CNN Says Chat Rooms Are a Haven for Hackers

MiTEG writes "CNN is carrying an article about IRC and how it aids "hackers" with their mischief. There are some alarming quotes from Bruce Schneier, CTO of Counterpane Technologies, such as "people who are anti-big-corporation are going to be more likely to use something like IRC"." Yeah, if they ever hung out in our chatroom, they'd lock us all up for abusing Kurt the Pope.

Comments

Also used by 'hackers'

[Raedwald]

And fresh reports say that 'hackers' also use e-mail, telephones and postal services. Shut them all down!

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[cmallinson]

Another recent study has found that a large majority of people found eating lunch in the CNN cafeteria are in fact CNN employees.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[grapeape]

According to 2600 alot of hackers hang out in mall food courts too...guess we should shut down those as well.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Archie Steel]

...except that the Govt. can already monitor e-mail (with Carnivore), phone conversations (with Echelon) and snail mail. So basically they need to whip up some way of controlling IRC as well, and CNN is only happy to oblige in preparing the national psyche for that (since AOL will make more money if people are forced to use corporate chat services). The sad thing is that, since 9/11, a lot of people seem willing to forego their hard-won civil liberties for security (or at least the illusion of).

This reminds me of two famous (and nearly identical) quotes:

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), Letter to Josiah Quincy, Sept. 11, 1773.

Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.
-- President Thomas Jefferson.
1743-1826

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Mark Pitman]

...except that the Govt. can already monitor e-mail (with Carnivore), phone conversations (with Echelon) and snail mail. So basically they need to whip up some way of controlling IRC as well

All they need to do to monitor IRC is login...

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Archie Steel]

I know...but they're concerned that they won't be able to trace back the comments to their author (I guess).

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[-brazil-]

The difference is that since IRC channels are basically public, monitoring them is both easier and no violation of civil rights.

BTW, another quote:

There is no freedom without security.

-- Wilhelm von Humboldt

Total freedom means survival of the strongest and least scrupulous and those valuable to them, i.e. mainly the freedom to be robbed, raped, murdered and suppressed. The ideal is to find a balance between freedom and security.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Cynikal]

damn someone beat me to the obligatory sarcastic comment..

but really, when i see this kind of malformed "cause-effect" aproach to analyzing anything, i wonder how man managed to invent the wheel...

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[blibbleblobble]

Ask GRC, he write an IRC-bot to do investigations, so maybe echelon is using a version of that.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[EddydaSquige]

And don't forget the recent studies that show that in 100% of armed convience store robberies, the criminal gained access via the sidewalk. Think of the danger that sidewalks pose to home land security.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[kiwaiti]

Who had that IP at that time? Bingo.

It's especially easy 'cause they'll be staying online for a significant amount of time.

Kiwaiti

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Buck2]

It only took one man to invent the wheel.

Everyone else probably threw rocks at him afterwards until someone else realized they could steal the wheel, make a wheelbarrow, and then dump even more rocks on him.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[jedrek]

So basically they need to whip up some way of controlling IRC as well.

To read *any* message on a typical IRC network you need access to this many servers:

One.

The way IRC is constructed each message goes to every server, so it's a no-brainer.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Stskeeps]

I'd like to disagree to this, referring to RFC1459:

If there are multiple users on a server in the same
channel, the message text is sent only once to that server and then
sent to each client on the channel. This action is then repeated for
each client-server combination until the original message has fanned
out and reached each member of the channel.

Same with PRIVMSG's, they only travel through the servers on the route from the orgin to the destination. It would be truely bandwidth waste to send all messages to all servers.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Florian Weimer]

The difference is that since IRC channels are basically public, monitoring them is both easier and no violation of civil rights.

IRC channels are public, but you can only monitor a channel if its messages are routed through your server. The only reliable way to ensure this is to join it, and law enforcement people do not want to do this because it would announce their presence in the whole IRC network.

Server access is another problem. Most servers are collectively administrated. Who shall be notified of the wiretapping effort?

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Florian Weimer]

All they need to do to monitor IRC is login...

No, it's more complicated. People are interested in silently monitoring IRC, and this is a bit more complicated.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Eccles]

Total freedom means survival of the strongest and least scrupulous and those valuable to them, i.e. mainly the freedom to be robbed, raped, murdered and suppressed.

Au contraire.

We live in a world of absolute freedom. We just choose to use that freedom to form governments to prevent the unscrupulous from abusing others.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Erik Fish]

There is no security on this earth. There is only opportunity.

-- General Douglas MacArthur

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[WowTIP]

And the channels they want to monitor are probably not that easy to join either, one might guess. Of course they could force some ircop or something like that to grant them access, but that would make the users of the channel very aware of their precense. And there are also ways to encrypt your irc chats, I don't really know how heavy the crypto is, but it would probably make their job a little bit tougher.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[zer0*ryok0]

all they gotta do is make some cool vhost like

agent99@i.just.hax0red.the.fbi.gov

or if your into long hosts

bgates@microshaft.sucks.and.so.does.the.fbi.gov

and everybody would be none the wiser

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Kafka_Canada]

The sad thing is that, since 9/11, a lot of people seem willing to forego their hard-won civil liberties for security (or at least the illusion of).

The sadder thing is, this war is purportedly being fought for our freedoms, and the government seems to think the best way to secure our (hard-won) civil liberties is to start by taking them away.

Although they have been pretty clever about it: a war against an invisible, intangible, unmeasurable "enemy" (terrorism) is an invisible, intagible, unmeasurable war -- in other words, there is never a time when they have to/can declare victory and drop the pretext of fighting terrorism, and thus there is never a time when they have to give up the gradual rescinding of our liberties "in order to guarantee our security." How is this fighting for freedom?

Of course, while it's clever, it's hardly original. Pretty reminiscent of the never-ending wars fought in 1984; Big Brother's rhetoric's not even far off from Bush's, and the declared purposes of the wars are likewise pretty similar.

Oh well.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[4of12]

And fresh reports say that 'hackers' also use e-mail, telephones and postal services.

Arrgh!! Why'd you have to tell them that?

Please, please don't tell them that "hackers" eat M&M's and drink coffee!

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Cynikal]

hehe most likely

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[arnie_apesacrappin]

Snip (Archie Steel):

This reminds me of two famous (and nearly identical) quotes:

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), Letter to Josiah Quincy, Sept. 11, 1773.

Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. -- President Thomas Jefferson. 1743-1826

Well, it seems that Attorney General John Ashcroft doesn't agree with two of America's great founding fathers. He was quoted as saying, "To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: your tactics only aid terrorists."

I'm sorry John, but here, you are the terrorist. Don't persuade me or anyone else to give up my freedoms to make your job easier under the guise of making the world a safer place. To calmly allow you to take my rights is the first step onto a slippery slope that I don't even want to know the results of. I won't quit using IRC, I won't give up my private keys, and I will continue to protect my right to say and hear what I'm constitutionally allowed to. If you want to take my rights, try to change the first amendment. Until then, in the spirit of Monty Python's The Life of Brian(I know they're not American, but it's the best quote I could think of), "piss off!"

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[sugrshack]

uh huh. right. that will work.

as if anyone in those rooms will actually say anything publicly if someone they don't know is in there.

remember, one can always whisper.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Archie Steel]

There is no freedom without security.
-- Wilhelm von Humboldt

To which I'll add: "There is on peace without justice."
--Peter Tosh, Reggae Singer

Total freedom means survival of the strongest and least scrupulous and those valuable to them,

Actually, that is a logical fallacy, since total freedom also means freedom to live - "total" freedom, as in "optimal" freedom would mean that everybody shared the same freedom without infringing upon other people's freedom. The balance is delicate, I'll give you that - but it isn't between freedom and security. Rather it is between everyone's freedom. Of course we also need to discuss what types of freedom: obviously, no sane society will condone freedom to perpetrate crimes against other people (because then it would negate those people's own freedom). We can stick to the basic freedom that every human should have, amongst which are the classics (freedom to live, freedom of speech, freedom of movement), and everybody will be just fine. However, with that freedom comes some risk that people will use it to do bad things. That is just something we have to accept: limiting everyone's freedom because of inherent risks is not an acceptable solution.

All right, that's enough typing of the word "freedom" for a single day!

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Archie Steel]

Hmm...of course I meant "There is NO peace without justice."

And I triple-checked for typos, too...

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Z4rd0Z]

Of course, while it's clever, it's hardly original. Pretty reminiscent of the never-ending wars fought in 1984; Big Brother's rhetoric's not even far off from Bush's, and the declared purposes of the wars are likewise pretty similar.

That's absolutely true. We've had some kind of "war" going on for a long time. I first remember it with the bombing of Libya in the 80's, but I'm sure it goes back farther. It's typically not an officially declared war, but rather some kind of foreign conflict with a purpose that is unclear. The "War on Terror" appears to be designed to last for a good long while yet. That ought to keep the minds of the masses from being occupied with Real Issues for the next decade.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[smannell]

You know what? I'll bet they all eat bread too. Obviously, it is the bread that is causing them to be evil 'hackers.' We need to stop letting people get corrupted by eating bread.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[56ker]

Who had the IP at that time?

Ever realised that computer's clocks aren't always accurate? hmm?

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[AndroSyn]

But, if you install monitoring software on one or more hub servers, you lose. Its trivial to monitor irc servers, *if* you know what you are doing.

We've (hybrid-ircd) team have ways of doing it already, but we don't hand out that code, as it is just for debugging purposes...

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[SAFH]

Hrm... Burn Karma or post AC...

Since the late 90's, the US Govt (Specifically the NSA, CIA, and NRO) along with other govts have showed increased interest in IRC. The original problem with monitoring IRC was the ability to correlate the packets (through Eschelon, JID, misc. sniffers) to the handles, DCC sessions, and misc. queries. Once scripts were established to correlate time stamps, and do active session recreation/replay the data was a bit more reliable, however there were large gaps in the data where netsplits occurred, or handles changed, dynamic IP's, etc. Since running analysts through abstract sessions of data was counterproductive, the data was dropped. So in public channels, bots and live agents (*cough*analysts*cough*) were placed to idle and log, however groups started catching on to the idlers and kicking, in addition, since all of the operations were done w/o the knowledge of IRCops, K-Lines started being put up and times got a bit harder.

So starting in late 2000, when reliable/substantiated information started comming across about possible Electronic Warfare, under cover company names, IRC servers started getting funding and/or being provided by agencies with an active tcpdump w/ ssl netcat (or scheduled ssh dumps depending) running on them (yes, that simple) which was then reprocessed and sessions recreated through a series of parsing scripts and dumped into databases that track handles, IPs, session data, keyword recognition (including handles, group names, and a series of acronyms/extensions), along with the ability to grab code snippets.

OPN, DAL, IRCNet and EFNet all participate in monitoring, EF and IRCNet remain the least cooperative, DAL and OPN actively participate and support the process. LiloFree, SuidNet, Conclave, and others are extremely difficult to track, however have their faults.

I won't get into IM protocols since we all know the inherant problems. AOL has not been entirely supportive of US Govt efforts to setup monitoring devices, however the Time Warner side of AOL/Time Warner has been a bit more agreeable. ICQ/Mirabilis gave in a -long- time ago, LICQ over SSL is great though.

The quotes below are great, however in times like these, the famous line "Do not disclose, sources or methods" from our spook friends applies quite well. Reply to:

...except that the Govt. can already monitor e-mail (with Carnivore), phone conversations (with Echelon) and snail mail. So basically they need to whip up some way of controlling IRC as well, and CNN is only happy to oblige in preparing the national psyche for that (since AOL will make more money if people are forced to use corporate chat services). The sad thing is that, since 9/11, a lot of people seem willing to forego their hard-won civil liberties for security (or at least the illusion of). This reminds me of two famous (and nearly identical) quotes: They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), Letter to Josiah Quincy, Sept. 11, 1773. Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. -- President Thomas Jefferson. 1743-1826

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[BrookHarty]

next they'll publish the findings of a multimillion dollar study that concludes that hackers tend to use computers.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[SparafucileMan]

I doubt AOL has anything to do with it. If you remember, CNN regularly employs a small division (corporate, not military) of U.S. Army Psyops people, you know, the guys that are supposed to brainwash and mislead the BadGuys. They (CNN) regularly tows the U.S. Administration's line, all too happy to report or not report things as the military sees fit. The news in this country has been biased for quite a long time (say, 70 years at least), so this isn't anything new.

There are some reports here, here, and here. A general thing from the military is here. I don't have time to find a more radical critique, as I'm in the middle of class.

My opinion though is that the executives are lying concering what they knew, it just isn't feasable that top corporate executives wouldn't at least gets a little wink wink from their secretaries or whoever. They may not have encouraged it, but they certainly acquised. The U.S. military has a long tradition, at least since the perpetual wars we've been fighting since Vietnam (read your history books, we've been in constant war since WWII), of actively manipulating the domestic press to suit its own purposes. In addition to active maniplation, they lie constantly in press briefings. Whether they have a good reason to do this, I have no idea, but they're certainly not acting like the Constitution decrees.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[tetro]

The world's greatest hackers all communicate through IRC because it's epitome of stability.

Crap articles like these just make me cringe since only a fraction of the IRC users actually "trade" SS#'s, CC's, and steal identities. If the author would write another article on telephones, I bet he'd discover that telephones are havens for stalkers, phone sex operators, psychics, and telemarketers.

I suspect some writer had a quota to fill and chose to blow something out of proportion.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Alzheimers]

Of course, while it's clever, it's hardly original. Pretty reminiscent of the never-ending wars fought in 1984; Big Brother's rhetoric's not even far off from Bush's, and the declared purposes of the wars are likewise pretty similar.


...Every time I see a picture of Osama, I start my "Two Minute Hate"...

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Mortanius]

Maybe it's just my anti-hysterical nature that doesn't mesh well with slashdotters, but could someone point out to me where in the article they explicitly said the Feds were going to try to shut down IRC networks?

Lesson for the day kiddies: You can't fight battles by putting words in someone's mouth. It just shoots you in the foot.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[jafac]

. . . preceeded by about 20 years by:

"A man that would sacrifice his freedom for security deserves neither. The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time."
-Montesquieu, The Rights of British America

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[ameoba]

It's not that hard to watch IRC. Simply stick a bot in there to record what's said. It's not like anyone would really notice ANOTHER idle motherfucker.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[mother_superius]

We are at war with Afghanistan; allied with Russia. We have always been at war with Afghanistan and allied with Russia.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[TheOnlyCoolTim]

When someone's on for several hours or whole days at a time I don't thinky you need to worry that much about the accuracy of the server's clock.

Tim

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[TheOnlyCoolTim]

/server foo.net
/nick l33td00d
/join #hackerz

Activate Logging.

No one will notice another idler....

Tim

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[fferreres]

They don't need that. They can just monitor with a sniffer, and that's how are doing it already. IMHO, it's kind of naif. Yes, they will get johnny pirate, and joe "LeTz NuKe BueNos AirEs", but they won't get the real terrorists / hackers down. Just the pigeons, not the hawks...AS ALWAYS...

In the meantime, you won't be able to say "I love you" in a private chat without Agent Smith knowing about it...

NOCK NOCK!

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Fat Casper]

The sadder thing is, this war is purportedly being fought for our freedoms, and the government seems to think the best way to secure our (hard-won) civil liberties is to start by taking them away.

This war is being fought entirely for our freedoms. It's a shame that Al Qaeda was able to spark a war between a population that doesn't much care and a big government run by big government assholes. Yes, it's President Cheney and John Ashcroft vs. us, and our self evident, inalienable rights are the prize.

Call me crazy, but I don't understand this. If these folks are so pro-small government, why are they doing everything they can to increase the government's interference in our lives? Or are they only small government when it comes to the capital gains tax and the highest income tax bracket?

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Idimmu Xul]

This reminds me of two famous (and nearly identical) quotes: They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), Letter to Josiah Quincy, Sept. 11, 1773.

I expect noone will read this If im lucky i also expect to be modded down as flamebait, which is utterly not the intention.

But.. p. we sold out be having organised institutions e.g. government/police that can tell us what to do anyway.. Im not saying one more is a good thing (and in this case it certainly isnt) Im just saying people continuously shoving that crap quote in our faces it completly shit, as we already live in that world.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[BgJonson79]

My favorite --

Live Free or Die

On my state's (NH) license plates ;)

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[spacy]

They're not really pro-small government - what they want to is to shrink the parts of govt that they don't like, like social security, welfare, etc. They don't consider what those agencies/programs do to be what the government is supposed to be doing.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[AndyChrist]

especially on Efnet.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Florian Weimer]

No one will notice another idler....

For some channels, this assumption is false. IRC is used for coordinating illegal activities other than cracking computers.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[hkmwbz]

I believe some or most IRC servers are "protected" against eavesdropping, or it is simply not possible. Not even an IRCop or admin can listen in, unless the server has been compiled with support for this.

Believe me - I've seen many a person with an o-line participate in channel wars, and if they could spy on users and channels, they would have. They have an o-line, but still want to be channel ops, or help their friends get their channel back :)

This would mainly be on networks without channel services, of course.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Decimal]

This reminds me of two famous (and nearly identical) quotes:

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), Letter to Josiah Quincy, Sept. 11, 1773.

Define "essential liberty" and "little temporary safety". The two are so mallable that it's easy to use that quote to nourish one's own bigotry. Once a person has mentally mashed the saying in their head enough to agree with it, they stop thinking of the other viewpoint as someone who wants to be safe, but as the enemy who doesn't deserve any safety. And besides the fact that someone who would give up essential liberties for safety is already willing to forefit safety, I think anyone would be hard pressed to find any justifiable reason to put someone in danger for their political beliefs on how society should be run.

Here's a thought exercise: Do you as readily agree with the following?

"Those who would give up an essential element of human safety to gain a trivial liberty deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[cburley]

Pretty reminiscent of the never-ending wars fought in 1984

But different from the never-ending, vastly expensive, and internally divisive wars started by FDR, LBJ, and others against poverty, against unemployment, against racism, against drugs, against pr0n, and so on?

At least Bush admitted up-front it would be never-ending and expensive, unlike other Presidents when they launched, or relaunched, most or all of these other wars.

And I admit I'm not 100% up on which of my rights have been taken away as a direct result of the War on Terror. I'm still stunned that my 1st-amendment rights have been directly attacked by Congress and Bush as a direct result of the War on Supposedly Too Much Money In Politics, aka "The Incumbent Protection Act", aka "Campaign Finance Reform", so maybe I just haven't paid attention to the other.

But of all these wars, the only one I'm reasonably certain is better fought by the US federal government than by citizens employing their own intelligence, rights, and compassion, happens to be the War on Terror. And, so far, it's a lot less expensive for me, less intrusive on my rights than those other wars have been, as far as I can tell. (Note that I distinguish between rights I have and rights I actually exercise; even rights I never wish to exercise, I desire for myself and others, to be able to choose whether to exercise.)

I'd rather the US government fight the War on Terror than leave the general population to do as it sees fit with the Arab Muslims in its midst (not to mention those who just happen to look like Arab Muslims, like Arab Christians, Indian Sikhs, and so on).

But I'll admit that, at this point, I can't really tell that it's a War on Terror anymore, so much as a War on Politically Unpopular Terrorists. Oh well.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm at work today, so I don't have access to my signon. You can verify this by asking me at lilo@openprojects.net via email.

OPN has never been approached to help some government agency monitor our content. I can't imagine a situation in which I would find that acceptable. Anyone who knows the ircd protocols knows we cannot prevent Carnivore boxes from sniffing them, but that's another issue.

