How Crackers View Themselves

prostoalex writes "Dr. Orly Turgeman Goldschmidt from Hebrew University of Jerusalem conducted a research to figure out if there any any differences between the classic computer vandal stereotypes and the real life. After surveying 54 Israeli repondents and using the term hacker gratuitously, Goldshmidt found out many computer vandals to be "young, well-educated men without a criminal record, who belong to the middle or upper class." 3 out of 54 respondents were women, some of the respondents were married and had children. Goldschmidt's survey seemed to include somewhat low-life representatives of computer security community, the type who goes on shopping sprees on stolen credit cards, so take the findings with a grain of salt."

Comments

I'm Getting Sick of This

[Anonymous Coward]

What's the big hang up of hacker vs cracker? I understand both meaning of hacker and the definition of cracker. So why the persistence with insisting hackers should be called crackers?

Considering a good 90+ percent of the world uses the term hacker to describe breaking into computer systems and what not what's the point in trying to change or clarify it?

Re:I'm Getting Sick of This

[Confessed Geek]

This one bugs me too. I just feel silly talking about crackers attacking my systems. On top of that at least in the U.S. cracker has some racial old south connotations that make me a little uncomfortable.
From www.webster.com:
Cracker:

5 a usually disparaging : a poor usually Southern white b capitalized : a native or resident of Florida or Georgia -- used as a nickname

My suggestion is we use "Haxzor" for those attempting to do bad things to other peoples systems as it has no other connections, is belittling, and mocks their own self-stylings. Its easier to hear the difference between the words also.

Compare:
He is a dang smart kernel hacker.
Some dufus haxzor tried a 2 year old microsoft crack on my apache server.

Just my $.02

Re:I'm Getting Sick of This

[dasmegabyte]

Well, it's not like we OWN the word hacker. Language is decided by the majority, by common use, not by initial definition. If it were, a "faggot" would still be a pile of sticks and "spam" would still be a moderately disgusting tinned meat product. If 9/10 of the world use this word in an offensive context, we should stop using it unless we want to get strange looks -- it's certainly easier than trying to educate all these people on how we want them to use it, as if we had some authority in the matter. "Coder" is a word which is pretty similar (same number of syllables, same intended meaning) without any of the associated negatives.

And there are many. Besides the obvious abuse of the term to mean "Computer Intruder or software virus manufacturer," there's also a construment among programmers (mostly older guys) that a hacker is a seat-of-the-pants programmer who aims only to finish a single task as quickly as possible, bullocks to good coding practices, documentation, correct tabbing, spaghetti code and poor design. A "hack" is a piece of code that is poorly thought out, poorly executed, or otherwise sloppily written.

Is this really the kind of definition we want to give ourselves, simple because we think the Tech Model Railroad Club was a pretty cool organization? Referring to Alan Cox or Linus Torvalds as "Kernel Hackers" when the folks working on the NT Kernel are called "Software Engineers" leaves a pretty broad disparity between their abilities by definition in the minds of most non-technical people, a disparity which is not refelected in their actual abilities. I think the OSS and Linux communties are really trying to lift themselves out of their perception as wild systems written by cowboy programmers. One step of that may be dropping the ill-advised, grudging use of "Hacker" as an honorific.

What about "tuner?" It's another sweet word, and if you've seen Dark City, it's got some neat conotations...

Re:I'm Getting Sick of This

[Felinoid]

What's the big hang up of hacker vs cracker?
Why call it "The Web" when 90% of the world call it "The Internet"?

Probably becouse 90% of the documentation has called it "The Internet" decades before the avrage jo ever got his hands on the word.

Same with hacker. There are people who've called themselfs "Hacker" longer than the word was used to refer to a criminal activity and it would be very sad if people reviewing those documents started using that as an admittion of guilt.

And it's not like losing a word to discribe computer hobbyests hasn't hurt the computer industry.
Certan companys (ahem NOT Microsoft) would have you believe that computer hobbiests don't exist.
It's not just the word we lost but the very consept of 'hacker' is missing to a growing number of people.

