einstein)
I only went to three meetings because the vibe was so weird. There were four or five groups of people who met sort of hesitantly together and were exceedingly paranoid about talking about much of anything. The only real lengthy discussion we had was at one meeting when it appeared that there was a guy in a suit watching us from a couple floors above and we were speculating as to whether or not he was FBI or Secret Service or something. I have no idea what the Seattle meetings are like now, but I'm going to have to bet that meeting quality varies quite a bit from place to place. I'm in LA now and haven't felt any great urges to show up at the place, even though a focus of my current work is network security.
I like the end of the article...
;-)
Asked whether they figured out how a way to thwart online banner ads, Watson said yes, they've concluded it's feasible.
But would they do it?
"Of course not," he said after a pause. "That would be illegal."
I think they forgot the "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" part that came after it though
--You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
I agree with the largest part of your reply, except for this:
"Security holes are only an issue because of the damn hackers. Hacker: 'Hey, we're helping you exposing security holes so you can fix them'. Dude: 'And why should we fix the holes?.' Hacker: 'Um uh. To protect you from us.'"
There are enough proven cases in which information, creditcard numbers for example, was stolen. I wouldn't be very happy if people broke into my machines, but I could live with it if I knew if it was only for the 'sport of it'.Unfortunately it happens too often that information is stolen, and therefore it is necessary to fix holes. I think it is a bit too easy to compare hackers with criminals.
Thanks to MP3, Silicon Valley cash, www.everyfuckingthingyouwantinporno.com and media hype over anything and everything to do with the Internet, it seems like things created by geeks have really done a number on society. The evolution of 2600 into semi-responsible corporate wannabes rather than Phiber Optik wannabes was expected, by me at least. When all is said and done, the more morally-ambiguous types will tend toward the path of least resistance, which these days, appears to be the corporate grind for the remnants of the dot-cash.
Just look at Think Geek. Hey, there's a lot of cool stuff there. But who other than a corporate flunky can actually afford any of it? Geeks have to be rich now, to stay geeks. We're being driven to it.
I guess I'll just have to stay at my community college support job until my contract ends, then contemplate surrendering my unfunded geekness. It's too expensive.
Either that, or I'll just have to start coding in C and work on kernel patches. Gotta do it old school.
My own pointless vanity vintage computing page
Ender's Game is usually on someone's shit list.
--
Dyolf Knip
Reading about underground technology is probably the most stimulating form of reading that I know of. Slashdot often deals with such a broad story range (.com funnies to extreme details about a complex emerging technology) and can often only cater to specific audiences (like today's jabber and UDDI stories), where as 2600's technical stuff is so watered down one can usually easily understand the basic concepts.
So, even tho it might be a simple magazine for simple minds and occasionally those that are prone to be idiots are idiots and try things in 2600, atleast the forum is there. They've always looked for writers, and I think Eric Corely is probably the last true old-media free-speach technology journalist.
----
1. Po' White Trash
2. One who cracks copy protection on software.
Hacker (noun)
1. One who cranks out program code in a ham-fisted manner to get things done, rather than follow rigid methodologies.
2. One who rigs things up to perform functions for which they were not designed.
3. One who circumvents security of external servers owned by others for the purposes of recreation and/or intellectual curiosity.
4. One who takes advantage of network and communications technology they don't own to make money by illegal means.
You may not agree with these definitions, but I don't really agree with yours... and more people agree with mine. Usage defines language, not vice versa. Sorry if that gets under your skin, but it's the way language evolves.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
People who hack code have been trying since the 80's to remove the label "hacker" from computer criminals. Unfortunately, people who break into systems have always called themselves "hackers", too, and are not interested in being re-labeled as "crackers". (Hence, 2600, which has always published info about breaking into systems and has never been about programming, calls itself "The Hacker Quarterly".
I can understand why programmers don't want to be lumped in with "Cap'n Crunch" and Kevin Mitnick, but the truth is that the whole hacker/cracker semantics debate is one that nobody else really listens to.
Bottom line, more than one group of people identify themselves as "hackers".
Look at it this way... suppose all those who are into communications and security said "no, we are hackers not you. the right word for programmers is 'packers'. please refrain from EVER calling a programmer a hacker."
Sounds silly and childish, doesn't it? It sounds the same way when programmers do it.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Yes, but it should not come as any surprise.
Any time you host meetings for hackers and open it to the public you are going to get a huge mix of posers, wanna-bes, curious observers, and maybe a handful of people who know their shit. The S/N ratio of the 2600 magazine is really horrible, so I would expect their meetings to be very similar.