We are currently running dancer-ircd-1.0.31+maint8, and you can find that source code at http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~aps100/dancer/dancer-ircd / .0/releases/ . What you see is what we run, and if we find out a sponsor has put in intrusive code, they'll be delinked. If we find that a sponsor is sniffing private traffic, they'll be delinked. We have and use the capability to tell what users are on our servers and what users are on our channels; we use the information to do our jobs and keep it as confidential as possible. And, if you're on a channel and we think the channel might be off-topic, you may see us there regardless of +i or channel key. You'll see us as a visible client presence, since our server code contains no provision for invisible presence on a channel.

We do not sniff private messages. Anything else you hear is a distortion of the facts, at the very least.

Thanks,

Rob Levin
Head of Operations, Open Projects Net
"Open Source, Open Technology, Open Information"

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Any_User]

FWIW I've talked to Rob and verified this as true.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Scott Robinson]

I too received the Wallops message on carter.openprojects.net. It seems to be the real deal.

Anyway, I wonder if it would be possible to put end-to-end encryption on OpenProjects links?

I realize that they just went through a rather massive server upgrade, but with talk of Carnivore I wonder if wouldn't be reasonable...

Scott.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[neV3RMINd]

unfortunately encryption takes up more bandwidth.
as all openprojects.net servers are hosted voluntarilly, it most likely would not be feasable from the bandwidth usage standpoint. but it should be taken into consideration that IRC has NEVER been secure. If you dont want other people to be able to hear/see information, dont use IRC.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Archie Steel]

Here's a thought exercise: Do you as readily agree with the following?

"Those who would give up an essential element of human safety to gain a trivial liberty deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Define "essential safety" and "trivial liberty". You're just trying to relativize away a great quote. I personally don't go for that post-modern bullshit, so excuse if I don't participate in your petty linguistics.

The fact is, since time immemorial demagogues have often scared populations into giving up freedom by pointing to an imaginary and/or impotent enemy or other kind of menace. Remember McCarthyism? Now, the right to privacy is an essential liberty. After all, if you're talking to someone, you don't want someone else to eavesdrop, do you? Even if you could be planning some evil act. And so in order to protect some basic fundamental freedoms (freedom of speech, of movement, of privacy, etc.) we also must accept that some may abuse those freedoms in order to harm others. Just as the fact that Democracy, by giving power to those who get the most votes, does carry within itself the seeds to its own destruction: the people could vote for an anti-democratic party who, given a large enough majority, could replace democracy by a totalitarian regime. Anyway, many fascist regimes are quite popular when they first come into power...and yet democracy is the best system we have (or try to have...I don't know of any real democratic countries around...)

About your sig: why exactly do you support the brutal humiliation and slow destruction of a people who are so mad with despair that young girls spontaneously decide to blow themselves up out of rage? Don't you think that violence begets more violence, and that Israel's aggression will only perpetrate the pain and suffering this region has known for more than a generation? I think you need to look beyond the propaganda...

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Decimal]

Define "essential safety" and "trivial liberty".

That was exactly my point. Glad you caught it.

You're just trying to relativize away a great quote. I personally don't go for that post-modern bullshit, so excuse if I don't participate in your petty linguistics.

Yes, I'm happy to "relativize away" quotes that send a if-you-disagree-with-me-you-deserve-to-be-shot message by paring them down to what they really are, just like I would ruin a good barbeque by pointing out that the guests are being served the neighbors' recently-vanished canines. If you're drawn to the barbeque by the smell and enjoy the meat that's fine, but if you take a better look you might find that you're not as hungry as you thought. People use this quote by Franklin when they are trying to sound intellectual -- and this quote is somehow "ruined" if you try to think it through? Is that what you consider post-modern?

Notice that I never said that we (I'm in the U.S.) don't deserve those rights. The liberties provided by the constitution are essential to maintaining a free-thinking democracy. I only said that I don't agree that someone deserves to have their safety taken away or to be stripped of all of their liberties if they were to vote differently at the polls than you.

As for the Israel thing, I'm not going to start a flame war with you. You already ignored the rest of my sig* -- and assumed that you understood why I believe the way I do. Hence, I doubt you would readily listen to any "propaganda" I would respond with. Huh... Interesting that you call the actions of one side acting with rage out of desperation, but you label the second half of the hurtful cycle as simple aggression.

(*Signature tends to change by the week.)

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Archie Steel]

Don't worry, I'm not into flame wars. But I am outraged at the fact that the american media constantly describes Palestinian attacks as "aggression" while Israeli attacks are called "retaliation". I'm outraged that these attacks, which destroy innocent lives on both sides, are called "terrorism" when perpetrated by civilians and "collateral damage" when done by soldiers. I'm outraged that the two sides are judged as equal partners in the conflict when one has the most powerful army in the region (the fourth largest in the world) and the other has no other weapons than a few old assault rifles and makeshift bombs. I'm outraged that Sharon, responsible for the massacres at Sabra and Chatila, is now seen as "a man of peace" by Bush when he is only interested in furthering the war and increasing illegal settlements in the occupied territory. I'm outraged that the majority of people in Israel and America don't understand that you can't eliminate terrorism by humiliating and oppressing an entire population, and that in fact it has the opposing effect of radicalizing moderates - even William F. Buckley understands this! If your father had been killed by the people that occupy your land, if they beat up your younger brother in front of you, if they harassed you, prevented you from going to work, flattened your house, arrested you without a warrant and stripped you naked in the middle of the road, wouldn't you want some kind of retribution? I'm outraged at the lies of the Israeli military, who say that the monks in Bethleem are held hostages by the besieged palestinians that took refuge in the Church of the Nativity, when those very monks have said that they are staying behind of their own free will to avoid a bloodshed. I'm outraged at the policy of targeted killings adopted by the Israeli government, which is an insult to the rule of law because (among others) of the high risk of executing an innocent - Tim McVeigh got a trial, didn't he?

Israelis have the right to live in peace, but not to oppress another people to achieve this. Sharon's military initiative will not bring peace for the simple reason that two wrongs don't make a right. The whole world understands this, save for Israel and the U.S. (where the media nearly all have a pro-Israel bias). Sharon is now thumbing his nose at George Bush, who is losing is war-earned prestige by the minute - what has all this brought back to the U.S., save for the animosity of the arab world and the embarassment of allies? Sharon does not respect the U.S., he only appreciates the military help - twice last week, he defended the behavior of his army by implying that the U.S. army in Afghanistan killed civilians indiscriminately...are those the words of a staunch ally?

As they say: with friends like these...

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Archie Steel]

Yes, I'm happy to "relativize away" quotes that send a if-you-disagree-with-me-you-deserve-to-be-shot message

Well, you misinterpreted both my post and the original quotes, if I may say so. The meaning of the quote is that when people start putting more value in safety than in liberty, things can (and often do) go down pretty bad. Look at it this way: totalitarian regimes are usually pretty safe - as long as you tow the party line. Crime was almost nonexistent in the Cold War-era U.S.S.R. But dissent was severely punished. So people were safe, but not free.

I only said that I don't agree that someone deserves to have their safety taken away or to be stripped of all of their liberties if they were to vote differently at the polls than you.

Now where the hell did you get that from? You're blatantly distorting my words - I am a true democrat, and would never advocate such a thing. I'm insulted that you would give me such intentions and appreciate it if you could apologize.

On the other hand, I understand where you may have misunderstood the original quote. I think it has to do with the word "deserve". You automatically conclude that, when Franklin or Jefferson say that those who would sacrifice freedom for security do not deserve neither, that they are advocating that such freedom and security be removed from them: they are simply making a moral observation. Like someone who receives a gift but doesn't deserve it: you can state that fact without advocating taking the gift away. I'll give you another (partisan) example: I can say that Bush didn't deserve to win the last election, since he got a lesser portion of the national vote than Gore. That doesn't mean that I'm advocating his overthrow (though I'm sure President Chavez of Venezuela would say that he was responsible for his own demise... ;-) Or, I could say that "A Beautiful Mind" didn't deserve to win the Oscar for Best Picture - but I wouldn't support an overturn of the decision!

There is a subtle distinction here, I hope you can understand it.

People use this quote by Franklin when they are trying to sound intellectual[...]Is that what you consider post-modern?

I wasn't trying to sound like an intellectual (I've got my own website to do that!), I just put it there because I like it. I think it's a really good quote. I did think it through, and I still think it's a great quote. I personally think that you have simply misunderstood its meaning. The post-modern thing is a reference to many people I know who just take the meaning out of everything by excessively relativizing it (it usually boils down to "but, what is life?" or worse "but, what is art?"). That's trying to sound intellectual.

Re:Also used by 'hackers'

[Decimal]

>Yes, I'm happy to "relativize away" quotes
> that send a if-you-disagree-with-me-you-deserve-to-be-shot message

Well, you misinterpreted both my post

I made no interpretation about any of your own words. My comment was about the quote and my goal was to get people to think about what it really means.

and the original quotes, if I may say so. The meaning of the quote is that when people start putting more value in safety than in liberty, things can (and often do) go down pretty bad.

No, the quote means exactly what it says: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Look at it this way: totalitarian regimes are usually pretty safe - as long as you tow the party line. Crime was almost nonexistent in the Cold War-era U.S.S.R. But dissent was severely punished. So people were safe, but not free.

Yes, extremely unfortunate living conditions.

> I only said that I don't agree that someone
> deserves to have their safety taken away or to
> be stripped of all of their liberties if they
> were to vote differently at the polls than you.

Now where the hell did you get that from? You're blatantly distorting my words - I am a true democrat, and would never advocate such a thing. I'm insulted that you would give me such intentions and appreciate it if you could apologize.

*sigh* You seem to have an overactive sense of self-defense. I only made statements about how people interpret Franklin's quote and that I don't agree with it's real message. Please re-read my initial analysis of the quote. I have no intentions towards you one way or another. (However I did notice that you briefly placed me on your Slashdot "foe" list.) Still, if you wish an apology anyhow for anything I said was the least bit offensive to you, perceived or intentional, you officially have it. Just don't slap me with a white glove or challenge me to a duel. ;)

On the other hand, I understand where you may have misunderstood the original quote. I think it has to do with the word "deserve". You automatically conclude that, when Franklin or Jefferson say that those who would sacrifice freedom for security do not deserve neither, that they are advocating that such freedom and security be removed from them: they are simply making a moral observation. Like someone who receives a gift but doesn't deserve it: you can state that fact without advocating taking the gift away. I'll give you another (partisan) example: I can say that Bush didn't deserve to win the last election, since he got a lesser portion of the national vote than Gore. That doesn't mean that I'm advocating his overthrow (though I'm sure President Chavez of Venezuela would say that he was responsible for his own demise... ;-)

You make a good point, one that I shall have to contemplate. But regardless of whether someone who says another deserves something would actually act on it if they had the unhindered power, the quote still has the mentality of "If you disagree with me, you deserve to be locked up." Or shot. Or both.

Remember, I live in the U.S. There are many people here who would be happy to see such a moral judgment made policy. I'm sure you can understand my reaction given my interpretation of what that quote really means. It does not seem to me to be too far from any other malicious judgment, such as "No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots".

> People use this quote by Franklin when they
> are trying to sound intellectual[...]Is that
> what you consider post-modern?

I wasn't trying to sound like an intellectual (I've got my own website to do that!), I just put it there because I like it.

Sorry, people tend to do so. I see I will have to be very careful with my words so that you don't think everything I say is about you. Going back to my barbeque analogy, I personally see this as similar to "I eat the meat because I like it." And there's nothing inherently wrong with that, nor with quoting something because you like it. But considering the subject and presumably logical tone of the quote, I think the quote should be dealt with directly on it's own level. So I'm happy to put the words through the hurtles to see what it really means and how people really interpret it.

I think it's a really good quote. I did think it through, and I still think it's a great quote. I personally think that you have simply misunderstood its meaning.

As do I you.

The post-modern thing is a reference to many people I know who just take the meaning out of everything

But you see I am not trying to remove any meaning. I'm attempting to clarify the quote's meaning.

by excessively relativizing it (it usually boils down to "but, what is life?" or worse "but, what is art?"). That's trying to sound intellectual.

Nah, I'd attribute that level of solipsism to watching "The Matrix" one too many times while smoking pot. ;)

I'm not aware how long it will be before this thread becomes unalterable, but you may contact me at my address through the website.

This is news?

[colindiz]

Why is this news? Of course hackers hang out in IRC. You know what, so do crackers. And so do other people.

NEWSFLASH: The sky is blue.

Re:This is news?

[arnie_apesacrappin]

To badly quote Norm MacDonald, "Breaking news from the scientific journal DUH!"

Other places hackers hang out:

• malls
• coffee shops
• schools

CNN might want to investigate these places as well. Inside sources from CNN also tell me that these things called "newsgroups" exist. Appearantly, these "newsgroups" allow people to exchange "news", which according to CNN sources is a "code word" for "illegal activities", and is a new sweeping trend in the scary hacker underworld.

Also, staring at the sun can cause blindness.

Re:This is news?

[richardbowers]

I thought the only people on IRC were FBI agents pretending to be 14 year old girls. There are hackers there, too?

Re:This is news?

[Fulcrum of Evil]

I thought the only people on IRC were FBI agents pretending to be 14 year old girls. There are hackers there, too?

Yeah, there are also 14 year old girls pretending to be FBI agents.

Re:This is news?

[llamalicious]

Pardon me. But my colorblind friend says the sky is a medium gray.
He can't understand blue, or what possible uses that color has on a day to day basis.

Likewise, the people out there coming up with these "notices" are technology blind.

So if we couldn't trust a colorblind person to paint your house, how can we trust technology-blind legislators and other political reps to make the right decisions or statements on our behalf...?

Time to get out the voting stick.

Re:This is news?

[zentigger]

Actually there are only FBI agents pretending to be hAx0rZ...

Re:This is news?

[Lonath]

Why is this news?

Remember, the RIAA was *SHOCKED* a month ago to hear about these things called ".zip files" that let people take an ****ENTIRE CD**** and put it into ONE file and COMPRESS it so it can be sent PEER TO PEER over the INTERNET.

OMFG, IRC??? Are you NUTS? Why would they know that that is? Wait till they hear about "anonymous ftp using a CLI" that lets people steal things WITHOUT EVEN USING A BROWSER OR A GUI! Do you understand? They can steal things without using any pictures. They'll have to learn all of this arcane technology to even realize how badly they're getting ripped off! And the worst thing is that the only people who understand this shit are the very people they want to lock up! They're Scr00d!

Re:This is news?

[generic-man]

Hackers do not hang out in malls. Because hackers have no legitimate source of income, they can only purchase goods and services using stolen credit card numbers on the Inter-net.

Hackers do not hang out in coffee shops, since they eschew coffee in favor of Mountain Dew (non-Canadian version).

Hackers have all been expelled from their respective schools for subversive computer-related activities, such as hacking.

Newsgroups are used primarily for "flame-wars" (which is a hacker term to describe the practice of systematically destroying a user's e-mail box through consistent "flame" mails) and for the distribution of copyrighted materials without their authors' consent. I am currently in talks with the management of this alleged "Use-net," and will likely require that all use-net users provide proof of identity prior to use.

Re:This is news?

[slackergod]

You never know, it could be true...
Such fabrication is an established government practice and all.

Then again, is that just what they want us to think?

-Slackergod

Re:This is news?

[Jaysyn]

I'm glad I know you're just being sarcastic.

Jaysyn

Re:This is news?

[zaffir]

Somehow i doubt that most 14 year old girls know that IRC exists, let alone what it is and how to use it. AOL's chat rooms are a much better place to find them.

Re:This is news?

[Grax]

But she said she loved me and that age shouldn't matter.

Re:This is news?

[diverman]

Just in the last week (maybe two), I saw on TechTV and also on the regular news something being referred to as "Drive-by hackers." They were referring to people who used 802.11b enabled laptops to break into people's networking, including businesses.

Looks like we need to shut down the roads too.

-Alex

CNN is quality media

[timothy_m_smith]

In this age of watered-down single source media, this article is about par for the course. It's hard to believe that the bulk of American's accept CNN as a reliable media outlet.

Re:CNN is quality media

[ryuuzin]

Hey, when you really want some un-biased, quality, even, news reporting, you can't get much better than CNN... or Fox News... or MSNBC... *ducks and goes to watch BBC; they may have their own bias but at least it's not American*

Re:CNN is quality media

[boglebud]

The only viable solution is to turn to online news from alternative sources, perhaps the BBC, etc

Forget the BBC. Their online tech-news, in particular, can be so bad it makes the CNN report look positively professional.

Why are so many tech reporters on the major news services such numb-nuts?

Re:CNN is quality media

[linzeal]

Who the hell gave the limeys computers? We want are univac back please post haste please, thank you.

Re:CNN is quality media

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, Fox News is rather unbiased (at least, when compared to MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, etc.).

Fox News is not unbiased, they are simply biased to the right instead of to the left.

Re:CNN is quality media

[MaxVlast]

Biased in the direction you prefer is different from unbiased.

Re:CNN is quality media

[MaxVlast]

Mr. Babbage and Mrs. Lovelace might be surprised to read your post.

Of course, they'd be surprised by a CRT. Let alone TCP.

Re:CNN is quality media

[Brandeissansoo]

Actually the news section of Fox News is very unbiased, however, the opinion shows have a slight lean to the right. Even though these shows, like O'reilly and Hannity and Colmes always still have the opposing view, which is more than I can say for CNN. Remember the presidential debates? They gave Gore 56% of the split screen...not noticeable, but just enough to be subliminally slimey

Re:CNN is quality media

[0x0d0a]

The BBC's website kicks the shit out of CNN's. They've got a nice low graphics version.

I stopped using CNN for my main news source in favor of BBC (well, and Google Headlines) some time ago. CNN is really awful.

I thought it was kind of funny at the time, how many people who live in the US are using the BBC because most of the major US news sites are bad.

technews.com is where I go for tech business news, though.

Re:CNN is quality media

[Tet]

Fox News is not unbiased

Living in the UK, I've never seen it, and so can't comment directly. However, I used to work for News Corporation (who own Fox), and I can assure you that not a single word of their combined media output is unbiased...

Re:CNN is quality media

[cryptor3]

While this is definitely not news to anyone in the /. crowd, you have to step back into the real world some time and realize that most people have never heard of IRC. For the general public, this isn't breaking news,
but rather a CNN lesson in computer literacy.

Yes, it's somewhat alarmist in emphasizing the illegal activities of IRC, but then again, isn't most of what goes on on IRC probably illegal in some form or another?

But of course sarcasm is always fun for /.ers.

Re:CNN is quality media

[Shadowlion]

Biased in the direction you prefer is different from unbiased.

That's true, but let's put it this way: Fox News actually presents _both_ sides of the story before putting the news corporation's spin on the story.

The bias of places like CNN, as well as the Big Three networks is readily evident because they don't even _give_ the other side a hearing. When was the last time you heard the phrase "left wing conspiracy" on CNN? And how many times you have the phrase "right wing conspiracy?" Chances are, you're probably _never_ heard the former, but you're all too familiar with the latter.

Re:CNN is quality media

[kneeo]

fox news in fair and balanced. You are just used to the news leaning towards the left that anything in the middle is right to you.

Re:CNN is quality media

[hex1848]

CNN == "Communist News Network"

Re:CNN is quality media

[SplatFileGoo]

CNN=Conservative Network News

Ever notice how most of the internet stories on the tube help the parent company? Gosh, in this case, that would be AOL and it's AIM/ICQ alternative to IRC.

Or how about two weeks ago on nbc's The West Wing where they made fun of net forums (I think they snipped the words "slashdot" from the transcript).

