Slashdot Mirror
Should You Hire a Hacker?
fabioj writes "Business Week has an article about today's debate at the RSA Security Conference held at the Moscone Center attended by Kevin Mitnick and his 1995 trial prosecutor, Christopher Painter. Interesting to note that Painter doesn't see Kevin Mitnick's experiences as a deterrent for the 'up-and-coming technology workforce' to criminally hack."
They're called crackers.
Mitnick sounds like little more than a self-promoter to me.
Just google for getting more results and descriptions on the subject.
Genius doesn't work on an assembly line basis. You can't simply say, "Today I will be brilliant."
Like Frank Abagnale who, after a brief but brilliant career as a conman, was eventually hired by the FBI itself.
BOO! TERRO
And of course criminals have no place in law enforcement. </sarcasm>
otoh = on the other hand
ianah = i am not a hacker
ihtlut2oigsitimawstw
(i had to look up the 2nd one in google so i thought i might as well share the wealth)
This is a very insular USENet thing adopted by some segments of Free Software culture, and not at all in keeping with past or present common usage in the computer field or wider culture. As noted in one of the other replies, the usage of "cracker" to describe people who break into computers was coined ca. 1985; the usage of "hacker" to describe these same people dates back to the late 1970s, and was already in very common usage by the early 1980s. For the vast majority of the history of computers, this (someone who breaks into computers) has been the primary meaning of the term "hacker."
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Interestingly, I wonder exactly who the U.S. has employed in its counterterrorist operations.
They probably outsource it just like corporations do.
He painted a unicorn in outer space. I'm askin' ya, what's it breathin'?
Bah.
I was around then too. I, however, wasn't a thief.
"I pride myself on my honesty and don't steal, rob, rape, pillage or murder."
Um, yes you DO! You stole from companies. Furthermore, you STILL don't see it as wrong. You have the same attitude as Mitnick, and that's what the prosecutor was getting at. Lack of remorse, lack of true understanding that YOU ARE A THIEF.
You didn't just break some random law--you STOLE service! Others had to pay for you to do things that you were supposed to pay for.
I wouldn't hire either of you if my company's future depended on it. I don't need to lower myself to consort with unrepentant criminals.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
I believe I can see where Mr. Painter is coming from, given some past experience of mine. At one point in my past, I served a little over two years in a correctional facility...8 hours at a time, as one of the CO's. Even that seemingly short amount of time was more than enough to send my faith in the nature of humans straight through the floor. I personally witnessed nearly every individual that had been incarcerated and released come right back through the "revolving door" in the Intake Dept., many of them for more than one return trip. This, of course, was limited only to those who had not been convicted of serious enough crimes to warrant long sentences, but listening to them, one would hear stories of previous prison terms, or plans to continue doing what they always did as soon as they were released.
It was downright depressing, really, and I don't believe there's a single person who has worked in the American "correctional" system in any way, shape, or form for any period of time that truly believes in the concept that reform happens. If I were put in the position of deciding whether or not to hire Mr. Mitnik, given my past experience with the wonders of "reform," I'd have to say that any five-time felon would most likely take any job offer and transform it into conviction number six.
Okay, this irks me just a little bit. Someone in law enforcement (whether you are an officer or a prosecuter) should never say things like that. The problem our society faces is that mentality that once you are a criminal, you are always a criminal.
Recidivism is the leading cause for prison overcrowding. The problem is that the convicted felons are not given the opportunity to learn necessary skills (whether they be work skills or social skills) to make it in the real world. So when said prisoner gets out of the pen, they only know one thing, not to make the mistake that got them caught the first time.
It worries me to see prosecutors give up on people. I was charged with a felony, I was not exactly convicted (plea bargain for probation, no record cuz I was young) and the court actually gave me the opportunity to make things right. And I did. I also had studied criminology in college and knew the epidemic of recidivism that plagues our society. Understanding the problem and how to pull myself out of it was very important. I also had a support network of family and friends which is also important but that is a different story.
I guess my point is this... when somebody make a mistake or poor decision, it is not exactly good to label them a violator of the law for the rest of thier life. Yes, punishment and restitution is prudent, but labels are what cause that person to repeat the crime again. Prison is not so much of a deterrant once you have already been there... it becomes a training facility and the 'me versus them' attitude begins. If you make a mistake and you know that you were dumb and should have done better yet everyone keeps calling you a criminal and nobody tells you otherwise, you become just that... a criminal.. for life.