So if you are looking for reliable information, it is not really the first place to go... But as a social outlet for the sort of kids that Jon Katz frets over professionally, it is probably a net good, posers and all.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
The conventional wisdom is that a good hacker can sometimes come in to a project not knowing his ass from a hole in the ground, and have a working product slapped together before a more regemented software engineer has even mastered the language syntax.
Of couse, he would also leave you with line after line of useless, undocumented cruft, but the business world occationally has one-off projects where that is good enough if it works.
This, of course leads to the type of hacker who breaks into systems. They often know nothing about the OS, the security issues, or even what sort of data is on the system they are looking at. Often times, it was found by random "war-dialing" (or the IP search equivelants these days). By "hacking around" (brute-forcing passwords, trying commands to see what they do, etc.), they are eventually able to get their barings. Hence, they are, in fact, "hackers".
In the context of computer lingo, the name "cracker" comes from the old term "safe-cracker". They open things for other people... such as those who make and distribute "cracked" copies of programs that normally have copy protection.
Remember folks, The Jargon File is not a definative final authority... it is just a sample of the agreed-upon jargon of a very, very small group of usenet chatters, (most of whom were big-iron mainframe grunts who apparently liked to spend their spare time talking about PDP systems). Their little world does not represent everybody, nor even all computer techies.
If you were to assemble similar dictionaries from Redmond, MIT, or Silicon Valley, you would probably find a lot of differences between them. (And I bet all three would accept both uses of the word "hacker", to the dismay of many people here).
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
In a corner removed from the rest of the group, Watson and another man were huddled together discussing what annoys them the most about the modern Internet--the banner ads. They were trying to come up with a way to "solve" that problem. They talk about whether it would be possible to intercept the ads and replace them with the words "Free the Net!" Or maybe the easiest way to make them disappear would be would be just to bring down the server computers for DoubleClick, the company that manages much of the Internet's advertising.
"If we could find a way to get rid of those ads for a week we'd be the heroes of the Internet," Watson said.
Just go to your client's (or better still, proxy server's) hosts file (C:\Windows\hosts on Windows,
Add entries for every server you don't want to connect to, i.e. ad1.doubleclick.com, etc. and point them to 127.0.0.1 (localhost). That'll time out extra-fast. Example here.
Alterately, you could block *doubleclick.com at a proxy server. Or you could put a proxy on your local machine (Like a content-checking porn filter), that checked all files with *.gif extension for banner proportions, then replaced them.
Blocking banner ads is easy. The question is: Would the benefit (whatever that may be) outway the problem of sites not being funded by advertising, and maybe changing to subscription, or closing. This is the real issue.
Michael
...another comment from Michael Tandy.
"Goodness me, how unlike the FBI to abuse the trust of the American public." -- The Onion
Okay, even ignoring momentarily the media reputation of everyone lumped into the category of "hackers," from script kiddies to Alan Cox, it's nice to 2600 of all people getting some good press.
Even though 2600 (the magazine) isn't what it used to be, 2600 (the magazine, the meetings, etc.) deserve some respect they never seem to get. I was sick of seeing 2600 bashed in Wired, even in /. comments for supporting Kevin Mitnick. Okay, yeah, he broke the law and deserved to get caught, but the treatment in his case was extreme, and you didn't see anyone else constantly reminding people that four years in jail without a trial or bail hearing is wrong.
Even igoring the Mitnick saga, 2600 provides a really great entry point for kids who've seen War Games and... okay, maybe today it would be (god forbid) HAckers, but you get the point. In the pages of that mag, people find out that you don't just guess a password and launch bombs, if you want to do things (even illegal things) you have to learn... a lot. I started learning everything I know now, from system security, to TCP/IP, UNIX, C, everything, because when I was 11 I wanted to be a kr4d 31337 h4x0r d00d. Hell, I used to type on BBSs like that... but by the time I learned how to write an IRC bot, I didn't have time to transpose letters in to numbers, so I had to remap the keyboard in my terminal emulator so I c0u1d 7yp3 a11 l337 w17h0u7 5p3nd1ng 51x h0ur5 534rch1ng 4 34ch k3y. So I learned things, even for the sake of being stupid.
And I feel like I owe a lot of this to 2600. when I found an old acoustic coupler, I took it to the local 2600 meeting to figure out how to rewire it to work with my built-in modem... I learned half of what I know about hardware there... Hell, I learned what a front-side bus was from those people.
So it's nice to see 2600 getting some good press, and to see the meetings described as something other than a bunch of lurking, black-clad teenage misfits in doc martens and 2600 t-shirts.
just my deux centimes.
telekon
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.