Re:CNN is quality media

[Rogerborg]

• It's hard to believe that the bulk of American's accept CNN as a reliable media outlet

Hey! I'm a bulky American, and I'm outraged to read about all of these damn paedophiles and junkie hackers and what not stealing my credit card using this RCI. In fact, I'm going to write my Congressman and demand that... ooh, a squirrel! Heheheheh! They're so cute.

(In other words, don't sweat it. This too shall pass.)

Re:CNN is quality media

[Jaysyn]

In other news, use of IRC has gone up 4000% in the days following our last story....

Jaysyn

Re:CNN is quality media

[BaconLT]

I'm not sure if you understand what you're looking at. It's virtually impossible to present information without bias. Reporters are people, ever hear of body language?

But, beyond that, FOX NEWS, CNN, whatever... Whoever controls the flow of information controls the multitude.

Whether or not you want to believe it, even Slashdot presents information with bias.

The biggest difference, it seems, between news with bias and news with balance, is whether you agree with it. Right?

Re:CNN is quality media

[BaconLT]

CNN=Conservative Network News

Does this mean that when the internet and the hacker culture has been in the mainstream media for 40 years, they'll defend it as "the old way?"

Re:CNN is quality media

[Shadowlion]

How is this a troll?

Re:CNN is quality media

[Grax]

Australians don't have an accent in Australia and news agencies aren't biased if they agree with me.

Re:CNN is quality media

[jerdenn]

CNN=Conservative Network News

CNN is hardly known for it's conservative bent. Their reporting is rather leftish, in fact.

-jerdenn

Re:CNN is quality media

[NumberSyx]

fox news in fair and balanced. You are just used to the news leaning towards the left that anything in the middle is right to you.

Or Fox New is biased towards the right, but because you are also on the right, to you, it appears to be "Fair and Balanced".

Re:CNN is quality media

[mother_superius]

There's no such thing as not having a bias; people generally interpret supporting the status quo as a lack of bias, and something original as biased.

Re:CNN is quality media

[kneeo]

The news casts are fair, the other shows are right leaning.
The election coverage was extremely fair.

You dont watch O'Reilly and expect to not see any bias.
You do watch the 5:30pm(cst) news on CBS, NBC, ABC and expect to see fair reporting and you dont.

More and more people are watching Fox, so they must be doing something right.(bad pun)

Re:CNN is quality media

[dajalas]

But all of the mentioned news organizations are biased toward statism rather than individual liberties.

There is no right or left. Those are artifical political divisions used to separate natural political allies.

There is only the climb to freedom or the fall to tyranny.

mandatory response

[Hadlock]

ahem (dons flame proof suit)...

in other news...

water wet
microsoft bad

Re:mandatory response

[Cleon]

"But I didn't wipe, and didn't enjoy it."

Re:mandatory response

[jo42]

Microsoft wet bed

Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[Rentar]

Criminals that want to organize any criminal actions are known to use the telephone system to communicate!

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[bareminimum]

No, they actually sit in cafes, bars, restaurants and other public places and ... TALK.

Brought to you by citizens for a mute and honest society.

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[ReelOddeeo]

Criminals that want to organize any criminal actions are known to use the telephone system to communicate!

Criminals wanting to conspire to commit criminal action are known to sit in corporate boardrooms in closed, secret conferences.

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[warpSpeed]

$parent =~ s/corporate boardrooms/congressional hearing rooms/g

hmm, seems to work that way too.

~Sean

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[Stonehand]

And yet another poster who needs to be beaten with a cluestick -- badly.

Here's an analogy that you may, possibly, be able to understand.

Phone system::IRC talk::Napster.

Phones only help you when you know who exactly to call. IRC provides more of a forum, which will help when you don't precisely know who to contact -- and when you'd prefer that those who you contact won't know exactly who YOU are.

So, frankly, your post is a bunch of hogwash in its "slippery slope" implications.

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[Rentar]

And yet another poster who needs to be beaten with a cluestick -- badly.

Thanks for this nice quote. Ditto.

What I meant is "Pretty usefull and widely used communication facility (Phone system)" <-> "Pretty usefull and widely used communication facility (IRC)".

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[Stonehand]

Still no comparison. In case you didn't notice, the article isn't calling for banning of IRC, or labelling IRC as all bad. It's merely stating that, for the purposes of identity theft and related frauds, IRC is a common choice of medium -- which it is, depending on which channels you frequent. And it's far better for that than the phone system, for reasons which are clear to anybody who stops to think.

Now, unless you can show that IRC is NOT providing a forum for such activities, your post is, for all practical purposes, useless.

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[rhizome]

Now, unless you can show that IRC is NOT providing a forum for such activities, your post is, for all practical purposes, useless.

Yet another poster who needs to be beaten with the cluestick...badly. You can't prove a negative.

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[Score Whore]

You can't prove a negative.

Prove it.

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[hoggoth]

>> You can't prove a negative.
> Prove it.

HAhAhAHA! Got'cha! Someone with a wand-of-modding please mod this up!

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[sporty]

You leave Enron alone! :)

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[maxpublic]

And really, so what? "IRC bad"? Ooooh, yeah, guess we have to ban it, or monitor it, or make people easier to track because it *might* be abused by certain individuals.

This sort of logic is the haven for control freaks, the sort who equate anonymity with illegality. Next thing you know some moron will decide we all need to be implanted with a chip because freedom of movement without observation *might* be used to pursue criminal activities....

Max

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[jacrawf]

Whoa, I parsed that wrong. You wrote "corporate boardrooms" and I read "corporate bedrooms". But, I guess that is just the most appropriate place for all different kinds of fucking...

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[Rentar]

[...], your post is, for all practical purposes, useless.

Oh! You've come to /. for usefull comments/posts? My bad, sorry to disappoint you ...

On a more serious note: the Article is giving the impression that IRC is bad, 'cause it is a pool of crime and nothing more. It tries to give the impression that IRC is not used for constructive things (see irc.openprojects.net) or just plain fun (see any other IRC network). Of course I don't think that CNN or any big company will report anything else about this "anti-big-company"-medium, but I think this article is at least as useless as you think my comment is. Thanks for listening.

Re:Telephone System A Heaven for Criminals

[mpe]

In case you didn't notice, the article isn't calling for banning of IRC, or labelling IRC as all bad. It's merely stating that, for the purposes of identity theft and related frauds, IRC is a common choice of medium

If it was actually about identity theft and fraud shouldn't it make just as must fuss about telephones, post and face to face meetings.
How about systems which make identity theft easier or more damaging. Most especially abuse of such things as SSN's and driving licences. IIRC some US states have even passed laws mandating driving licence abuse.

This Just In...

[KingKire64]

The Internet is a haven for hackers, Terrorists, and pedofiles... Tom Ridge, Chief of Home land security says we must destroy it NOW. In other news Alcolism is directly reatled to computer use.

paper tiger

[avandesande]

It seems like the credit card thing is a paper tiger bandied about by corporate news sites to inspire fear in people about the internet. I don't know of anyone who has had credit card numbers stolen or traded on the internet. Usually card theft happens when people simply lose their cards(in meatspace).

Re:paper tiger

[trickydisko]

About 6 months ago, around 1500UKP was deducted from my credit card account fraudulently. The withdrawals took place in Turkey - somewhere I've never been or bought from. My cards were never lost, and I've only ever made a couple of transactions using them over the phone, but I'd used them to buy many items online. It seems reasonable to guess that my details were probably stolen on the net.

These things do happen!

Re:paper tiger

[Takeel]

Boy, oh, boy...you must be relatively new to the Internet.

Here's just one example of organized credit card fraud on the Internet. Some software piracy groups have *entire segments* dedicated to credit card fraud. They even have a name for these folks: "carders." They'll "card" a laptop, CD writer, etc. for you, and find a way to get it safely received. Many of these folks have huge lists of names, addresses, and credit card numbers that often come from compromised websites.

It's happened to me before. Luckily, I caught it, and I learned from my mistake. I've found a way to help defend against this kind of attack.

Everyone should think about using one-time-use credit card numbers when making purchases from anyone over the phone or Internet. Several credit card issuers offer this feature. Here's an example of one of them.

Re:paper tiger

[trickydisko]

I'm not sure McDonalds even accept credit cards ;)

Seriously, I can't remember anyone taking my card out of my sight for anything I've paid for.

Re:paper tiger

[Takeel]

It's happened to me before. Luckily, I caught it, and I learned from my mistake. I've found a way to help defend against this kind of attack.

I should clarify that I mean that it was *my* card that was stolen; I did not receive "carded" merchandise.

Because of our American climate of lawsuits and accusations, I felt the need to post this addendum.

Re:paper tiger

[Wansu]

I don't know of anyone who has had credit card numbers stolen or traded on the internet.

My wife bought CDs in November '99 from CD Universe. Her credit card number was apparently one of the ones displayed on that Russian hacker's website when he tried to get CD Universe to pay a ransom. CD Universe notified her bank. My wife's bank called her to tell her they were cancelling that card and sending her a new one.

Re:paper tiger

[gl4ss]

i just remember them(warez groups) requestin CALLING CARDS most of the time, which then were used for expensive calls to far-away people..

Re:paper tiger

[Effugas]

Bruce just answered the very legitimate question, "Why do hackers tend to congregate on IRC instead of, say, chat rooms on Yahoo and AOL?"

Well, how would you reply?

Bruce never implied for a moment that IRC should be shut down because that's where all the hackers are, he simply pointed out that it was a system more suitable to the technocultural aspects of the seedier parts of hackerdom -- which, of course, it is. So too is Linux, so too are home-built computers, so too is a distaste for your average sitcom. One can observe that without arguing that Linux, non-Dells, and Dharma and Greg-free homes be raided.

--Dan

Re:paper tiger

[Jaysyn]

Umm, hasn't IRC been around much longer than both of those other meduims?

Jaysyn

Re:paper tiger

[mpe]

My cards were never lost, and I've only ever made a couple of transactions using them over the phone, but I'd used them to buy many items online. It seems reasonable to guess that my details were probably stolen on the net.

Actually the most likely possibility is internal fraud from your credit card issuer. Or someone getting hold of the recipt from any transaction.

Re:paper tiger

[Effugas]

Entire generations joined the net *after* ICQ, AIM, and Yahoo. People deliberately are avoiding the "newer" tech.

--Dan

IRC aids hackers???

[Tuxinatorium]

Well, in the same sense, penises aid rapists, so let's make a law forcing everyone to get castrated!! That makes as much sense as dissing IRC!

Re:IRC aids hackers???

[eno2001]

>> Well, in the same sense, penises aid rapists, so
>> let's make a law forcing everyone to get
>> castrated!!

Even women? Cool... I wanna see that.

Re:IRC aids hackers???

[Traser]

The last time I checked castration has little if anything to do with the penis.....

In other news...

[serps]

• Political rallies are suspected to harbor dissidents
• Pilots found to utilise aircraft in situations where they could crash them into buildings
• Taxi drivers transport people around without identification, aiding terrorism.

You know, sometimes, reporters just have to get a grip.

In other words...

[HiQ]

"It's older, it's not tied to Microsoft or AOL or a big company, it's one of the Internet protocols ... so if you're running Windows or Linux or Macintosh or another flavor of Unix, you can use it," says Schneier. "So it's not that it's more suitable for hackers to use, it's just a more basic service and people who are anti-big-corporation are going to be more likely to use something like IRC."

In other words, just trust the big companies and none of this would ever happen???
This guy has got to be joking!

Re:In other words...

[ealar dlanvuli]

At least the editor appears to have had half a brain and put a explination at the end. That article was slighly disturbing. It basically says, people with information to share, use a forum for shring information in order to share it.

Re:In other words...

[Rentar]

In other words, just trust the big companies and none of this would ever happen???

Even worse, he's doing his job for AOL. Do you really think that the main goal of CNN is to inform the people?

Re:In other words...

[zaren]

So, nobody uses AOL chat rooms (real chat rooms, mind you, not those wacky IRC "chat rooms") to trade info on pirated software, or 0-day dvdz, or anything like that? The corporate Internet sites are pure and pristine, and devoid of any unsavory elements of society? Well, boy howdy, sign me up!

What a steaming pile of dreck.

Re:In other words...

[HiQ]

You mean, it isn't ???

Re:In other words...

[Michael_Jarvis]

In other words, just trust the big companies and none of this would ever happen???

I don't think that was either the Schneier's point. I think Schneier was just pointing out the obvious.

If I am not mistaken, AOL has always monitored and censored their chatroom conversations. As a corporation, AOL has the ways and means to control the whole process. With IRC there is not any centralized control--someone can be running an IRC server in their dorm room, specifically FOR illegal activity, and there's nobody for the Fed's to subpoena, since they probably won't even know about it.

All Schneier was saying is that it's a no-brainer for the criminal types to use IRC instead of some sort of proprietary corporate communication method.

Re:In other words...

[origin2k]

I believe you are inferring more than was stated. Schneier is trying to make the statement that any forums of anonymity are susceptible to unscrupulous activities. Large companies like AOL etc. probably keep a copy of all online transactions for just this reason. No one may be checking them, but they could be used for an audit trail if something is needed later.

I don't think Schneier's comments are alarming either, but I guess that is one way to get people to read the editorial you are posting about.

Re:In other words...

[jeffy124]

(note: i am a former AOLer. at the time, they were the only ISP with a dial number that was local)

AOL does indeed monitor chatroom conversations, but not all at once, and you know when they're being watched, as a screenname "Guide####" appears in the list of people there. In addition, if someone's causing a ruckus, a Guide can be "paged" or someone can submit a TOS violation report, and they'll investigate.

Likewise, for IM conversation (ie, one-to-one conversations), someone can send a TOSV report, and AOL will investigate. But that's only for their ISP users (people that pay for the service), not AIM users.

My guess is that either all conversations are logged and purged after like a day or so, or a snapshot of the conversation is made when a report is filed.

Re:In other words...

[zer0*ryok0]

i dont know how it is on AOL now

but when i used 3.0 upto.. i think 5 or somthing

aol had to be THE easiest place to get warezed goods.

if you wanted somthing inparticular you went to any of the server rooms, if you wanted a goodie basket you went to the mass mail rooms.

you never had to wait in line, just opened your mailbox and downloaded the attachments.

and once it was in your mail it was just as easy to serve it back to everyone else.

Re:In other words...

[maxpublic]

And freedom of movement could also result in the pursuit of criminal activities...freedom of speech can be used to plan criminal activities, or incite others to enact them...

Guess we should just ban all these things, or at least monitor them on the off-chance that they *might* be used to break the law.

Max

Newsflash

[Proaxiom]

It seems hackers seeking to pass information use a convenient communication mechanism.

Astonishing.

Wow, what bullshit . . .

[cjpez]

I used to work for a company that actually used IRC. We had a bunch of geographically-diverse locations, and we needed to be in near-constant communication with them, so we just set up an IRC server and that was that.

Ah, what fun we had with bots . . . We had a bot to talk to our phone list database, a bot to page people, etc . . . Grand fun.

Re:Wow, what bullshit . . .

[morgajel]

I feel the same way. My college uses IRC for their senior project to communicate with a school in sweden.
This is a good example of how decent uses of technology will be blacklisted because some stupid reporter didn't do his homework.

His implication that it aids hackers shows he himself has never experimented with it. I use IRC on a daily basis for help with iptables, html, linux in general, kernel compilation, etc. At my last job, I used IRC to help me learn ASP(don't laugh- it was completely foreign to me).
He should have interviewed the people over at irc.debian.org or undernet.
better yet, he should have made the interviews over the phone and HELD them in IRC.

Re:Wow, what bullshit . . .

[danny256]

I've been on IRC for a while and from what I've seen the bulk of it is piracy and porn. I know there are some legitimate discussion groups but lets not kid ourselves here, IRC is not exactly innocent.

Re:Wow, what bullshit . . .

[maxpublic]

So we should ban or monitor IRC because of this?

Max

Re:Wow, what bullshit . . .

[Grax]

Well if you were looking for piracy and porn you probably didn't spend much time looking for semi-intelligent conversation.

The horror!

[lunenburg]

IRC! And the telephone! And email! And public meeting places! And printers! And the postal system! They all help those nefarious "hackers" do their evil work!

Jesus Christ on a bicycle. Communication is communication. They talk about IRC being hard to track, but I'm sure that at a cursory glance, most other forms of communication can be, too.

Sensationalism at its best. Take a subject that the common person may not be very familiar with, like IRC, and you can spin it into any kind of world you want.

Re:The horror!

[tenman]

okay because these are obligitory

• "hackers" vs. "crackers" - they should get it right
• In the same way that guns don't kill people, chat rooms don't breed crackers.
• Everyone uses chat rooms (for other illegal comminications

Re:The horror!

[0x0d0a]

IRC is about the easiest to track form of communication I can think of, actually.

So hackers hang out on IRC. No shit. Most techies hang out on IRC at some point or another. I suppose CNN reporters don't generally do so...

Re:The horror!

[bleckywelcky]

Good point. Maybe people actually kill themselves by not breathing/not pumping blood/etc when they are shot... Then again, heh.

Shocking!

[TheLocustNMI]

this just in -- dancefloors, bars, other public settings rumored to be HACKER FREE!

Re:Shocking!

[ethereal]

...not to mention pretty much any place that's out in the Big Blue Room :)

Teenagers=Hackers?

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess if you consider Hackers 13+ teenage boys looking for Internet girlfriends hackers...

anti big corporations

[bsDaemon]

That comment does make sence. You don't have to pay for it. There are no advertisements like with AIM. You don't get random crap sent to you like with ICQ. But I wasn't aware that not liking unsolicited solicitations made me even more l3et0 than before.

Re:anti big corporations

[Archie Steel]

Well, don't you know? If you're not using 100% big corporations services such as AOL, then you're anti-big corporations and are a commie and a terrorist. Please report yourself to the authorities to serve as cheap prison labor.

While we're at it, why don't they just go ahead and just take money right off from our paychecks...soon it will be illegal to give something for free! It's hard not to become cynical in the face of such corporatism - at least they had the honesty of reminding us that AOL/Time Warner is the owner of CNN.

Re:anti big corporations

[Gaijin42]

It IS illegal to give away most things for free. (at least giving it away, without someone paying taxes on it).

Its just that most things the tax would be $0.00001 so nobody bothers.

Re:anti big corporations

[Gaijin42]

There is an exemption for up to $10,000 of gifts per year per person. (The total value of gifts, or value of services rendered needs to be less than $10,000. If it is more, then the recipient pays income tax)

Also, trades are covered under barter rules. (in an exchange of goods, somehow both parties profit, and both get to pay income taxes. There are special IRS forms if you do alot of work via barter.)

Also, everything you sell on ebay counts as income too.

Re:anti big corporations

[Grax]

Interestingly enough, it is legal to give sex away for free while selling it is illegal.

those quotes....

[jeffy124]

i suspect the quotes from Schnier (sp?) were eitehr taken out of context or he didnt know what they were going toward.

i read the article yesterday (tried submiting it too, rejected) and the article was anti-IRC right from the start. Kinda like Phil Zimmerman's "guilt" over PGP dabacle with the Washington Post last September following the terror attacks.

basic thing to remember: the media is always biased, no matter how much they say they arent.

Re:those quotes....

[GrenDel Fuego]

It is taken out of context. I'm still not a big fan of what's being said, but it's not as bad as it was depicted above.

"It's older, it's not tied to Microsoft or AOL or a big company, it's one of the Internet protocols ... so if you're running Windows or Linux or Macintosh or another flavor of Unix, you can use it," says Schneier. "So it's not that it's more suitable for hackers to use, it's just a more basic service and people who are anti-big-corporation are going to be more likely to use something like IRC."

He's saying that someone who is anti-big-corporation is more likely to use IRC which isn't controlled by a big company than AIM, Yahoo Messanger, or MSN. Not that anti-big-corporation people are more likely to use irc than pro-big-corporation people.