Yes, there are some that commit crimes that are so severe that you can only think that they are mentally damaged. That is a different story and I am not saying that we should just put murderers and pedophiles into counseling and then off to the real world where they will be perfect citizens for ever... I am saying that non-vilolent crimes that do not directly harm another individual should be treated with hope that the one that comitted the crime can be reformed and contribute to society in a meaningful way in the future.
It is scary, but here is a little theory of mine. If I were to have 100% knowledge of every law in the land, and I were to watch every move you make, I would be able to charge 95% of you with at least one felony be it federal or in your state. Would the case win? Not sure... but I bet I would have a good case.
No. I meant Billy Bob Carter; Jimmy's brother and maker of Billy Beer.
Gotta call bullshit on this. You've been watching too much Shawshank or Magnum yourself.
In actuality, the majority of people coming out of prison _DO_ get time to adjust to a normal life. They aren't put on a bus and told to get out. That's only for people who have filled out their entire prison term. Most people don't fill out their entire prison term. They are released early on parole to save money and beds in prison. Most, if not all (that I'm aware of) violent prisoners and "hard" felons - assaults, robbery, rape, murder, etc. - are not even released immediately. They're put into a facility or halfway house. They have to follow a "level" program that requires that they follow some rules - these are things like 1) get a stable job (yes, they help) - 2) save some money with a budget and a bank account - 3) live by the rules - 4) see your PO consistently to make sure you're on track.
The quickest way to get out into society again via these halfway houses is to follow the rules - you get a job, buy your groceries, stay out of trouble, get some furloughs, and then, you "graduate" to full release, on conditions of parole or probation. If you don't follow the rules, you can get busted back down to your entrance level, or sent back to prison to fill out more of your term.
So, don't simply assume that prisoners are put back on the streets. There's a complex and well-organized program of supervision and rules to follow, unless you fill out your entire term. Which, in this economy, is nearly impossible. What they mean when they say "20 years, out in 7", is that you are sentenced to 20 years, commit no felonies _in_ prison, are released in 6.5 years to a halfway house, spend 4 - 6 months in the halfway house, then, assuming you're still following the rules of society, you are released into a parole program for 4 more years so someone can keep tabs on you - weekly visits, random drug tests, can't leave the county , that sort of thing - stricter rules than normal citizens - THEN you can be released back into society to try to live out your normal life.
So, it's not a simple, "Here's your $20 - get the fuck out." Prison systems do a thankless and difficult job of trying to get convicts back on the streets in the sanest and safest manner they can.
And yes, I was put in prison when I was 18 - convicted of felony assault for attacking a 35-year-old guy who hit my girlfriend. I've been through the program. It works. I was a violent kid. I've been in no trouble for 15 years, and I have had a good, stable career and a Masters in CS/BS in Math for about 8 years, now. It doesn't ruin your life. It SUCKS, but doesn't destroy you if you don't let it. I've got a wife, 7-year-old child, a nice house in an old neighborhood, a moderately stable job...
I'd say I'm living a "normal life".
Any sufficiently well-organized Government is indistinguishable from bullshit.
The problem here is that everyone seems to think that Kevin is a skillfull hacker. Anyone who has really read about him knows that he was a great social engineer but his computer skills were limited. He is really more of a con-man than a hacker.
I can understand how the unwashed herd can believe the sensationalist bullshit about Mitnik being some uber-hacker but I would think that slashdot readers would know better. Oh well.
The person you want to mention is Elliot Abrams, who is a convicted felon, and is currently working in the White House on the National Security Council staff. When a reporter asked Ari Fleischer who else at the White House was a convicted felon, he blew them off, which makes a person wonder... The White House is employing someone who was duplicitous to the Congress and American people, and they won't say if anyone else working for them could be in the same category. Hmm.
....I said...duplicate...
Sure, I'd hire a hacker. I don't think I'd want a Bad Guy or a Cracker or a Warz D00d or a Script Kid, but a hacker, sure, why not?
After all, I've got a fair amount of crufty lisp code that needs to be tweeked but have yet to meet anyone I'd trust with u+w. (Or rather, anyone I could afford...aye, there's the rub).
-- MarkusQ
P.S. For the ellusive final point, you have to figure out what the duck is for.
You're wrong when you say he is a criminal. It would be more correct to say that he did violate some laws in the past. His crimes were relatively minor. He did not, for example, kill anyone. Nor did he injure anyone. Through enormously creative deception, he gained possession of data he wasn't supposed to have. He did not attempt to sell that information or extort money from its original owners. Please, keep some perspective.