Recently, a federal judge in New York ruled that the magazine was guilty of copyright infringement for posting on its Web site some computer code that allows people to copy encrypted DVD movies. The magazine's editor, Eric Corley, aka Emmanuel Goldstein, has said that the publication of the program is protected by the First Amendment and is appealing.
DeCSS doesn't allow people to copy DVDs. That's always been possible, provided you can get a blank DVD and a DVD burner which aren't crippled with access controls. DeCSS allows people to use DVDs in non-approved, or non-licsened equipment.
There is a big difference, especially with the draconian restrictions placed on "approved" equipment manufacturers. I don't see why CSS is considered anything other than what it is, a way of making artificial trade barriers.
Oh, now I remember, it's because the mega-corps say it's an copy control mechanism. They're famous for their honesty to the consumer.
Steven
-- I have marked myself unwilling to moderate-- I don't have other accounts to artificially inflate the karma of
Psychology majors get into psych to find out what's wrong with themselves. I know it's an old wives tale but I think there's a grain of truth in it. I know some freshman physics majors who want to build rail guns.
I know that I, myself and several other chemistry majors got into chemistry so we could make drugs. I know how to make drugs now but I don't because I have a healthy respect for the process. It was so tempting to make amphetamine after learning gen chem but I knew I didn't have the skills quite yet. Now I have a great deal of time invested in my skill set and wouldn't illegally throw it away for a quick high. Most all the chem majors I know would agree with me. Gen chem gave us a healthy respect for what we were dealing with.
Now look at the script kiddies. As far as I'm concerned the damage they do is just as bad as cooking up amphetamine but leaving in the sodium hydroxide. However hackers who are attracted to the dark side at first are going to make better sys admins down the road because they understand the script kiddie mindset. If dreams of launching cavitating torpedos at your swim coach get kids into computing I say good for them. Hopefully by the time they figure out how to crack the ultra low frequency communication devices the Polaris subs use they'll also have learned some maturity and have respect for the skills that they've learned to get there.
I've hit Karma 50 and gotten a Score:5, Troll... I win!
If you want to learns to be a l337 h4xx0r, you need to get with the new DOS 4tt4ckz, root k1tz, etz. What's so wrong with planning to h4xx0rz a nuc-u-lar submarine to revenge-ify your gym teacher? I say it's good to have a goal.
To learns more about l337 h4xx04 things, clickz here.
If you want to get ahold of the best worm-writing software ever, click here.
I'm a computer professional who hangs out with 2600 (404), and I consider myself a hacker. Not in the 31337 c001 d00dz sense, which many people assume thanks to various sensationalist media PR. I play with computers and other interesting technical stuff, for both work and fun. I enjoy understanding the most obscure guts of technology.
I learn things that improve my skills in both my professional and personal life, and hang out with cool people. Yes, it's a bit like a "biker gang user group" and there are people I know are doing questionable things. There always are, at least there everyone is (mostly) out in the open about it and there is just as much talk about how to close security holes as how to exploit them. You can't have knowledge of one without the other.
After many years of picking up the occasional print copy at the bookstore, I finally live someplace I can go to meetings. You could say that I've been "in telecom" since high school when a buddy showed me this cool new toy he built, called a "Blue Box." Breaking into things just to be able to say so was never my thing, but it got me interested in how the telephone network works. Combine that with computers, and I found a lifelong interest and successful career.
And I do get a few cool points for being able to say that I make phone bills for a living. I've gotten more useful information out of 2600 than my years of ACM membership, another more respected professional organization in my industry. And it sure is a lot less boring
- Notice how the article (you read the article, right?) uses the word hack, with only a single exception, to refer to what you guys insist may only be referred to as "cracking."
- In Patrick's Roanhouse's words:With what he says is only slight exaggeration, he summed up his daily activities back then: "My mom thought I was playing Sesame Street Grover's ABC, but instead I was hacking into the Chinese government."
The word "hack" is routinely used to describe what you guys insist is cracking, the crackers refer to themselves refer to it as hacking and it's perfectly clear what, say, this guy was talking about. Bitching at him for failure to use proper Jargon File-sanctioned terminiology is unhelpful.He says 2600 taught him the "hacker ethic," a value system that attempts to define what's acceptable and what's going over the top in the digital world. That is, probing systems to learn about their vulnerabilities is okay as long as no damage is done, but flooding sites such as Yahoo, Amazon and eBay with fake packets of data to block legitimate users out is just plain stupid, Patrick said.