Yes...

[VistaBoy]

...and remember, any time someone says anything, it's a haven for radical ideas. Perhaps we should just cut fingers and vocal cords at birth so nobody can do anything illegal.

Admission of guilt?

[purplebear]

Computer security expert Chad Harrington regularly surfs Internet Relay Chat (IRC),

So Mr. Harrington is a hacker himself since he regularly surfs IRC? And who "surfs" IRC anyway?

IRC is a good forum for any groups. Just as mailing lists and newsgroups.

These people that come up with these theories have too much time on their hands.

Retarded

[Anonymous Coward]

People who hang out in bars are more likely to be convicted of a DUI. Therefore we should close all bars.

People who own a gun are more likely to shoot someone. Therefore we should ban all stores that sell guns, such as K-Mart.

People who smoke are more likely to die of lung cancer. Therefore we should close down all 7-11s because that's where people sometimes buy cigarettes.

While it may be true that "Many people who are hax0rs use IRC", that in no way indicates that the converse is true. I realize I dont' have to tell you all that, but who else is there. I am sick of so-called "experts" spouting ridiculous notions.

Spend some time on irc.enterthegame.com. It's a server for people who play online games. Shocker, not too much hack talk going on here; just typical clan nonsense, all in good fun.

Re:Retarded

[Genom]

Many people who are "hackers" wear clothing. Therefore we should outlaw the sale of such items.

Many people who are "hackers" consume food products. All businesses which sell food products, therefore, need to be closed down.

Many "hackers" rent apartments or own homes under a mortgage. Allowing this is unforgivable, and we need to outlaw the practice of renting or mortgaging immediately, as it is contributing to the problem.

=)

Re:Retarded

[anti-snot]

Well, perhaps if you had more guns in circulation the IRA wouldn't have to resort to messy bombings and Sid Vicious' girlfriend would still be alive.

Re:Retarded

[mpe]

Ummm, speaking as a resident of a country with hardly any guns (England) maybe if you didn't sell so many

Except that making anything illegal is hardly a barrier to criminals getting hold of it. If someone is seriously considering shooting people they are unlikely to be detered by not being able to get a legal firearm to do so.

FUD

[Michael_Jarvis]

In my opinion this CNN article is merely FUD material--Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. It's just gloom and doom about those "wild hackers" on that "crazy unregulated Internet".

Even if IRC went away, the net-criminals would find some other way to trade information. Just because some people are trading unlicensed software and credit card information on IRC doesn't mean that EVERYONE on IRC is doing that.

Regardless, I wouldn't be surprised if the Feds were working on a bot that would look for suspicious activity in a particular channel. If I were given their task, that's what I would do.

blah

[Vodak]

The Wild west of IRC... BANG BANG! do what does that make IRCops?

heh

[SnAzBaZ]

erm, I think that's rather pathetic, IRC is just a convieniant communication medium. You don't get people complaining that mobile phones or pagers are aiding criminals?

Re:heh

[Palarran]

>You don't get people complaining that mobile >phones or pagers are aiding criminals?

I've certainly heard those arguments.

Go back a few years and anyone wearing a beeper was likely to be a drug dealer. Add an alternative skin color, and you could be sure they were. National news reports that cell phones (specifically the pre paid type) are used by organized crime and other unsavory elements because they make it very hard to track the offender?

say it after me......

[Anonymous Coward]

once the hacker "has that information and wants to sell it, often they'll go to a hacker chat room, a place on the Web using an Internet Relay Chat which provides them some anonymity and allows them to mention that they have this personal information and they want to trade."

The Web is not the Internet...The Web is not the Internet...The Web is not the Internet...The Web is not the Internet...

Re:say it after me......

[zer0*ryok0]

betcha cant say that ten times fast :P

thepope.org slashdotted?

[hamsterspeed]

It's looking like Taco's found a new way to harrass Kurt...

Need

[KDENCE]

That is what I need for IRC to be shut down! What's next Napster? OH CRAP!! Napster is already gone. What the heck? I have to get a life now or wait any ideas where else I can get a whole bunch of junk for free and be able to hang out, play trivia, and chat with fellas that are just like me?

If they try to shut down IRC, I am gonna have to write a letter to someone, cause I ain'y gonna be happy!

"Entertain the Brutes"

Re:Need

[mvdwege]

That is what I need for IRC to be shut down! What's next Napster?

That's even funnier when you realise that Napster was based on IRC in the first place. It was basically a big IRC server with a search engine on top of it.

Mart

MS OSs are used by hackers !!!

[da5idnetlimit.com]

As platform for Spoofs, exploit, originating attacks.

Also, one "Exchange" software has been now and then used to commit major DoS and virii propagation.

As long as we are at this, lets observe the IIS case, for this "software" (sorry for the hacker term) disseminated worldwide by an obscure corporation, is indeed the major host platform for all hackers in the world.

Now we know the way to the first step in eradication Computers security problems !!!

LETS BAN IIS AND ECXHANGE !!!

Yours faithfully

Joe Knobblehead

Re:MS OSs are used by hackers !!!

[slakdrgn]

Don't forget, a lot of "l33t hax0rS" use AOL and Windows, we must rid of them ;)

I'm not a pureborne linux nut, but hell, I think the world would be a better place, atleast without AOL ;))

NewsFlash

[KingKire64]

AOL is for Idiots... I love Generalizations

Selective Reading

[ackthpt]

If you want to see something, you will. It's called 'predisposition'.

Chatrooms, in the news over the past years, have also been a haven for:

People sharing interest in pretty much everything you can find in alt.* and rec.*

Pedophiles

People meeting each other legitimately and socially

Terrorist plots

The future of Slashdot

It's just another red herring for the media, the biggest news for the New Yahk media is a big drought in Delaware, so guess what they dig up to shock Mr. and Mrs. Average American. Big wh00p.

Re:Selective Reading

[oyenstikker]

You forgot one:

News media hosting chats to appear high-tech

Re:Selective Reading

[ackthpt]

Insightful comment, but can you leave out the regional patriotism, or shall i say, hatriotism?

Hatriotism? What is that?

I suppose this is a bit offtopic, but I can't help but notice some of the anti-NY rhetoric on /. There IS a world in New York apart from your vanilla-flavored corporate idiocy. In fact, you've just slandered an entire hacker community. [mrbrklyn.com] And did libertarian Greenwich Village just disappear off the map? Yeah, it's pretty much off topic, but that never seems to stop anyone. The anti-NY rhetoric is your predisposition, you might ask yourself if the Rev. Al has had too much of an affect on your level of sensitivity. As for your assumption of Idiocy, slander and the relevence of The Village, you're probably very NY-centric and wouldn't understand the following joke:

Q: Why do people from Maine to Hawaii watch the evening news?
A: To see what's happening in New York

Wherever a media outlet's headquarters, they've all got their eyes and ears in NYC, after that it seems to be Washington, LA and then pretty much everywhere else. Probably doesn't seem that obvious a slant when you're from one of those places, but you might question why people who live 3000+ miles away, don't know who the local mayors are, but the media has made readily available all the dig on who's mayor of NYC and what he's just done or said, coast to coast.

Re:Selective Reading

[TheOnlyCoolTim]

He bet he did, and he enjoyed it!

Laugh or cry?

[larry bagina]

That "journalist" deserves a +5 "funny" or a -1 "watched too many h@x0r m0vi3s"

Web chat is a solution

[famazza]

One of the solutions for this problem is webchats. Webchat can be done using http and a web browser, all the functionality becomes controled by web frames inside the browser. No information can be retrieved besides the ones avaiable.

Of course that there are plenty of disadvantages, the speed is one of them, but I think that is acceptable so we can increase security.

Other option is modify IRC protocol to avoid these security flaws, this would avoid speed problems, and maybe is the more intelligent thing to do. But, will new IRC clients/servers implement the new protocol.

IMHO the new protocol, whatever it would be, http or new irc, should not be compatible with the old one, so we enforce the change, and avoid further problems.

What are the other options?

Re:Web chat is a solution

[imipak]

What are the other options?

The other options include "don't try to fix something that isn't broken." This is pretty much the standard 'slow news day' Internet horror story which CNN|the BBC | Fox | Time |whoever comes out with once or twice a year. Identity thieves use IRC. Film at 11. The problem that needs to be fixed is the ease with which people's IDs can be stolen, thanks to lots of personal data being stored on various insecure systems. I mean, you know, there are people out there buying things over the web using Visa cards from IE, to webservers running IIS... sorry, folks, Billy was lying: Windows (well, Win 9x), and IE/Outlook/IIS are NOT safe at any speed.

Incidentally, did every get a good laugh from today's announcement of no less than EIGHT new IIS holes? Lo,they are mostly present in the current version; and lo!(too), they were mostly(all?) discovered by OUTSIDE researchers, not Microsoft programmers on their month of 'intensive security auditing' their existing codebase (*giggle*)

Re:Web chat is a solution

[Takeel]

What are the other options?

While we all know that webchat is the most secure medium known to information security (and that's why the NSA has all of their teleconferences via Yahoo! Chat) here are several other options:

- Have a set-top box dedicated to Internet chatting. After all, it's not IRC, so it's got to be better, right?

- You've heard of IP-over-avian...add a messaging protocol and you can have chat-over-avian! Isn't that great?

- We all switch back to directly dialing up each other's computers via modem. If you use your Little Orphan Annie decoder ring, imagine the advantages over IRC!

Re:Web chat is a solution

[Kintanon]

Here's a solution for you, piss off. None of the people who USE IRC care about the security of the protocol. Snoop all you want, who cares if you know everything I ever said on IRC? The X bot probably has a log of 90% of everything that's been said on Undernet. We use IRC because it's fast and we can find lots of people quickly without any trouble. Anyone can start a new chan to talk to their friends in. It's simple, it works well, we like it. So stop trying to fuck with it. There's nothing wrong with IRC. It doesn't need to be changed. Piss off.

Kintanon

Re:Web chat is a solution

[X_Bones]

Sure, webchats may be a great thing, but I'm unclear as to what you think they're the solution for. The problem the article discusses is selling someone else's personal information over IRC, not using IRC to steal that information.

The only real solution that I can think of involves universal encryption and a good dose of common sense (and we all know the percentage of people possessing just one of those qualities, never mind both).

Re:Web chat is a solution

[Geek In Training]

This is pretty much the standard 'slow news day' Internet horror story which CNN|the BBC | Fox | Time |whoever comes out with once or twice a year. Identity thieves use IRC. Film at 11.

In the US, this is typically scripted as:

"And tonight, we have a report that you won't want to miss... it might just save you or a loved one from a financial nightmare. Online hackers stealing YOUR credit card numbers?!? Stay tuned for tonight's report..."

Re:Web chat is a solution

[Bagheera]

I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at. Web chats are terrible for speed, bandwidth usage, and security. The IRC protocol isn't an issue here. They're talking about "h@X0rZ" trading credit cards and identity information. That's not a flaw with the protocol - or an issue with IRC. As numerous people have pointed out, there are lots of ways for them to do it. And, as has also been pointed out, Carderz are a minority on most IRC nets. As in 1/10ths of a percent.

And the fact that IRC is a cleartext protocol makes it frighteningly easy to monitor. A former employer (an ISP) had a local IRC server that had very clear policy on carding and such - and would randomly monitor for the tell-tale pattern of a credit card number. The CNN article is smoke and mirrors. Yes: Carding happens on IRC. No: that doesn't make IRC bad.

But I'm still wondering about what "security flaws" you're talking about...

Re:Web chat is a solution

[dbazile]

Wait a minute... Wouldn't _FBI_-monitored irc servers revolve somewhere around international espionage? Congress/XYZ conglomerate needs a reality check as to what FBI can and cannot do.

</egg-on>

Re:Web chat is a solution

[Kintanon]

Insightful?!?! This isn't insightful! It's inciteful, ie Flamebait! My god people! I can't get moderated down when I TRY!!

Kintanon

Re:Web chat is a solution

[mpe]

The other options include "don't try to fix something that isn't broken." This is pretty much the standard 'slow news day' Internet horror story which CNN|the BBC | Fox | Time |whoever comes out with once or twice a year.

This is dated April 10th, how can it possibly be a "slow news day" when there is a war going on?

The problem that needs to be fixed is the ease with which people's IDs can be stolen, thanks to lots of personal data being stored on various insecure systems. I mean, you know, there are people out there buying things over the web using Visa cards from IE, to webservers running IIS... sorry, folks, Billy was lying: Windows (well, Win 9x), and IE/Outlook/IIS are NOT safe at any speed.

This is barking up the wrong tree too. Since the most likely way of credit card numbers being stolen fron an e-comerce site is internal fraud.

Schools are a haven for anarchists

[Demon-Xanth]

It has been determined that schools are a haven for anarchists. We believe this is due to the fact that an unusually large percentage of high school students are anarchists. If we want any safety from these anarchists we must somehow eliminate schools.

Re:Schools are a haven for anarchists

[DEBEDb]

In fact, it is estimated that practically
all of horrific crimes on humanity have
been perpetrated by regular users of dihydrogen
monoxide. How many more must die???

Nice headline.

[reaper20]

Anonymously stealing, trading personal information

Ok, do this over IRC, and you're a criminal - do it with a website, spyware, or spam, and you're a business.

hmmmm..... maybe I need to check out #amazon and #brilliant.

Re:Nice headline.

[zCyl]

Ok, do this over IRC, and you're a criminal - do it with a website, spyware, or spam, and you're a business.

Of course, given that the current definition of criminal is "one who does not make campaign contributions."

Re:Nice headline.

[slakdrgn]

Of course, given that the current definition of criminal is "one who does not make campaign contributions."

Ahhh, ok.. so if they actually made a contribution with the stolen CC#s, then this prolly wouldn't have been posted on CNN ;)

Bah, I think just script kiddie told one of the cnn guys in a chat room 'j00 ar3 jUs7 s0m3 l4m3r" and he took it too personally ;)

Re:Nice headline.

[Derkec]

Nice idea, but you're really missing the point. Websites and such that sell personal info are doing so for marketting reasons. Slimy, and bad yes, destructie to you? only a little bit. What the article discusses is trading identity theft type of info. Like your credit card, social and name. With that sort of info, you can be harmed much much more than getting spam or what have you. Be critical of this article, but be fair.

Wow, investigative reporting

[T1girl]

the FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC) didn't provide any statements to CNN regarding what goes on in Internet Relay Chat

Gee, I guess it would have been way too much trouble for CNN's hotshot reporters to log on and find out for themselves before running this half-baked article.

Re:Wow, investigative reporting

[Hydrogenoid]

What?
To get CNN hacked?
You really think they are that dumb?

Re:Wow, investigative reporting

[Quintin Stone]

CNN does very little investigation for its online articles (and I don't know that their televised content is any better). Instead, most CNN articles simply parrot whatever comes over the Reuters or AP lines. They never do their own checks on any of the information contained in these news reports, they just slap them up, mistakes and all. Who's going to hold them accountable anyway?

And while we're on the subject...

[Cinnibar CP]

"A lot more credit card numbers are stolen than ever used, but you should assume that right now, in your wallet, there's a credit card number that has been stolen off the Net."

You should ALSO assume that your wife is cheating on you. And you're about to be fired. And someone is monitoring you. Constantly. We even know what brand of socks you're wearing.

The first sentence

[parliboy]

Computer security expert Chad Harrington regularly surfs Internet Relay Chat (IRC), one of the oldest chat technologies on the Web. Now, anyone who thinks this is going to be a smartly written tech story after that sentence needs to be lined up against the wall.

Re:The first sentence

[purplebear]

Ah, but you must remember that to the majority of the world, Web = Internet. If you refer to the Internet, most people instantly associate that with the web.
Http and https ARE the only protocols available, right?

Re:The first sentence

[parliboy]

Ah, but you must remember that to the majority of the world, Web = Internet. If you refer to the Internet, most people instantly associate that with the web.

It's not that way to the real world. It's that way to an uneducated, luddite media (this writer's the technology anchor, for crying out loud, so there's no excuse whatsoever, including "dumbing it down"). When the real world is given 15 seconds of information, they figure out that the web is one part of the internet. They remember that. Really, they do. Go try it with your neighbors sometime -- they're smarter than you give them credit for. If their top technology guy doesn't know the difference between "web" and "Internet", this tells me what I need to know about CNN, and, scarily enough, about AOLTW.

Re:The first sentence

[zer0*ryok0]

these protocols are just too confusing to me..

http: chat and files
irc: chat and files
telnet: chat and files
napster: chat and files
socks: chat and files
aol: chat and files
icq: chat and files
MSN: chat and files
yahoo: chat and files
ftp: files

backorifice: chat and files (and turning someones screen upside down)

quake: chat and files and camping the quad
counter-strike: chat and files and cheating

Re:The first sentence

[DEBEDb]

Http and https ARE the only protocols available, right?

Protocols? What the hell are protocols? I don't
want any http, I just want to surf the Web.
All my friends can do it, and they don't
have any HTTPs... One of them has HP, and
it works fine...

Doesn't matter...

[strAtEdgE]

...this whole topic is going to be irrelivent once the entire internet is shut down because it's a haven for terrorists.

Guilt by Association.

[redelm]

Look -- I don't much like IRC. Too broken and choppy for my taste, and not enough time to write anything meaningful [long].

But it's just another Internet tool like email, USENET or WWW. It can be used for good or ill just like anthing else. I don't think it's any more secure from monitoring than any other protocol. Anon [mixmaster] email actually seems the least traceable.

I think this is just a slander-by-association: someone doesn't find IRC participants "nice" [=like them] so choses to consider all IRC participants gulity by association. Might as well consider all email users evil, same logical fallacy.

sheer ignorance

[entheon]

wow this guy is uniformed. anyone who doesn't know the difference between hacker and cracker shouldn't be writing an article about either in the first place.

They also...

[Junior J. Junior III]

Hackers also live in houses, which they use to store computers that are used to run various hacking projects. Obviously, something needs to be done about this housing problem. People should have to obtain a license or pass some kind of inspection, or else have their house taken away from them.

Hmm, so this means....

[Kredal]

"I chat, therefore I am... a hacker"

Riiiiight.

Hehe, that's funny ;)

[Sase]

That was a good laugh.. and my friends.. that's why it was posted to /. :)

I've been IRC'ing since 1992. That's 10 years, and I'm still not a veteran.

Some of the World's (Internet's) greatest heros and founders hang out on EFNet/IRC or some like service...

Remember BBS? :) Surprised they didn't talk about that.

It's so typical for people to lash out on things they do not understand. More or less, its all too typical that they never emphasize the best parts about it. I mean comon.. Let's think about it.

IRC is a place to share knowledge, not just CC #'s (who are they kidding.. I have never been asked to trade a CC # or anything of the like.) Many of the World's 'hackers' (or techies that work for YOUR company) can acredit their knowledge (or at least the start) to IRC. I know I can.

I knew nothing (well, not nothing, a tincy bitty bit) about the Internet, its structure, protocols, computers, other operating systems, etc. before I came to IRC.

It all started with the 'need' to have an eggdrop bot in my channel.. How the hell was I to do this?

*shrug* I didn't know what I was doing.. but I got my hands on a free WOPR.net shell, (if anyone knows who I'm talking about.. send a shout out.. I'm curious) and was forced to learn a bit of unix commands (heh) to opperate the bot...

By and by I had shell after shell.. learning more about *nix as the opportunity came along. I eventually had the oppertunity to have root on a friends system (from IRC) and learned more and more about the system and how it worked.

Fast forward a bunch of years :) I met both my partners of my company (Web Hosting/Web Development) on IRC, and they have been good friends ever since. It is quite the successful business, and I have learned much since then... all because of IRC (well, I guess not that much.. I'm still using /. ;)

The news concentrates on the bad things always.. I've become a better person because of IRC, completely. Not only have I learned a tone of IT stuff.. I've also learned how to be a ;better person.. to react in the right mannor (not just to get +o.. or plus +O for that matter ;0)

Much of the Internet success stories are because of IRC, and I feel this article fails to discuss this... That is a bad thing, and this is why us 'hackers' seem to get a bad rep.

Oh yeah.. IRC didn't teach me how to spell, really :) afaik :)

Re:Hehe, that's funny ;)

[BRTB]

Flashback to the old days of IRC, eh?

WOPRnet... wow, thought i'd never see anybody mention that thing again, lol... solaris boxes, /home NFS-mounted across all four, kerberos passwords, the works, and that strange module system to load up TCL and the other devel tools. Strange stuff. Had a bot on their machines for a while until they killed it and went to a "pay" system which must not have worked out very well.

Nowadays... well, check the sig. >=]

Is Bruce Schneier on crack?

[Nos.]

He says this:

"A lot more credit card numbers are stolen than ever used, but you should assume that right now, in your wallet, there's a credit card number that has been stolen off the Net."

To me this says, that I should assume, in my wallet is a stolen credit card. Well, there isn't, and I don't need to check. I have one credit card, and since I get a statement every month with my name on it, I obviously didn't steal it.

Now if he's just a confusing person and is actually saying that I should assume that one of my credit card numbers has been stolen. Well, as long as everyone out there practices some basic security, they shouldn't worry about that either. The first thing is to make sure you have fraud protection on your credit card (most have a $50 limit now). Second, look at your statement! If you just pay your bill without examining the charges, well, send me your credit card number!

Re:Is Bruce Schneier on crack?

[Chanc_Gorkon]

AMEN! Yeah I think this line is a load of you know what! If you just BE CAREFUL with about 90 percent of things you do (going to a restaurant, going to a hotel, walking on the street while chewing gum, multitasking with windows.....) you will be ok. This is the reason why if I see a sight that does not have SSL or anything protecting the page I am to enter my order in, the place does not get my business not matter how low the price. I used to order stuff of of one company (I did not and will not use their web page) who didn't have SSL on his order page! NUTS!

Re:Is Bruce Schneier on crack?

[Nos.]

Probably true, but I'm not familiar with laws in every country that has slashdot readers.

Re:Is Bruce Schneier on crack?

[dman123]

Combining his statement of

"A lot more credit card numbers are stolen than ever used, but you should assume that right now, in your wallet, there's a credit card number that has been stolen off the Net."

and

"We know that credit card numbers are bought and sold over the Internet because they have real cash value."

must mean there are a lot of very stupid criminals who do not ever sell these for their "real cash value." Or maybe there are idiots who pay for stolen numbers and do not use them???

Now if only I could get one of these stupid criminals to pay one of my bills...

On a side note, does Mr. Schneier ever pay with a CC at a restaurant? Does he leave it on the table for the server, or does he make sure that the server picks it up and then follows him/her back to the "secure" area of the restaurant and deposits it in a safe with a timelock? ;-) His air of paranoia in the article makes me think that he may do this... or maybe that's the sucject of his next in-depth article.

Re:Is Bruce Schneier on crack?

[seann]

My girlfriend got a credit card January 16th, 2002.
We went out for supper on the 18th at East Side Marios.
She uses her credit card at her work, to buy a telephone on Feburary 2nd.

she reads her bill online, feb 4th, there are 3 transactions:
East Side Marios: 50$
Sex shop in quebec: 80$
Cell Phone: 50$

Somebody got a hold of her credit card number, bought something from a sex shop in quebec.
For the longest time we assumed it was somebody at east side marios, but now we've narrowed it down to a lady who lived at her managers house (good friend of ours) for a few months, who moved out mid feburary.
She must of dove into my girlfriends purse to get her credit card when she wasn't looking.

Not even 15 days of getting the card, and it was already used without her consent.

Good thing she didn't clear the internet history on his computer, should proove as some interesting evidence.

Re:Is Bruce Schneier on crack?

[dbazile]

Hello, Mr. Western Union? May I purchase a money order?

There's an unwritten agreement

[ackthpt]

There's an unwritten agreement among advertising agencies that they don't get into slinging mud like political campaigns do, i.e. child pornographers prefer Pepsi to Coke.

Nothing stops people from having such an opinion or media (short of threatening their own ad revenue stream) from exploring such ideas. When we as private citizens speculate, or even assert, we're now hearing that corporate america and cretins with a lack of moral and/or ethical fibre (lowercase 'a' used intentionally) sue people to shut them up.

Imagine a beowulf cluster of subpoenas...

Definition of Hacker

[pfb]

from http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/hacke r.html

hacker n.

[originally, someone who makes furniture with an axe] 1. A person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and how to stretch their capabilities, as opposed to most users, who prefer to learn only the minimum necessary. 2. One who programs enthusiastically (even obsessively) or who enjoys programming rather than just theorizing about programming. 3. A person capable of appreciating hack value. 4. A person who is good at programming quickly. 5. An expert at a particular program, or one who frequently does work using it or on it; as in `a Unix hacker'. (Definitions 1 through 5 are correlated, and people who fit them congregate.) 6. An expert or enthusiast of any kind. One might be an astronomy hacker, for example. 7. One who enjoys the intellectual challenge of creatively overcoming or circumventing limitations. 8. [deprecated] A malicious meddler who tries to discover sensitive information by poking around. Hence `password hacker', `network hacker'. The correct term for this sense is cracker.

Seems to me if "hackers" are using IRC could be to the advantage of all those who want advances in technology...

Let me get this straight:

[oyenstikker]

"Hackers" getting personal information and selling it to other "hackers" is bad.
Corporations getting personal information and selling it to other corporations is good.

People with tightly held secrets are suspect.
Corporations with tightly held secrets are to be trusted.

A person trying to extort people is a thug and scam artist.
A corporation trying to extort people is just protecting the artists.

OK. I got it. Now can I incorporate myself? I think I'd be much better off as a corporation than as a citizen.

Re:Let me get this straight:

[madenosine]

What do you think corporations are going to do? Buy new computers with your credit card?

Duh

[dieMSdie]

"It's older, it's not tied to Microsoft or AOL or a big company, it's one of the Internet protocols ... so if you're running Windows or Linux or Macintosh or another flavor of Unix, you can use it," says Schneier. "So it's not that it's more suitable for hackers to use, it's just a more basic service and people who are anti-big-corporation are going to be more likely to use something like IRC."

There's the only useful statement in the whole fscking article. What a loaf of fertilizer. Must have been a boring newsday for the CNN "tech" crew...

Re:Duh

[Shelled]

I'm wondering how much Counterpane Technologies paid to have the article posted. It's nothing but a contentless paranoia raising exercise to generate hits for their web site.

Not really so alarming...

[jonesvery]

There are some alarming quotes from Bruce Schneier, CTO of Counterpane Technologies, such as "people who are anti-big-corporation are going to be more likely to use something like IRC".

It actually seems to me that Schneier did a pretty good job of preventing some editor from slapping an alarmist breaker along the lines of "IRC is a tool designed for smelly hackers" into the piece; take a look at the full quote:

"It's older, it's not tied to Microsoft or AOL or a big company, it's one of the Internet protocols ... so if you're running Windows or Linux or Macintosh or another flavor of Unix, you can use it," says Schneier. "So it's not that it's more suitable for hackers to use, it's just a more basic service and people who are anti-big-corporation are going to be more likely to use something like IRC." [Emphasis added.]

He goes out of his way to point out that there's nothing that makes IRC particularly "suited" to nefarious purposes, but rather that its non-corporate nature is likely to appeal to anti-corporate people. (That, of course, is an assertion that can be argued forever, but it doesn't strike me as too alarming.)

Re:Not really so alarming...

[uncadonna]

Not as alarming as the /. blurb made out, but still revealing of the corporate mindset. Apparently AOL/TW/CNN still finds something dubious or alarming about the concept that people would have something to say to each other and use their technology to do it. In the mass media world, everyone who wasn't a member of a tiny content-production elite was expected to be a consumer and only a consumer. To the extent that everyone is now a publisher, this is threatened.

AOL/TW/CNN obviously has risked much to become a major player in the content game. Their discomfort with a world in which anyone is a content producer leaks out here. You'd hope they would find ways to profit from this prospect of freedom, rather than trying to squelch it, but it's not surprising that some folks in that outfit don't get it.

As for me, I'm not anti-big-corporation where big corporations matter. I like airlines and bridge builders and silicon foundries, but I'm not about to set one up in my basement. I don't like Starbucks, because their main value-added is de-localizing what ought to be a lot of small businesses.

If information megacorps want to help me, they'll help me make the most of all the content out there, and they'll help me stay secure even though there's no sensible way to keep bad people out of chat rooms. I don't want to live in a world where people steal my credit card, but even more I don't want to live in a world where significant powers feel free to characterize online chat as subversive.

Re:Not really so alarming...

[jonesvery]

If information megacorps want to help me, they'll help me make the most of all the content out there, and they'll help me stay secure even though there's no sensible way to keep bad people out of chat rooms. I don't want to live in a world where people steal my credit card, but even more I don't want to live in a world where significant powers feel free to characterize online chat as subversive.

Absolutely agreed (though I'm afraid that we already live in a world where significant powers feel free to characterize online chat as subversive).

My concern was regarding the characterization of Schneier's quotes as "alarming." His quotes were far more reasonable than those made by Chad Harrington (the IRC is eBay for hackers statement); it seems to me that the story would have been far more skewed and alarmist without the input from Schneier, and I'm honestly glad that his input made it into the piece.

CNN *runs* an IRC server!

[LinuxHam]

I may have skimmed a little too lightly, but I didn't see anyone mention that CNN actually runs one of the best IRC servers used for interactive televsion! When Mir was returning to Earth, there were well over 800 people in the room.

Then, with Talkback Live, they make excellent use of AIM and IRC. Very forward thinking.

Re:CNN *runs* an IRC server!

[EMH_Mark3]

IIRC, there were more than 4000 people in #cnn on september 11th.

Re:CNN *runs* an IRC server!

[mdwebster]

From the CNN website:

CNN.com has closed its open chat room, but will continue to offer hosted chats with international newsmakers.

Re:CNN *runs* an IRC server!

[Pooh22]

I tried chat.cnn.com, but it doesn't have much channels right now, but I guess that could change quickly once it's slashdotted ;-)

Nike shoes

[dattaway]

Running shoes allow thieves and armed robbers to flee the scene from their victims. We must take away everyone's shoes. Won't anyone please think of the victims?

Let's play the Slashdot Overreaction Game.

[Stonehand]

Any guesses as to how many posts on this thread will...

- Call CNN a bunch of morons.
- Suggest that we should therefore ban ::insert whatever:: using ridiculous slippery-slope logic.
- Say "Duh".

...without showing ANY evidence of reading the article, or making any factual statements whatsoever?

Really, now.

Now, for those with actual central nervous systems and who actually care about facts rather than knee-jerk responses:

IRC is a multiperson always-on real-time worldwide system, and is therefore more conducive to exchanges and marketing than phones, pagers and their ilk. There's no comparison, really, except for morons, because while a phone system at most might be a small-scale party line, messages on IRC can reach nigh-arbitrary amounts of people whom you DON'T need to have previous knowledge of. Even if you do NOT have any intended buyers in mind, calling random people and offering credit card numbers is stupid. Sending a CC list offer to an appropriate IRC channel is less stupid, in that you can reach more people at once, and they're voluntarily reading so they're more likely to be interested. Plus, there's no Caller ID, and if you're bright you may be using a compromised machine so that your own IP isn't shown. If the distribution of logs crosses national borders, it may be quite a hassle for anybody to ever find your identity -- assuming that you can maintain anonymity during an exchange, of course, by not screwing up by, say, using one of your own personal bank accounts.

And, most people who read CNN have little experience with IRC. Therefore, it's fair to give them a "heads up", especially, say, if they've got a teen who's spending a lot of time online and ordering more stuff than you think he could afford, or similar situations... this merely provides a bit of awareness to the technologically naive.

Re:Let's play the Slashdot Overreaction Game.

[sulli]

No, in this case CNN are a bunch of morons. This article was 100% unmitigated crap.

Re:Let's play the Slashdot Overreaction Game.

[mochan_s]

This is in strict contrast to CNN where people can't view anonymously, advertising and marketing isn't really feasible and all the information presented is reliable and true.

And you're appluading CNN in bringing awareness about as you put it "a teen who's spending a lot of time online and ordering more stuff than you think he could afford" as IRC.

Re:Let's play the Slashdot Overreaction Game.

[Angst Badger]

Therefore, it's fair to give them a "heads up", especially, say, if they've got a teen who's spending a lot of time online and ordering more stuff than you think he could afford, or similar situations... this merely provides a bit of awareness to the technologically naive.

If your teen has unrestricted use of a credit card, you're naive about a lot more than just technology.

At least, that was the case when I was a teenager with naive parents. They learned quick, though.

Re:Let's play the Slashdot Overreaction Game.

[startled]

...without showing ANY evidence of reading the article, or making any factual statements whatsoever?

Ironically, that's what you've just done. I have to ask-- did you read the article? This isn't a helpful heads up. It's not going to alarm just the parents who think the kid's ordering a lot of expensive stuff. It's gonna have parents saying:

Parent: "Hey son, we need to sit down and have a talk."
Kiddi3: "WTF? I already know about sex, dad."
P: "We heard something bad about the IROC-Z we bought you. Have you been using it for hacking?"
K: "..."
P: "I knew it! You've been in those chat rooms! You need to turn yourself in."
K: "Oh, IRC? Sure, yeah. I hang out with Devastat0r and _pr0nKat_. We talk about how high school sucks, and cigarettes."
P: "Cigarettes? You smoke?"
K: "Ah, fuck."
(... parent comes back 3 weeks later, after losing money gambling)
P: "Hey. Uh.... So on that IRC. Do you think you could get me a credit card? Just one time."
K: "Great role model, Dad."

Yeah. Good thing we have CNN to report on this stuff.

Re:Let's play the Slashdot Overreaction Game.

[Ctrl-Z]

Therefore, it's fair to give them a "heads up", especially, say, if they've got a teen who's spending a lot of time online and ordering more stuff than you think he could afford, or similar situations... this merely provides a bit of awareness to the technologically naive.

If your teen has unrestricted use of a credit card, you're naive about a lot more than just technology.

At least, that was the case when I was a teenager with naive parents. They learned quick, though.


And in the spirit of not actually reading the material being discussed, you have completely missed the point of the post you replied to. The point was, if your teenage son/daughter is ordering lots of stuff online, it may not be a bad idea to check up on his/her IRC habits...

Talk.

[lynx_user_abroad]

I wonder how this (CNN) article would have read if the author only knew about TALK. After all, at least with IRC there is a server which can be monitored. With TALK, you don't even get one of those.

UNFETTERED???!!!

[kvn299]

God forbid that something on the internet should be unfettered.

FUD at it's finest. Too bad CNN can't bring themselves to report this eagerly on something, say, like corruption in politics.

Re:UNFETTERED???!!!

[A_Non_Moose]

Well, you know what "they" say:

Fetterey will get you everywhere.

.

RL Locales

[superdan2k]

I've noticed that a lot of the 2600 meetings take place in malls and bookstores. I'm sure people would be loathe to shut down a shopping mall, because that would be bad for the economy, and therefore un-American. But the bookstores? Burn 'em to the ground! That way, hackers won't come together, and you can prevent people from getting access to any sort of subversive materials. You might have to pin red "H"s on the hackers and post security at the doors of the mall.

Is there some sort of plot?

[theolein]

I don't know if it's just me but when I read about some CEO saying something against something or someone else I see the words "vested interests" in the background, or has anyone forgotten MS' Mundie vs. Linux , MS vs. Unix, Brilliant's Chief thief vs. everyone's PC?

What worries me more in these times of security paranoia is this: The underlying motives of said CEO's comments are often not as transparent as those of MS's Bosses and what is worse is that there are enough other braindead people who do not think for themselves who will take said CEO's words as gospel.

since the dawning of time

[digitalsushi]

since the dawning of time evil men have thwarted to abuse the societies they dwell in. ever since the original urge to evolve from single celled space snots into the form of the human being, this evil force has compelled a portion of our fair species to evolve one step beyond the main stream. as early as the 1800s humans have developed simplistic vocal patterns used to convery root directives between what we refer to as "nodes". these nodes, when in a collaberative setting, can communicate rapidly, and the use of technology has only spread this disturbing pattern. eventually is is conceivable that these evil nodes will dominate the world with their bloodthirsty lust for communication.. modern day usage of "internet" relay chats indicates what we shall call "Big Trouble Ahead". If given time to spread, we may find that evil nodes of human clusters will continue their ravaging in search of the ultimate form of communication. we as reasonable members of the species must do everything we can to thwart this insidious infestation. Indeed, our very futures depends on it.

Other forms of communication

[red_dragon]

Some other media that the CNN article forgot to mention:

• Smoke
• Flash lights
• Morse code
• CB/Ham radio
• Phones
• Pen and paper
• Station wagons full of magnetic tape/CDs/DVDs

Re:Other forms of communication

[krmt]

Don't forget pheremones. But then, sex sells, so they probably don't want to endanger that market.

Sounds like a certain movie we all know

[JZ_Tonka]

"Once the hacker or someone in the underworld has personal information, credit card numbers, social security numbers, address, whatever it may be," says Harrington, once the hacker "has that information and wants to sell it, often they'll go to a hacker chat room, a place on the Web using an Internet Relay Chat which provides them some anonymity and allows them to mention that they have this personal information and they want to trade."

Is it just me, or does this guy sound like the extend of his knowledge about "hackers" is limited to what he learned from the movie of the same title?

Bayes Theorem

[Glorat]

I dunno how many of you nerds know Bayes Theorem but it's one of the first rules and statisticians learn and, annoyingly, it is one of the more unintuitive arguments for the uninitiated

<Offtopic>I can't stand the current Cannibis debate in the UK where people state something like that 95% of heroin addicts used Cannibis first as a gateway drug. Therefore Cannabis should be illegal. While I agree Cannabis should be illegal, that argument is a statistically false one because you cannot say that 99% of cannabis users go on to take heroin. That would be significant</offtopic>

Here, just because I imagine 99% of script kiddies use IRC, does not mean we should be anti IRC. You cannot map it to the proper argument where I imagine only <1% of all IRC users have anything to do with hacking and scripting. If you, for example, kill IRC, you upset 99% of the populatoin and script kiddies go elsewhere

Exploitation of people's misunderstanding of Bayes makes the easiest and most effective weapon in the world of FUD

Re:Bayes Theorem

[tongue]

In logic its known as the fallacy of "post hoc ergo propter hoc": after this and therefore because of this. "Heroin users started using heroin after using pot, therefore, they began using heroin BECAUSE of their pot usage." you can replace "pot" with nearly any common substance, such as air, water, alcohol, etc; and the statement SOUNDS true, no matter how ridiculous the conclusion is.

Re:Bayes Theorem

[chompz]

Your offtopic comment is interesting to me. What percentage of pot heads in the UK do go on to use heroin? I have never seen such a statistic in the US, only how many heroin users have smoked pot.

Re:Bayes Theorem

[Glorat]

You know, that bugs me too. Noone has ever produce that stat. I only keep hearing that the "vast majority" of heroin users used pot first

Re:Bayes Theorem

[nadaou]

or more succinctly:
Correlation does not necessitate causality.

e.g. "Everyone who goes to the dentist dies"

Re:Bayes Theorem

[ethereal]

Easy counterargument: the majority of heroin users were borne of a woman. Thus, we should outlaw women, or at least motherhood.