While I'm commenting:
Mike Godwin, former staff attorney of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, agrees: "There's no doubt in my mind that the clubs have done more good than harm, in that they've encouraged kids to develop their knowledge and computer skills."
underscores why I've never had much respect for the Wired/EFF/cyberrights axis. I just don't get how these people can drone on and on about privacy when they're clearly untroubled by, if not outright sympathetic to, *ackers breaking into systems where they're not allowed to be.
Unsettling MOTD at my ISP.
The geek subculture has truly lost its status as subculture, and is rapidly being assimilated into the rest of pop culture as a whole. We've all noticed it, some of us have said it, and I really wonder how many of us want it. Thanks to MP3, Silicon Valley cash, www.everyfuckingthingyouwantinporno.com and media hype over anything and everything to do with the Internet, it seems like things created by geeks have really done a number on society. The evolution of 2600 into semi-responsible corporate wannabes rather than Phiber Optik wannabes was expected, by me at least. When all is said and done, the more morally-ambiguous types will tend toward the path of least resistance, which these days, appears to be the corporate grind for the remnants of the dot-cash. Just look at Think Geek. Hey, there's a lot of cool stuff there. But who other than a corporate flunky can actually afford any of it? Geeks have to be rich now, to stay geeks. We're being driven to it.
Yours,
Bob
All the best,
--Bob
The press has it all wrong when they say a hacker made his way into a server and deleted it....
Hacker's distinguish themselves with Crackers.... You're thinking, and referring to, crackers. They're the ones who use a program designed and made for securing your own web server and use it to find holes and exploits...
That's where the difference comes in. It's the hackers that made Linux, and almost all of the software programs that you use. They hacked code and learned how computers and software worked. They then found a way around a problem and solved it. You should be thanking them....
Linuxrunner
www.slightlycrewed.com - Because aren't we all?
2600 Virginia Avenue, NW, Suite 100
Washington DC 20037
--
--hongpong.com
The kid's father says "Without 2600 (he would) probably be one of those pot-smoking, crack-sniffing guys who gave up on life a long time ago."
It's good to know that guy has high regard for his own parenting skills. Dammit! If my son didn't meet those hackers who would have raised him right?!
The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
I live in DC, and attend that meeting with some regularity (greets to Paul, Jake, et alia), and can attest fully to the nature of this article. The meeting has evolved over the last several years, along with the "dot-com" phenomenon, and has matured from mostly high school students to young employees of major tech and financial companies, where we work in security and programming positions. We still talk about what makes things tick and bizzarre projects (like programming GameBoys to do things they really aren't intended to do), but it's been somehwat transformed by the fact that we now all have outlets for our energies and skills. We're no longer rooting around for places to use what we know, and it shows.
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
This is the biggest load of bovine defacation I have ever heard. In Toronto where I am, 2600 meetings are a forum for good-for-nothing, nervous shut-in kids to showcase their carded $5,000 laptops running Windows98.
Once upon a time when I ventured to one of these meetings out of curiosity, I was asked by a punk-ass kid if I knew who he was. When I responded by asking if I had an obligation to, he responded by saying "You don't want to know me," no lead-up conversation beforehand. Laughter.
I'd been to one meeting and there was actually an entertaining speaker who went by the handle FruitLoops. He had some seriously interesting phone phreaking theories, among other things. He claimed to have hung out with Kyrie, the Canadian telco employee lady that got busted here for long distance fraud before making off to the States. There wouldn't have been any reason to doubt him.
The 2600 way is no longer the ideal source of subversive information. They're now a howto manual for dreamer, Mad Magazine-reading adolescents. The name "Acme" springs to mind.
ICEPHREAK
Toronto, Canada
It is really good to see some positive reporting on this subject. Alot of times, organizations like these are the only places a bright and slightly off-center kid can be accepted. It provides a good offset to the bullshit that a person like that will get in their public education institution of incarceration. With your computer group, being a "geek" is no problem, it's a solution.
Where's my lobbyist? Right here.
Let me just begin with how lame ass the 2600 meeting i attended was in Las Vegas. There was no measure of what the article was describing present at the meeting. What was present was wannabe high school posers. There was a small minority of what looked like educated people giving out free cd's, but the large majority was controlled by a mac user named freek (yeah i know, isnt that handle original?) Apparently he, freek, "controlled the meeting and dictates who can show up to the meeting and who is allowed in. Delving further into the social structure of the group found to be pointless. There was no structure. No exchanging of information, nothing of interest. Apparently, the mailing list administrator (you guessed it: freek) of the "group" removed a couple of people who apparently (gasp) objected to the style of the meetings. If you are reading this and you are one of the people who were removed, come to the next meeting. apparently, freeky is gone and there is talk about moving the meeting to a more convenient location.