Rioting in the streets ensues.

Re:Bayes Theorem

[Ctrl-Z]

I would think that it would be difficult to gather that statistic without both heroin and marijuana use being legal. Since (I assume) most users would be unwilling to come forward for statistical purposes, it would be difficult to track marijuana users and their changing habits over a long term. Even if they did come forward, their usage patterns might be affected by the nature of the study.

On the other hand, it is relatively easy to assess what proportion of heroin users began with marijuana; at least among those that are arrested for heroin use or are willing to participate in a study.

Re:Bayes Theorem

[gorilla]

I agree Cannabis should be illegal

Funny, cause the UK doesn't. It was downgraded from Class B to Class C last year, with a pilot program in one London borough with the only thing the police can do is confiscate it - a program that is exepected to be extended to the whole country soon, and the committe charged with making recommendations on drug policy have reported that it should be decriminalized, which is expected to be accepted by the Home Secretary. In fact, in the UK, the whole "War on Drugs" approach is widely seen as a failure, with the minor opposition party having decriminalization of all drugs (As happened in Portugal last year) as a platform, and many members of both major party agreeing with that policy. BTW, the drug most likely to be associated with crime is ... alcohol. "between 72% and 82%, depending on the area, testing positive for alcohol. " (http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studi es/runciman/pf7.htm)

Re:Bayes Theorem

[maxpublic]

All of them! Our government tells us so!

Max

Re:Bayes Theorem

[oasisbob]

I believe that I understand Bayes Theorem pretty well (I admit that I've never used it much directly with hypothesis testing in inferential statistics), but I don't see how it relates directly to the problem at hand.

And you don't need 99% to prove something as being statistically significant.

Let's say you wanted to prove that cannibis use and heroin use were related. Remember that you can't prove cause and effect through correlational studies. (Another weapon in the world of FUD -- state cause and effect from an observational study.) You could take a sample of Cannabis users, and another sample from the entire population. Compare the samples for number of people who have used heroin. Do some testing to determine the probablility that the difference between the two is due to chance, and voila. You can prove statistically that heroin use is higher among those that smoke Cannibis than those who don't.

But that's all. It is incorrect to make assumptions regarding cause and effect simply because two variables are related. With such a complicated issue as drug abuse, it is very reasonable to assue that there is multifactorial causation.

So let's take this back to the CNN/IRC argument. It isn't a matter of statistics. It's more a matter of logic.

For example, take the old hammer analogy. You can kill someone with a hammer, but you can also build useful and creative things. A hammer is meant to be a tool. So is IRC.

Re:Bayes Theorem

[ch-chuck]

Part of the problem is that canabis users have already committed a crime, so it's not a big transition to go onto heroin, altho I cannot see why a well informed person would voluntarily take up a physically addicting drug as opposed to a merely habit forming one. If canabis were legal or at least highly controlled like alcohol (no one under 21, available only at govt controlled stores) then there would be a barrier to going on to heroin, it's not only illegal but physically addicting. As it is, a relatively harmless recreational drug is mindlessly lumped in with dangerous behavior, so naturally many users will go on to the harder stuff. It's like the govt laws here in the US are telling us "Well, it you use pot, you might as well be shooting up!" which is blatently false.

But then people used to mistakenly think that tomatoes were dangerously poisonous too, so that, duh, nobody ever tried them to find out otherwise.

Re:Bayes Theorem

[Glorat]

All that you have stated is correct and actually pretty close at what I was trying to get at.

The article claims that all (99%) script kiddies use IRC and then try to make the inference or image that therefore IRC is bad (by making the implicit suggestion that 99% of IRC users are bad). That kinda FUD winds me up

Re:Bayes Theorem

[mpe]

In fact, in the UK, the whole "War on Drugs" approach is widely seen as a failure,

Hardly a UK specific viewpoint, even in the US there is plenty of evidence that prohibition/war on drugs is an expensive farce.
Maybe with the possibility of a ceasefire in the "war on drugs" politicans feel they need a "war on hackers" to compensate.

An expert?

[XaXXon]

Computer security expert Chad Harrington regularly surfs Internet Relay Chat (IRC)

Just showing that to 'prove' he's an 'expert'

"Once the hacker or someone in the underworld has personal information, credit card numbers, social security numbers, address, whatever it may be," says Harrington, once the hacker "has that information and wants to sell it, often they'll go to a hacker chat room, a place on the Web using an Internet Relay Chat (emphasis mine) which provides them some anonymity and allows them to mention that they have this personal information and they want to trade."

Does this remind anyone of the warez article that was out a while ago? I'm embarassed that people like this are considered experts.

What Is Considered "Subversive and Illicit"

[DonWallace]

The bottom line of this article appears to be that if someone uses *anything* called a 'chat room', they're implicitly engaged in illicit activities:

"It's older, it's not tied to Microsoft or AOL or a big company, it's one of the Internet protocols ... so if you're running Windows or Linux or Macintosh or another flavor of Unix, you can use it," says Schneier. "So it's not that it's more suitable for hackers to use, it's just a more basic service and people who are anti-big-corporation are going to be more likely to use something like IRC."

This spokesperson is basically saying that chat outside the venue of a benevolent, all-watching big corporation is evidence of intent to cause harm to the capitalist system, by extension. (and don't forget all of the child molesters hanging out on ... er... AOL!!)

While many are mocking the origin of the story, don't laugh.

Civil liberties can easily be eroded by the F.U.D. and implied subversion that a large media company such as CNN can implant in the minds of readers over a perior of time. "Chat room" == "bad unsupervised people up to no good" can become implanted in reader's minds subtly by repetition... with the terrorism paranoia running rampant in our society, spin like this ain't positive.

It's not Hackers they're worried about

[shawnmelliott]

"people who are anti-big-corporation are going to be more likely to use something like IRC"

should say

"We are very disturbed that people have an avenue to express their First amendment rights. We as a corporation want the right to swindle, steal and lie without other people expressing their concerns about it to others"

Its true...

[GnomeKing]

I've been on irc for 4 years now... It wasnt until recently that I discovered that I too had turned into a criminal... Its obvious that meerly joining a chatroom slowly turns you into a l33t h4>0rz" warning messages Oh how ashamed am I :/

To do what?

[noz]

Aids hackers? To do what? Talk! Jesus, do I have a fucking mouth and what does it do?

I don't see them printing: "MSN Messenger 'Group Chat' feature aids hackers!" Has greater implications. Also, noone 'owns' IRC. Distributed, free, run by volunteers. Excellent for millions.

This den of 3\/1|_ |-|@x0r5 must be stamped out.

[Anonynnous Coward]

Here's one of the offenders right here: chat.cnn.com.

This credit card theft, cracking, terrorism promoting menace of a protocol and its operational cells must be stamped out immediately! Somebody call John Ashcroft!

I'll take irony for 500, Alex.

Goodness gracious!!

[billmaly]

The government ought to regulate and monitor this somehow!! *NOT!!!*

What we knew all along

[Jucius Maximus]

As many have said time and again since Sept 11, legislators will try to connect unlikely things with terrorism and that is enough to bring up legislation to control those unlikely elements. This is a perfect example.

And most people (and journalists) do not understand IRC and when investigating 'chat rooms' they usually end up in Java chats somewhere. ( I will laugh if they try to ban Java because of this. It would be a double edged sword because IBM and Sun would oppose it with the force of $Billions and actual IRC would never be addressed.)

This article is an example of the blind leading the blind (i.e. journalists leading readers) and is a perfect example of how the 'war against terrorism' is becoming outrageously off-topic in how it is applied.

Re:What we knew all along

[Stonehand]

That's an interesting claim you're making since the letters in "terror" don't appear in the article even once.

the picture

[oyenstikker]

Article about IRC. Picture of Netscape on CNN.com

Government knows already

[Raedwald]

That criminals use the internet for 'identifty teheft' is not news Even the US government is on the case:

The proliferation of identity theft crimes has been fueled in some measure by the Internet, where Social Security numbers and other personal identifying information are widely available for a fee.

The original article seemed very alarmist. Is it really such a problem? My skimming of a US government report from some years ago revealled the following interesting information (emphasis added):

Officials at VISA U.S.A., Inc., and MasterCard International, Inc., indicated that overall fraud losses from their member banks are in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually, but these losses constitute a small part (about 0.1 percent) of the banks' overall billing transactions processed. Nevertheless, an official from MasterCard told us that dollar losses relating to identity fraud represented about 96 percent of its member banks' overall fraud losses of $407 million in 1997.

The Wild Wild West.

[MongooseCN]

But IRC is largely unregulated -- a Wild West of chat...

YEEEHA!! I'm gonna rustle me up some trout to slap!

silly journalists

[Jucius Maximus]

"And while the FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC) didn't provide any statements to CNN regarding what goes on in Internet Relay Chat, security experts say it's a matter of law enforcement manpower and trying to track down hackers in a very crowded -- and loud -- chat room. "

I wonder who's laughing the loudest at this: Us or the FBI.

In other news....

[CrazyDuke]

I can already see it now...

In other news, AOL/Time Warner, parent company of CNN, filed a formal complaint with the USDOJ today, claiming that that the chatting system "IRC" aids both hackers and pirates. "This is in violation of the DCMA and must be stopped," an anonymous executive is quoted as saying. "For instance, the amount of pirated TV shows has skyrocketed on IRC. Thats bad for business." Another anonymous employee also noted, "IRC is a haven for pedophiles and terrorists, would you want to be known with these people?" Officials from AOL/Time Warner state the recent groundswell of anti-IRC sentiment of the general public justifies shutting down IRC.

In other words, just more FUD to get Joe Blow to bend over a little further. Plus, it wouldn't hurt AIM, now would it?

bad name for us all

[Flamesplash]

I really wish they would at least mention that IRC for the most part is just ppl getting together online like they would in real life, doing completely legit things and yes even helping people out in some places. The slant on the article is way to anti-IRC, it's like saying "clubs aid pedophiles in trading kiddie pr0n." I can see how some techno-n00b parents could start restricting their childrens IRC access purely because of this article. :(

Reminds me of this article.

Check your wallet.

[MongooseCN]

...but you should assume that right now, in your wallet, there's a credit card number that has been stolen off the Net."

Opens up wallet.

OMG! He's right! Someone stole a CC number off the Internet and put it in my wallet! These hackers are good!

This story

[Beautyon]

is unworthy of repetiton. It is poor journalism of the most illiterate kind, engineered to whip up hysteria over something as old as the hills.

The author "With more than 23 years of journalism experience to draw from, Renay San Miguel is a technology anchor and correspondent for CNN Headline News based in CNN's world headquarters in Atlanta....From 1997-2000 he was with CNBC, where he served as a correspondent specializing in technology and the Internet. "

really needs to have 23 years of experience in how to research a story. And anyway, how on EARTH can someone from 1997, "..specializing in technology and the Internet.." not have ever used or seenIRC???

If he knows what IRC is, and STILL wrote that, then he really is just a sh1t stirrer, first class.

Nothing to see here: move along!

Read carefully, Slashdotters

[mblase]

But with identity theft becoming a more popular form of fraud, according to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), more attention is being paid to chat rooms that serve as flea markets for hackers.

This is the real thrust of the article, although it's brevity and excessive misuse of the word "hacker" makes it easy to miss. The article isn't slamming IRC as an evil haven of credit card thieves, it's pointing out that there's an entire chunk of the Internet called IRC that most people aren't aware of, and that it's possible, if not likely, that your credit cards and other personal information are being bought and sold on it right now.

Re:Read carefully, Slashdotters

[Stonehand]

Right. But notice that it's the posts that make knee-jerk responses about the article that get moderated up, not the ones that analyze the article and consider its factual basis. Go fig.

And yes, it's a real concern for those that aren't aware of identity theft, don't fully examine their bills, and so forth. It may be a surprise to people that their CC#s, once revealed -- which they do every time they use them -- might be posted somewhere and used 'round the globe until the issuer's fraud-detection algorithms flag the number, or the limit is hit. And some may not be aware that the Feds aren't completely oblivious to the situation...

Re:Read carefully, Slashdotters

[borgheron]

No one is debating whether identity theft occurs. The article *will* be read by the common person and interpreted quite simply as "IRC is evil, let's kill it."

Information is a powerful thing. IRC is simply a means of disseminating information, just like the telephone or news groups.

The portion of the article which most concerns me is the part about "monitoring". Since when did we become a police state? If we're not already, that certainly seems to be the raod we are heading down lately.

GJC

ugh, hackers?

[awptic]

Isn't it about time the media realized the difference
between a hacker and a _cracker_? I've spent
enough time on IRC to know 99% of the people they
talk about in this article are just clueless
12 year olds who try to impress eachother
with their 'el33t' ./hacking abilities.

Who is anti corporation

[CrazyJim0]

A study yet to be done finds qualified programmers who are denied employment by all major corporations seem to be anti corporation.

Re:Who is anti corporation

[borgheron]

I'm forced to ask: In this day and age with large corporations striving so hard to take away the rights of individuals for monetary gain, is it such bad thing to be "anti-corporation"?

Just a thought. Shades of Facism are entering this country. Imperial Americana here we come. :(

GJC

CNN aplies to the masses..

[psycht]

We are the informed few. 99.9% of people that frequent this site are very aware of IRC and the possible dangers therein. I use IRC daily. I have been for years and in this time, i have noticed the amount of 'newbs' that show up on a daily basis. These people are NOT informed of the openess of IRC and should be warned.

CNN, I applaud you.

Also, if they don't know what theyre doing, then they should go to AOL chat...

rrrgh.

[cisco_rob]

"A lot more credit card numbers are stolen than ever used, but you should assume that right now, in your wallet, there's a credit card number that has been stolen off the Net." WHAT IS THIS FUD??! Can we get a statistic to back any of this up? Why doesn't CNN fact-check tech stories? ..

OHMYGOD ...

[ProfMoriarty]

You mean that people use the Internet for bad?

In Other News:
Prepaid Calling Cards can be used for bad.
Disposable Cell Phones can be used for bad.
Pretty much anything can be used for bad.

Ok ... time to get back to surfing for pr0n ...

Uniformed Reporting

[Vodak]

Yes IRC is a great tool and sometimes it can be a lot like ebay. I've gotten some good hardware that I can't find anywhere else just by talking to people on IRC.

Of course these people will go to IRC chat rooms all the time, hell like every other type of computer geek on the internet they like to boost. It's natural for a geek to go somewhere and brag about their exploits.

The claim that identity theft is running wild and it's the fault of the hackers is an amazing assumption. While I do believe things like this happen to people around on many occasions. I do not believe it's as large scale as some people would have us believe. I have seen many more cases where identity theft is caused by people in the real world either losing their wallets. or other malicious deeds in which a criminal gets information from a victim.

You should automatically assume your credit card was stolen? Frankly if your not reviewing your credit card transactions you are a fool. But again. there are many more cases of this happening because of a store employee collecting the information some nameless computer hacker who is out to get you.

Why would things like pirated software, child pornography, and stolen information be available on IRC? It's a quicker communication medium. It's easier and faster for people to exchange the information then web pages or e-mail.

People use IRC networks like EFNET, DALNET, GAMESNET, etc. as opposed to AOL or Microsoft because the big business companies consider their users to be morons that don't need more advanced forms of software. When your network blocks out all types of profanity because it's "bad" many people are going to look to communicate where they can speak as they wish.

As for the law enforcement issue it is up to all the irc networks in question to regulate the going on in their own set of servers. I'll use Gamesnet as an example. They are constantly attempting to stop the "warez trade" from happening on their network and have assisted law enforcement when they find out their users are committing crimes.

The FBI gets lucky because like all criminals people who are involved in things like identify theft, child pornography sing like canaries. that's the only reason they get lucky. the boasting of hackers helps the FBI catch hackers

Nifty.

[rmadmin]

Its also haven for kiddie pr0n, movie traders, child mollestors, terrorists, horny teenagers, and 15 year olds that think they are hackers. Oh yeah, and my mom sits in #40something =P She goes in the category of 'CNN forgot that part'.

Oh Really?

[bakreule]

"A lot more credit card numbers are stolen than ever used, but you should assume that right now, in your wallet, there's a credit card number that has been stolen off the Net."

I'd really like to see some information to back this up. It seems kinda of like a manipulation of numbers to scare people. It seems very unlikely to me that EVERYONE has a number floating around the 'net....

Re:Oh Really?

[Stonehand]

Treat it as a precaution -- basically, you're being advised to check your statements carefully, looking for activity that isn't yours. It would not surprise me if a lot of people did NOT examine their credit card bills completely, considering that people have also been ripped off down by phone companies adding incorrect charges to their bills.

It's along the same lines of saying that assume that somebody might consider stealing your car every time you park it in a public lot -- meaning that you should lock the doors, secure any valuables out of sight, and so forth.

God I hate you AOL!!

[QuantumG]

Why is it that AOL's proprietory terminology dominates the technology that predates it? It's not a "Chat Room". It's a channel. Read the god damn rfc!

Section 1.3:

A channel is a named group of one or more clients which will all
receive messages addressed to that channel. The channel is created
implicitly when the first client joins it, and the channel ceases to
exist when the last client leaves it. While channel exists, any
client can reference the channel using the name of the channel.

In fact, search the rfc for the word "room" and you wont find it! You're in the real world now people, drag yourself away from the smothering bossom of AOL and grow the hell up.

This is the best CNN can do?

[ziriyab]

Renay San Miguel, the author of the story, is a "Technology Anchor" for CNN and he doesn't even know the difference between the web and the internet ("often they'll go to a hacker chat room, a place on the Web using an Internet Relay Chat")

It's depressing that a big "news" company like CNN (OK, I know it's an entertainment business, but they still call themselves a news channel) can't even hire a decent geek to sit in a broom closet and proofread their drivel.

On the plus side, you do have to give them credit for not trying to make their point about the evils of IRC by saying that terrorists use it to coordinate activities. These days you use the T-word to push any cause (carnivore, &c.)

Not according to this guy....

[Jason Levine]

According to this guy, using AMD, Bonzai Buddy, Flash, and Quake makes you a hacker.

Depending on how you read it, it's either hilarious parody or a woefully misinformed parent. I was in the hilarious parody camp until I saw the rest of his articles.

Re:Not according to this guy....

[redpop350]

LUNIX. That's got to be the funniest thing I ever read... especially the part about having to have the new HD installed.

Did I lose my mind...

[Alex Belits]

...or today two of more or less famous among computer-using population people for, both named Bruce, and with last names starting with "S" (Bruce Sterling, a writer, and Bruce Schneier, a cryptographist, of "Applied Cryptography" fame) made absolutely inane statements, performing the acts of nearly the worst ass-kissing that ever was mentioned on Slashdot?

Is someone going through the list (sorted first name first, like every ignorant person will do) and doing something to those people? Is there something in common? Or everyone and his dog suddenly became a patriot of the Corporate States of America, so those coincidences are merely a result of high density of this ?

To be honest, I would be equally disgusted in both cases, so I'll rather stick with the hypothesis of my insanity.

if they think IRC is hacker heaven...

[Skorpion]

They should check SILC - next generation distributed conferencing with strong cryptography used for authentication and privacy.

Absolutely absurd.

[dasmegabyte]

In other news, bars and clubs are coming under fire for being havens for drunks, deviants and criminals. Churches are coming under fire because we need to protect our kids from secual deviants using the lord's work to help them out. Universities and libraries are known hide outs for communists, terrorists and dangerous foreign nationals called "graduate students." Shopping malls and "high schools" are breeding grounds for gangs of teenagers associated through shocking dress, style and manors of speech that are anathem to the status quo; these kids want to shake things up in deadly new ways. Department stores are selling guns, cigarettes, alcohol and dangerous narcotics such as aspirin and caffeine. Oh, and private homes -- which are difficult to monitor due to laws designed to protect criminals and prevent beneficial government employees from knowing what's really going on -- are the worst of all. People are torturing kids, raising deadly animals and polishing guns, ready to start a revolution against your great american goverment.

And I don't totally trust this "Applebees" restaurant chain, neither. John Birch says they're pinkos.

A bunch of no good hackers!

[Servo]

Damn hackers, all they do is sit around and don't pay big corporations money!

This is all a big conspiracy (on purpose or not) to erode our individual freedoms of speech, privacy, and the right to not spend our hard earned money.

Never trust a guy...

[misleb]

Never trust a guy who uses the word "Web" to refer to the Internet in general Is it just me, or does web really just refer to HTTP, as in WWW? From the author: IRC... one of the oldest chat technologies on the Web.

From Harrington: ...often they'll go to a hacker chat room, a place on the Web using an Internet Relay Chat...

Sounds like my grandpa.

-matthew

IS CNN STEALING FROM TheOnion.com ??

[ramdac]

It took CNN just over a decade to realize the protocol IRC uses for chatting, is habitated by hackers.

WWW.WHATTHEF#$K.COM! NO SH** people. It would seem reasonable to me that since hackers are basically accredited for having built up the protocol, that it's userbase would also, therefore, be hackers.

Talk about Investigative reporting. Thanks CNN, for wasting America's time.

Looking for a blame game

[westfieldscientific]

Mindset here seems to be that everything happening in the universe has to be somebody's fault.

Not limited to online interaction, the implication seems to be that we (or this guy anyway) live in a society not so much competitive as predatory, where everything said and done is motivated by the need to chalk up another victim. Completely alien to this is the concept that an IRC conversation or any other exchange between two people is innocuous - with no winner or loser, and perhaps no significant meaning at all.

Maybe the dude is right in the context he's thinking of: If he had the (good?) fortune to have his credit card lifted somehow with a major and well funded corporation to blame, and took care to select a jury of credulous nitwits, which is how that game is usually played, he could end up with a large enough $$$$$$ettlement that he could piddle off from journalism and never have to work another day in his life.

With an attitude like that though, wow. No wonder the sonofabitch doesn't like IRC.

"Oh my whats this?" says the CNN journalist?

[Tranvisor]

Looks like somebody just discovered "NEW HAVEN OF HACKERS" over at CNN. Yeah, yeah I know we are all making fun of CNN here for being such doofuses but hold on a sec.

Ask 99% of the people you know (parents/relatives/friends) ,and unless you are a total geek and all of your friends happen to be geeks as well, they will have no clue what the IRC is. None at all. Yes the IRC is one of the last "Wild West" parts of the web. Its one of the last few places you can actually go to and not be censored because you said the f-word off-hand.

Well at least, tho the article is slanted, I won't have to explain what the IRC is to my friends quite as much, I'll just have to explain to them that I'm not a criminal, thanks for that CNN.

IRC hackers

[Cubeman]

This article sadly is true. I remember an online friend said his ident kept changing, so I had him do a netstat and send me the results. It turned out his computer was connected to a server on port 6667. I connected and found he was one of about 30 computers on this homemade IRC server. Every 10 minutes or so the computers would report their status, and the owner of this IRC network was sending them commands. It was really interesting, but consequently they kick-banned me off the server and tried to ping flood me :)

Re:IRC hackers

[Ziviyr]

Ping flooding has never exactly been state of the art, however much people try to make it so. :-)

IRC is *not* a centralized system

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems like a lot of comments calling for shutdown imply that such would be possible.

There is no way to shut "IRC" down. IRC is not a single entity.

Anyone can download an ircd and start their own {server,network}. It's much like gnutella or other P2P variants.

RFC 1459 defines an open standard for the IRC protocol. Anyone can implement this, much like anyone can implement their own DHCP or S/KEY implementation.

There is no central IRC authority. Operators have the scope of the network on which they reside (if even that).

*sighs*

Re:IRC is *not* a centralized system

[GnomeKing]

No IRC is a centralized system There can be many servers - just like there can be many ICQ servers (and indeed there are) these servers can be linked (indeed, they are) you can have stand alone servers (I believe there was an ICQ server downloadable?) anyone can download and start up their own ICQ network gnutella is based on the principle that the client is the server for other clients IRC is based on the principle that clients connect to a server which relays information the IRC servers network can be considered to be a peer to peer operation, but irc chat by normal clients cant... By a centralized system, its not exclusive to situations where there is one and only one server that EVERYONE has to use, but centralized systems are ones that can be shut off thus preventing clients from connecting if the clients are the servers (as in gnutella) then its decentralized otherwise its still centralized Just because its centralized, doesnt mean there is a realistic way of shutting it down DNS is centralized but its been designed to be difficult to shut down (by unauthorised parties that is)

Ummm...yea

[Hassman]

This was so last week...

CNN reports Cars are an aid to Hackers!

[Mulletproof]

"CNN's startling revelation came as a shock to world community as it was revealed for the first time that cars are used by Hackers world wide. Also revealed was their use of spoons, sidewalks and paper."

"This has gone on long enough!" one senator was reported as saying. "These Hacker-related items must be federally controlled or they will be abused!" When it was pointed out that cars were used by normal, law-biding citizens as well, the senator launched into an Anti-Hacker tirade before driving off to his next appointment."

Dont hope my Mom reads this.

[Quazion]

Cause she knows i am on IRC a lot, so now she will think i am a hacker!
which i am ofcourse i hack some c every day, but never the less this could set my reputation in a wrong perspective, lets DDoS CNN again =D

Quazion.

Re:CNN runs an ircd too

[ramdac]

Yah.. Too bad you can't create channels, or talk in any channels. It only has 4 channels, and only bots reside on the server.

Nice eh? :)

Paranoia

[Dizzo]

"A lot more credit card numbers are stolen than ever used, but you should assume that right now, in your wallet, there's a credit card number that has been stolen off the Net."

How is a statement like this helpful in any way? Are people supposed to stop using credit cards period? These paranoid 'experts' need to realize that while this sort of thing may happen, it doesn't mean that it has already happened to you. Scaring people does nothing to help them.

Secure IRC?

[ClickNMix]

Perhaps a little off topic.. but this got me thinking, is there any kind of 'secure IRC' client/server, or does the IRC protocol have encyption options in-built?

I'm not talking about anything major, but just an SSH/SSL type thing to stop your boss sniffing packets for text etc. I'v seen people use SSL for connection to talkers/MUDs/MUSHes in the past, but IRC has always seemed rather open.

Re:Secure IRC?

[Kredal]

Best way to do this would be to run a client on your home machine, and ssh to it from work. IRC is all done in plaintext, any encrypting would have to be done before you got anywhere near the server.

You could probably get a BitchX script that rot-13'd everything you typed (I bet if you can SSH, you could make your own script anyways) but that's not true encryption of course... would keep the average bot from listening in though!

Re:Secure IRC?

[GnomeKing]

There is work for IRC servers using ssl - atleast one has already been made, but I cant remember which server its based on

clients that can use it include the psybnc bouncer and a proper client, but I cant remember which one...

a quick search on google for ssl ircd shows some interesting results ;)

Re:Secure IRC?

[ClickNMix]

You could probably get a BitchX script that rot-13'd everything you typed

Or, some plugin to encode with anything you wanted like GPG so long as who your talking to had the same thing to undo it.

But in keeping with the way IRC works, I wouldnt mind seeing something global (Like an SSH enabled port on the server so all traffic was SSHed - then you could SSH tunnel with any old client to the host of your choice.)

In fact.. Maybe I answered my own question. If JoeHost opened an SSH tunnel on IRCHost.Net to the IRC port, then anyone could SSH tunnel to that, and bingo.. instant secure IRC for all??

Right -- IRC is on the web.

[j-turkey]

From the CNN article (reprinted without permission):


"Once the hacker or someone in the underworld has personal information, credit card numbers, social security numbers, address, whatever it may be...has that information and wants to sell it, often they'll go to a hacker chat room, a place on the Web using an Internet Relay Chat which provides them some anonymity and allows them to mention that they have this personal information and they want to trade."


Right -- IRC is a special place on the Web. I can think of a special place where this guy belongs.

What does it take for CNN to call someone an expert? Usually an expert in medicine has to be an MD. An expert in computers (or in this case, computer security, has to be self-described as such).

Lastly, is IRC really the "wild-west" of the internet? Its certianly monitored by federal law enforcement. See this article (actually, the link to the real article is here) about the FBI monitoring IRC as a tool to bust suspected crackers.

-Turkey

Down right goofy story

[Smilodon]

I know that CNN is supposed to be "for the masses" as some have said here when applauding the story. I don't see that gives them a right to mis-inform. There are a number of not just technically inaccurate (which almost any CNN story would be to this crowd), but odd illogical statements. To wit:

"It's older, it's not tied to Microsoft or AOL or a big company, it's one of the Internet protocols ... so if you're running Windows or Linux or Macintosh or another flavor of Unix, you can use it," says Schneier. "So it's not that it's more suitable for hackers to use, it's just a more basic service and people who are anti-big-corporation are going to be more likely to use something like IRC."

So, let's see:

* Anti-big-corporation (ABC) people are more likely to be hackers and thieves (see: 'Enron').
* Software that is multi-platform is ABC (as is multi-platform in general I imagine).
* Software that is simple (basic) is ABC.
* ABC people are more likely to use Unix and Mac. I guess they meant "for their personal use", rather than as the target of their "hacking" (cracking).

Sheesh, quite a lot of rubbish packed into one small paragraph.

So, let's see. To avoid "hackers" and be a "good guy", I should use a complex, single-platform software suite backed by a major corporation. Then I'd be safe, and wouldn't be a "bad guy". I guess I can see where this is heading.

I got IRC because I needed a straight-forward chat arrangement for a specific (intranet) reason. It was cheap (or free) and I had control within my network. I use it on the internet (I chat very little, but when I do) for many of the same reasons. That, and no bloody adverts.

I have worked for big corporations. They use many platforms (including Unix and Macs and MS), like multi-platform software, and prefer something straight-forward and simple (although they don't achieve it as much as they'd like). They even used IRC when they needed to. They are definitely NOT anti-big-corporation.

So, worse rubbish than usual for CNN. Considering their association with AOL, and their competing chat technology, I DON'T consider this informing the great un-techie unwashed masses. It's just bad, and to the point of questionable news-ethics-wise.

Smilodon
V V

Paper shredder a haven for criminals

[joopsTao]

Some organisations have been known to shred incrimenating evidence. (Or even get Another company to do it for them)

jt.

Wrong - CLOSED

[NSupremo]

CNN CLOSED thier chat server.
CNN CLOSED thier message boards.

CNN CHARGES for video now.

http://www.cnn.com/COMMUNITY/

CNN IS ENTERTAINMENT WITH ZERO RESPONSIBILITY.

Re:IRC *is* a centralized system

[GnomeKing]

No

IRC is a centralized system

There can be many servers - just like there can be many ICQ servers (and indeed there are)
these servers can be linked (indeed, they are)
you can have stand alone servers (I believe there was an ICQ server downloadable?)
anyone can download and start up their own ICQ network

gnutella is based on the principle that the client is the server for other clients

IRC is based on the principle that clients connect to a server which relays information
the IRC servers network can be considered to be a peer to peer operation, but irc chat by normal clients cant...

By a centralized system, its not exclusive to situations where there is one and only one server that EVERYONE has to use, but centralized systems are ones that can be shut off thus preventing clients from connecting

if the clients are the servers (as in gnutella) then its decentralized

otherwise its still centralized

Just because its centralized, doesnt mean there is a realistic way of shutting it down

DNS is centralized but its been designed to be difficult to shut down (by unauthorised parties that is)

Re:CNN runs an ircd too

[/dev/trash]

Hot Damn, they do...it's pretty empty tho...

Wait until they found out the truth...

[niftyeric]

Everyone is idle! :)

idle : 116 hours 35 mins 1 secs (signon: Tue Apr 2 19:47:05 2002)

"C'mon, I thought hackers talked here!"
"Turns out it's just a vanity thing!"

Carnivore?

[Ctrl-Z]

"In the electronic world of the Internet, it's such a vast landscape and there's no way that the FBI and CIA or any law enforcement agency can be involved in watching over the shoulder of every Internet user," says Harrington. "Unfortunately, that's probably what it would have to take to prevent this sort of fraud."

I wonder if Chad Harrington has ever heard of Carnivore.

Actually, quite iformative article.

[WowTIP]

I didn't know that you "surf IRC" or that it is "one of the oldest chat technologies on the Web".
You have to give credit to good old news centrals that spread enlightment among the people. Now I know better than before.

IRC already monitored

[jridley]

Friend of a friend is a cop on cyber-patrol (no, really) in MI. He spends a lot of his time on IRC setting up stings. Mainly they persue child porn offenders, but just FYI, the cops ARE active in IRC and other IM clients, and could persue this if they wanted to.

Cannabis and Heroin

[NSupremo]

Imagine if Cannabis did not exist. (well hard to imagine since it is responsible for the very thing we call civilization - via cultivation).

Imagine how many heroin uses there would be if cannabis did not exist.

I think there would be a lot more heroin users.....

I think the real gateway drug are flintstones vitamins. Or those 'Bubble Blow' toys shaped like pipes.

Misnomers / Cluelessness

[valmont]

" ... a place on the Web using an Internet Relay Chat ... "

Any news source or any so-called "expert" that labels any and every very different subset of internet-bound network protocols as "The Web" oughta be shot before having their balls severed.

"The Web" refers to HTTP.

IRC is not the web.

The internet is not the web.

CNN already never bore much credibility in my book. Such shallow and poorly-researched article, clearly begging for "public's attention", filled with buzz-words, and offering such a one-sided vision of issues at hand, clearly proves what I have believed all along.

Here's a free clue to CNN editors: when hackers *need* a way, they find it. If it's not IRC, then they'll gather on bulletin board systems. That'll be their big come-back. Because that's where they used to gather before that. And if that still doesn't do it, they'll gather on public web forums. And if that doesn't work, they'll come up with a peer-to-peer chat protocols with emphasis on communities. Most Instant Messaging systems already offer you that. It'll just get expanded. And if that still doesn't work, trust me, the demand *will* be there, and new network protocols will be created. To accomodate grass-roots communities. It is amazing the things you can do with TCP/IP. If the more popular IRC networks get snooped or shut-down, then many more little irc servers will rise. Anyone with a DSL connection a shitty old PC can download many free, open-source flavors of the popular "IRC Daemon" software, "ircd", and set-up a very reliable and fairly scalable IRC server. Get two people together on different connections and you have a network. Each server can have thousands of simultaneously connected users.

The point i'm trying to bring home here, is that there will *never* be a shortage of venues for hackers to go about their illicit business. It clearly is sad, as such practices and articles like this one tend to focus the public's opinion on restricting our own liberties to *absolutely NO CONCLUSIVE END*.

That article clearly mingles without any distinction the "underground" aspect of IRC with "anti-corporation" stance and "identity-theft hackers".

Lemme make this clear:

it is NOT OKAY to steal identity and be a hacker. it's lame too.

it IS OKAY to be against corporation-hosted chat networks and for grass-roots communities such as IRC.

it IS OKAY to prefer "less-popular" communities to find like-minded geeks, such as ones we'll find on IRC.

If CNN had any clue, any journalistic integrity, they would at least try to bring some of those points home in their article. But they keep quoting that same guy, over and over, with scary buzz-phrases and words your average american will just eat-up.

Next thing you know, parents will only allow their children to "hang out" on AOL chat-rooms. "No more IRC for you son, it's evil, CNN sez so, mm-MMM".

Can we see a corporate agenda here?

fuckingshit.

Re:Misnomers / Cluelessness

[rudiger]

while you are ragging on misnomers, I spell 'Internet' w/ a capital I.

Re:Misnomers / Cluelessness

[valmont]

yer one nit-picky little shit aintcha? ;]

but fair enuff. cheers.

Re:Misnomers / Cluelessness

[BoneFlower]

"CNN already never bore much credibility in my book"

ACtually, in my book, they have a good bit of credibility, in some matters. Geopolitics and military issues they do some really good work, second to none. Technology, however, they are horrid on.

God help us if CNN gets seriously interested in the rave scene...

What is an IRC room?

[Marx_Mrvelous]

I'm pretty sure it's an IRC *channel*, AOL has "rooms" to chat in. ;)

Conspiracy Theory

[phaze3000]

Here's a conspiracy theory for you all.

CNN are owned by AOL/Time Warner. AOL/Time Warner control two of the four major instant messaging systems (AOL, ICQ, the other two being MSN and IRC). CNN and other AOL/Time Warner owned news corps start bad-mouthing IRC, making it less socially acceptable. Many IRC servers are run from Universities, and with IRC becoming less socially acceptable justifying the related costs becomes more and more difficult. IRC dwindles in market share, with AOL taking up the slack. AOL's network now has a massive number of subscribers, and can even compete with Microsoft, who bundle their chat client with their operating systems.

Does this really sound so far-fetched?

this is news?

[zendeath]

"hackers" have been congregating on IRC since its inception, and IRC was made famous at the time of the Kevin Mitnick pursue.

At any rate, anyone that has a clue knows that any communication passing through an IRC server (whether its a public message, and /msg, with the exception of a DCC p2p connection) can be monitored.

What makes you think the FBI/CIA/NSA/{insert your favourite intelligence agency here} isn't already peered to all the IRC networks and patiently sifting through all the conversation logs? This is not rocket science.

why are people surprised? this is what I don't get

Kurt the Pope

[smileyy]

Pope-abuse is a serious issue these days. As is nun-beating. And don't even get me started on the topic of penguin lust.

I'm not a troublemaker, I'm a Wanamaker!

[johnpaul191]

... sorry, it's a Philly joke and i could not resist.

anyway, back to topic... i think the term hacker is way too loaded right now in the mainstream media. just wait till someone "proves" that there are terrorists hacking away at the very foundations of e-business in america (MS hacking? ha!). then all hackers will be blasted with some charge of treason. it wouldn't be the first time a hacker was declared "a risk to national security", but in these paranoid times it could get dangerous.

CNN uses IRC as their chat rooms backend.

[iamr00t]

I used to monitor president debates via their webcast, and that webcast also had a chatroom, that used Java IRC client.
I looked in source of page and was able to connect to their chat server and rooms using mIRC.

Oh the irony :)

No they don't.

[El Camino SS]

Haven't you seen Goodfellas recently?

Copy protection

[Tomcat666]

If you, for example, kill IRC, you upset 99% of the populatoin and script kiddies go elsewhere

Reminds me of the copy protection stuff... "If you kill 'Fair Use', you upset 99% of the population and pirates get their music elsewhere"

That bit of halibut was fit for Jehovah himself.

[Jules]

From cnn.com:

• Read more about chat-room hackers and identity theft in a chat with Entercept's Chad Harrington

Stone him! Grab your beards lads, erm, ladies!

Oh yeah, god forbid!

[Restil]

Someone might utilize a USEFUL tool in such a way that might entail malace. Among other things, IRC is useful for the following things:

Trading porn including child pornography (tm).
Trading illegal mp3's.
Trading illegal movies.
Trading illegal books.
Trading illegal software.
Trading illegal TV shows.
Stalking.
Preying grounds for Child Molesters (tm).
Learning BAD english "31337 anyone???"
Discussing illegal activity.
DOS zombie gathering points.
Trojan access gathering points.

Oh, and of course, its primary purpose, so that large groups of people can easily gather online in a user friendly way to discuss various topics of interest to them.

People, its a tool, nothing more. You can use it legally or illegally. I can cut butter or stab someone with a knife. I can buy food or drugs with money. I can use a telephone to call my friends to say hi, or I can prank call someone and threaten to have them killed. And yes, if I really wanted to, I could use IRC illegally. As could I with AIM, or yahoo's chat/forums, or anywhere else that I wanted to.

Yes CNN, Chat rooms are most likely havens for hackers (tm). Its not so much an issue of debate, but an issue of declaring the obvoius. I'll bet they use phones too. And Email. And websites. I mean, if there wasn't an internet, there would still be hackers even though all the reasons you think they're bad would be null and void. Hackers pre-date the internet, even those inflicted with malice. Although, script kiddies are a rather recent breed.

-Restil

#illstuff log

[jonbrewer]

/me slaps the FBI bot with a limp trout

Yet another clue for you...

[BLKMGK]

Awhile back an entire database of card numbers was taken and STREAMED in an IRC channel. I believe it was EggHead's card database. Golly, this was reported all over and you didn't hear about it? The Reg carried it I'm sure as did others.

It was real, my card number was one of them and my card was cancelled\reissued by my bank. My big question though was WHY EggHead still had my card # on file. I went through my records and found that I'd not bought anything from them in over a year and yet my account was still being held by them - as was my E-mail judging from the SPAM barrage that followed this incident. Needless to say I've not bought ANYTHING from them since nor will I ever again. They lost my trust big time.

Rest assured credit card theft and identity theft happen all the time. I've now met two people who have had their identities stolen and it sux! Depending upon the circumstances getting a new SN can be a real PITA too. One of them hasn't been able to sufficiently "justify" a new SSN and has to explain the whole thing every time they need credit.

Secure IRC

[FuryG3]

well, anyone who knows anything about how IRC works (ie, a "hacker") knows that it has to be the most insecure method of communicating out there. Your message to #whatever is going down the line to everyone else in the channel, in plain text.

There is little doubt in my mind that the government already has something in place for monitoring IRC, what after all those "irc.psychic.com" web defacements a year or two ago.

Hacker crap asisde though, it's about time there was a secure method of chat to protect your messages from prying eyes (hackers, the government, or other). over at irc.leechbox.net, we're messing around with using SSL connections and providing backwards compatibility for all irc clients.

SSL only works if all parties involved are using it, ,and not everyone on a server cares about "secure IRC", so some irc daemons are implementing secure channel modes, etc.

Authentication is another battle, "nickserv" just isn't secure enough. So i hope to see some proper use of SSL client and server certivicates in place sometime soon, but for now i'll settle with all text being encrypted.

hypocrates

[autopr0n]

Dosn't CNN run their own, pretty popular IRC setup?

Re:hypocrates

[BrookHarty]

chat.cnn.com port 6667

absolute freedom?

[ciole]

We live in a world of absolute freedom. We just choose to use that freedom to form governments to prevent the unscrupulous from abusing others.

Au contraire.

Those in power, that is, the power to limit your freedom and mine, inherited that power in a fairly unbroken succession going back, at minimum, centuries. Everyone else is subject to their will.

Don't you recall the ever-bandied figures of 2% of the world's population owning >90% of the world's wealth? Class distinctions are ubiquitous. "For the people, by the people" is a joke.

Re:absolute freedom?

[Eccles]

Those in power, that is, the power to limit your freedom and mine, inherited that power in a fairly unbroken succession going back, at minimum, centuries. Everyone else is subject to their will.

Other than Bush, admittedly a decent example of your claim, who among today's powerful has such an inheritance? Last century's most powerful monarchy, England, is now merely a figurehead (and England itself has lost all real control of its Empire). The Tsars died in 1917. The French aristocracy lost their heads. Monarchies such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are largely recent creations, tribal leaders elevated to more powerful positions.

But what about the economically powerful? Gates, Ellison, Walton (Wal-Mart) are pretty new to real wealth. Where are the long lasting real fortunes?

Re:absolute freedom?

[ciole]

Sure, sure. Individuals do not always acquire their wealth from their progenitors. Monarchies and dynasties no longer control the world.

However, Gates, Ellison, and Walton are all white males. They amassed their wealth in world controlled by white males. We can't discount the passing of the reins of power from white male to white male as an operational legacy. The same is true of corporations featuring largely upper-class shareholders.

Anonymous Encrypted IRC

[elykyllek]

Encrypted, Anonymous, Opensource IRC.
IIP

Congratulations for discovering PROPAGANDA

[aphor]

Welcome to the world of PROPAGANDA. Psychologists know that people will subconsciously accept brazen lies if they are sufficiently tired, confused, or distracted before taking in the false causal statement. This is called "suggestability". They will subconsciously seek a (false if necessary) internal logic or even a leap-of-faith to understand the author. If they are too tired to question this understanding, they will keep it and use it as if it were fact, gleefully making false judgements baed upon the supposed "fact."

AKA: sales pitch.

In other News: Pubs are a Haven for criminals

[gotan]

So what? How is meeting on IRC different from (physically) meeting in public places? (all kinds of) Hackers always had their virtual hangouts all over the net, and if one (kind) is shut down they'll find other places. The same places are used by other folks too, and while it may be interesting to observe that hackers dislike proprietary services like AOL (for reasons not only applying to hackers) that just means, that different places attract a different audience. Compare the demographics of a McDonalds with that of a tea-house for reference.

Now if the apparent fact, that some illegal activity is conducted via IRC should imply something about IRC (that it should be banned/forbidden, identify it's users, copy each message to the CIA) then the same is true for any public place, so let's start bugging pubs and demand a personal ID from everyone who goes there.

CC#s on IRC? Check out DALnet

[ragazzi99]

Ok people, there is a grain of truth to what CNN reports. Just spend a little time in the password chatrooms on DALnet; credit card numbers are streamed in there quite regularly.

Paying for stolen CC#s?

[kkkalen]

From the CNN article: "We know that credit card numbers are bought and sold over the Internet because they have real cash value"

I'm wondering how one pays for these numbers or other information. By credit card? Ha.

I think having to exchange monies for whatever information defeats the idea of this anonymity that IRC chatrooms provide. Maybe one can send cash to a P.O. box somewhere. Still not 100% foolproof since someone can wait to see who shows up to collect the money.

And, haven't you heard not to send cash by the mail?

If IRC is so bad, why does CNN use it?

[generic-man]

As an American who has watched the Cable News Network (hereinafter "CNN") extensively, I feel compelled to offer the following information to the global information community of the Inter-net. The following piece of information will be useful for Americans.

I would like you to open your Internet Relay Chat (hereinafter "IRC") client, and instead of connecting to "leet-warez.ru", connect to "chat.cnn.com". Now you will have access to over ten illegals.

OpenProjects.Net

[Bones3D_mac]

Boy, if these guys fear anti-corpororate users with hacker tendencies, then OpenProjects has to be public enemy #1!

Internet = The web

[cstrommen]

From the article: "Computer security expert Chad Harrington regularly surfs Internet Relay Chat (IRC), one of the oldest chat technologies on the Web."

So now Internet is the same thing as the Web? Is mail then the oldest form of messaging over the Web?

Monitoring IRC

[Nazrag]

If they do start silently monitoring EFNET etc then people will just stop using it and change to another network, in a similar way people switched to kazaa after napster died.

Damn waiters...

[Mulletproof]

Let alone the fact that you have a better chance of your card# being taken from a resteraunt than a secure net connection... Heh.. No news in that, though.

And finally...

[Mulletproof]

"In a surprising move, the FTC has filed a motion to shutdown CNN for distributing news information to hackers who watch TV, citing that CNN "adds to the hacker's base of knowledge". CNN has rebuked this charge, saying that it's news has no informational value whatsoever and would there for be worthless to a hacker. Testimonies in the case begin next Tuesday."

Getting Credit Card Numbers the Easy Way

[extrasolar]

Personally, I don't see what the big deal is with credit card numbers. The reason I say this is because it seems that most people don't think a whole lot about their credit cards.

Yes its a generalization, but I know this from experience--at least from where I live.

I work at Subway. We take credit card orders all the time. It would be trivial for me to copy down the credit card numbers we have in a little paper sack we keep the reciepts in. Am I legally responsible if I distribute these reciepts? Not that I know of.

Of course, I wouldn't do anything like that for the ethics of that. But there are a lot of people who perhaps wouldn't think that way.

Customers, I've found, don't give a rats ass about the security of their credit card. Think about it. Do you sign it? Where I work, we don't check the signatures anyway. I've began checking though but too often the signatures are too faded or unreadable anyway. Many of the more security conscious customers write "See I.D." in place of the signature. I asked someone for their ID the other day and they were surprised. It seems that our store isn't alone.

The big problem is that no one is trained properly for swiping cred cards. Basically employees train employees and so people only know what they need to know to get the job done.

It isn't all our fault either. Too many customers hand me their credit card before I've even rung up their meal. If they don't check the price on their reciept before they sign it, which I am sure most don't, I could easily run the credit card for an extra fifteen bucks, and then take fifteen bucks out of the register. Chances are, no one would know any better.

Credit card numbers are not secure and any fear on getting them over IRC is just empty hype. Of course we all know that. Credit cards could be relatively secure, but there are too many weak links in the chain. In the end, its up to you to protect yourself. Personally I would avoid using a credit card for small purchases. Only purchase at places where they *always* check your ID and always get a reciept.. The government isn't going to protect you and certainly these online tabloids aren't. Its up to you.

AOL & IRC

[nite-]

Incidently, AOL actually runs a few irc servers. 2 of them are on Undernet. Maybe AOL shouldn't be the example. They used to have servers linked to all of the larger networks (except IRCnet afaik), but the old admin neglected them and only the Undernet servers remain.

CNN had an IRC server

[fajoli]

Funny, up until the recent AOLization of CNN, CNN ran an IRC server for discussing their news stories. They even provided a newsticker through the IRC channel. They just shutdown the server in the last month or two.

Now that they are out of the IRC business, they are claiming it is used by hackers? Seems more like AOL has decided all those bad people on IRC should be chatting through AIM instead like good little sheep.

Monitoring irc is easy

[AndroSyn]

Basically all you need to do is monitor one or perhaps two hub servers. Of course if you have no users who are in a particular channel to make it route via your hub, get yourself an AOL account and join a client to the channel.

Often times I'm sure if the server admin had a warrant to allow monitoring of the server, do you think he is going to refuse? To protect script kiddies...I don't think so.

IRC by its nature is not a secure medimum of communication, nor is that the intention of IRC. If you *want* it to be a bit more secure, you'll need to do end-to-end encryption of all traffic between you and you and the person you are talking to. Of course this is the job of the client and not the server.

Of course people have a lot of misconceptions as to what IRC is supposed to be, the capabilities of the administrators. If you need to monitor some channel, if you have warrants handed too two or three of the admins on the major hub servers on the network, you have vibility to probably 90% of the traffic on the network.

Of course if all the users are on one server, this won't work. If somebody wants to see what you are saying bad enough on IRC, they'll be able to see it.

-Aaron (Hybrid IRCd coder)

Re:This den of 3\/1|_ |-|@x0r5 must be stamped out

[BrookHarty]

During 9/11 chat.cnn.com irc server was the best place to get real time news.

Life. Liberty. And the Pursuit of Happiness.

[piecewise]

In that order.

what they are trying to say is...

[dollargonzo]

that if it is not 100% a micrpsoft product, hackers are prone to using it...

hmm, mr. goats must have really paid them off.

QED

IRC defined

[essdodson]

I repeat classes.

Of Course

[spacefrog]

Of course they are hacker free, at least in the U.S., you have to be 21!

They don't call 'em Script Kiddies for nothing.

Re: anonymity

[sakyamuni]

often they'll go to a hacker chat room, a place on the Web using an Internet Relay Chat which provides them some anonymity [my emphasis]

Real "hackers" use IIP (Invisible IRC Project), which provides strong anonymity on IRC. Another, somewhat related, sweet project is SILC, which, though it doesn't provide anonymity, adds strong crypto to IRC.

Anonymity?

[piranha(jpl)]

Hackers obviously want anonymity when they're looking to trade personal information that they've obtained via identity theft, so Internet Relay Chat is a commonly used mechanism," says Harrington.

Anonymity? Let's see what happens when I /whois myself on my favorite IRC server:

--- [piranha] (~piranha@dialupB92.spkn.uswest.net) : http://ely.ath.cx/~piranha/pirpl/
--- [piranha] #2600
--- [piranha] irc1.2600.net :The 2600 IRC Network
--- [piranha] idle 09:22:54, signon: Thu Apr 11 04:00:49
--- [piranha] End of WHOIS list.

Hey, that's my host name! That translates into a Real World IP address, 207.225.41.92. The website was specified in the "real name" value provided by one's IRC client, which is readily changable. Often, the user name ('piranha' in '~piranha@dialup...') is changable as well, without ident on the client's site. But the host name is not.

I don't see how IRC is any more anonymous than AOL Instant Messenger chat rooms or ezboard.com or other "mainstream" communications fora. (0-day credit card numbers on Slashdot?)

For those that don't know, any user can /whois any other user on IRC and get their IP address. Very, very few servers intentionally obfuscate the host name to prevent tracing it down to a real person. As far as I know, the major networks (EFnet, Dalnet, Undernet, etc) do not whatsoever. Some silly IRC servers don't check reverse lookups to see if they match IP addresses (for example, if I come from 11.22.33.44, and 44.33.22.11.in-addr.arpa resolves to www.whitehouse.gov, www.whitehouse.gov won't resolve to 11.22.33.44), but exploiting that requires that you have control of your own reverse DNS zone. (Did I get my terminology right?) And even if people do pull that off, an administrator at the IRC server's site can pull off one of probably several tricks to see what the real IP address is. (Like, start a tcpdump session, saving to a log file, and CTCP or /msg the person, and see where the packet goes to.)

By the way, it's sort of ironic I chose irc.2600.net for this example in a retort to this article; this server really isn't full of 3r33t h4x0rz, and I have observed no identity theft or other fraud on #2600. If you don't believe me, stop by and see for yourself, which is apparently a bit too much to ask for from the people at CNN.

Wicked et al used IRC...

[Da Schmiz]

According to Steve Gibson, the script k1dd13 "Wicked" and his friends used IRC to launch DDOS attacks.

You can't deny that the open, underground nature of IRC makes it ideal for both hacking and illegal activity. (Notice how I specifically did not equate those activities :-)

Captain Renault of the IRC Gendarme

[jpellino]

I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling - er - hacking - is going on in here!

well no duh.

[DaCool42]

Did they think hackers would be running MSN messager under wine, or what?

dude...

[aliusblank]

Thats like saying the internet is a haven for hackers. :-P

In other news...

[ForceOfWill]

(CNN) -- Street security expert Chad Harrington regularly surfs back alleys, one of the oldest meeting places. The alleys have names like Sherman St. and Lois La., but he agrees that another name works just as well: eBay for hackers.

"Once the hacker or someone in the underworld has personal information, credit card numbers, social security numbers, address, whatever it may be," says Harrington, once the hacker "has that information and wants to sell it, often they'll go to a hacker back alley, a place in the city using an a mask which provides them some anonymity and allows them to mention that they have this personal information and they want to trade."

The ability for hackers to go onto the streets and chat up fellow hackers is as old as the city itself. But with identity theft becoming a more popular form of fraud, according to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), more attention is being paid to back alleys that serve as flea markets for hackers.

"We know that credit card numbers are bought and sold in back alleys because they have real cash value," says Bruce Schneier, founder and CTO of Counterpane Technologies and a pioneer in city security.

"A lot more credit card numbers are stolen than ever used, but you should assume that right now, in your wallet, there's a credit card number that has been stolen off the street."

Both Schneier and Entercept Security Technology's Harrington say that your stolen personal information can be swapped or sold in other avenues. But back alleys are largely unregulated -- a Wild West of chat that has a special appeal for hackers.

"Hackers obviously want anonymity when they're looking to trade personal information that they've obtained via identity theft, so masks are a commonly used mechanism," says Harrington.

Difficult to monitor

The unfettered nature of back alleys is also appealing to hackers, says Schneier.

"It's older, it's not tied to Microsoft or AOL or a big company, it's one of the street protocols ... so if you're running Windows or Linux or Macintosh or another flavor of Unix, you can use it," says Schneier. "So it's not that it's more suitable for hackers to use, it's just a more basic service and people who are anti-big-corporation are going to be more likely to use something like back alleys."

(AOL Time Warner is the parent company of CNN.)

That same aspect of back alleys also makes them a tough digital obstacle for law enforcement.

"In the molecular world of the city, it's such a vast landscape and there's no way that the FBI and CIA or any law enforcement agency can be involved in watching over the shoulder of every citizen," says Harrington. "Unfortunately, that's probably what it would have to take to prevent this sort of fraud."

Occasionally the FBI gets lucky. The feds were able to track down the hacker known as "Mafiaboy" when he bragged about his exploits in back alleys.

And while the FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC) didn't provide any statements to CNN regarding what goes on in back alleys, security experts say it's a matter of law enforcement manpower and trying to track down hackers in a very crowded -- and loud -- back alley.

As much as it bugs me...

[Chicane-UK]

..I still love to read articles like this for one reason.. it makes me feel waaay more el1te than I really am.

If we were to go by everything the media tries to put down the technologically 'uninitiated's throats, I could consider myself to be an Uber :

a) Hacker (Hey, I use IRC.. so I MUST hate the corporate world, and hack for fun!)

b) Pirate (GASP.. he has MP3 copies of his own CD's.. oh, and he uses a broadband connection.. oh, and throw the IRC thing in there again.. he must be using his connection to download illegal copies of movies!!)

I wont bother going on, but I think you know what I am getting at. Misinformed respresentatives of the media go and spread stories like that, which ultimately only rallies support for zealots like Senator Hollings, and his Disney cronies. They just piggyback off the public uncertainty to make geeks like, like most of us here, look bad...

*grrrrrrrrr* :-|

Re:This just in

[wik]

They report real news? Coulda fooled me:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/SHOWBIZ/Movies/04/11/sta r. wars.line.ap/

'Live Free or Die'

[Adrodieu]

Stamped by inmates at the state penetentiaroy of course...

(another) this just in...

[Profe55or Booty]

America unleashes war on IRC. Bombing expected to be started by early next week somewhere, anywhere. Probably Iraq. It has the same first two letters. Yes. That will be perfect.

love, greg

fuel for the fire...

[eh2o]

maybe they meant insightful as in inciting a riot.

Re:Some more (free!) solutions

[mpe]

Run your own IRC server, or convince a friend to do so, and allow only SSL connections. Unreal, a popular ircd, supports SSL connections (port 994 by default).

Unless you then do everything as a DCC chat. This will only encrypt the client-server connection. It won't necessarily protect the server-server connections or help if the server itself is hacked.

Some coding problem?

[Ilgaz]

Is it a lagged April 1 story? I can't believe the page in its entity. I mean, that black hand on Netscape 4.x, VISA etc...

And the most funny is:
Read more about chat-room hackers and identity theft in a chat with Entercept's Chad Harrington

Geez, it was a april 1 story right?

MOD PARENT UP!

[lysurgon]

This came to me over the opirc (where I do some of my tellecommuting work) network just a bit ago:

!lilo:*! Reply to a comment on a /. article....unfortunately, probably no one
will see it since I can't sign onto my account from work :)
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=30906&threshol d=-1&commentsort=0&tid=95&mode=flat&pid=3324348

It's the real deal: Mod It Up!

Small Correction

[Decimal]

Er, that should be "already willing to give up liberty".