And it's not just the computer industry that insists on using 'hacker' as 'hobbyest'. We've used the short hand for so long many don't realise it's "Computer hacker" we use the word "Hacker" becouse it's obveous we are talking computers.

A hack reporter or writer is someone who's doing an unprofesional job. It's an insult akin to calling someone an amature.

It's not like the avrage jo will ever use the term "Hacker" to mean "Hobbiest" but there is equally no chance of expecting the avrage computer hacker to use the term to mean a criminal.

It's not like we haven't created annother word for hobbiests eather. Well actually a number 31337. It didn't take long for that it also mean "criminal".

If we don't start definning the criminals ourselfs the avrage jo will just keep using the latest word for "hobbyists" becouse what the avrage jo dosen't understand is the crackers ARE hobbyists.

Sample selection needs to be reviewed

[randombit]

From the article: "As one would expect, hackers need to operate undercover. Thus, in order to find interviewees, Turgeman had to do some detective work and, through journalists, conferences and Web sites, she managed to find hackers willing to talk to her."

Or, she mananged to find some script kiddies or, random people who felt like showing off. According to the article, 'hackers' are considered cool ("Apparently, the image that society has of hackers is generally positive"), so maybe someone thought it would be fun to 'be' one. The quotes by the interviewees are highly non-technical (for example, "When you crack a code, it gives you an amazing feeling", and rants about MS); did she ask any of them if they knew how a TCP handshake worked, or anything?

Re:Sample selection needs to be reviewed

[fermion]

And even if these people were in fact technically competent, the sample is still bad. She found people who were willing to talk to her. So we know up front that the sample was not only self selected, but there is a bias towards people who want to show off how smart they are. In effect, these are the members of the community who think they have something important to say and want publicity bad enough to risk prosecution.

From this biased selection the apparent scientist extrapolates this amazing finding:
"I was surprised to discover," says Turgeman, "that they were warm, sociable people with warm families and that many loved to play pranks and were iconoclasts in their childhood."
In other words, the good doctor was surprised to find that the biased self-selected sample, which was selected on their willingness to talk, was in fact a warm sociable crowd. It is also possible that such a sample bias might also favor men. Let's bring out the (ig) Nobel Prize.

The apparent thesis of the paper, to examine self-perception, likely was not significantly effected by the biased sample, which is why the committee let it go. That and the fact that sociology is an extremely soft science. However, some of her quoted comments indicates that she may believe the sample is much more representative that it appears.

In reality, "Hackers" are really nice guys?

[binaryDigit]

Goldschmidt's survey seemed to include somewhat low-life representatives of computer security community, the type who goes on shopping sprees on stolen credit cards, so take the findings with a grain of salt."

What, because her survey turned up some "low lifes" it suddenly can't be trusted and must be "taken with a grain of salt"? Where does this logic come from? Had her survey only found up right individuals that were doing it for pure knowledge, then we would take the survey as gospel?

Real crackers...

[Kulic]

probably don't run around talking to people about their illegal activities, especially people trying to get in contact with them.

If you've been hacked by the best, you probably don't even know it because they leave no trace and don't brag about what they do. Of course this opens the door to such questions as, do people like this actually exist?

Might be better to assume that there are. *dons tinfoil hat*

Was frightened?

[Begemot]

Turgeman herself was told ... where she lived, how many children she had, and what her marital status was. "The first time that happened I was frightened," she recalls, "but, after a while, I just got used to it."

Jeeeeeesus! I would expect a little more from someone doing Ph.D. thesis. Any idiot could do that stupid trick. Given a phone number, you start at 441 to find the exact name and then just search in the Israeli Electorate Registry.

Is this a joke?

[mendred]

What kind of a study is this? Seems to be she is just indulging in sensationalism. The sample is just too small and all she seems to be doing is trying o reinforce the hollywood 'hacker' image the guy who effortlessly breaks into systems.

And to people cribbing over why hackers insist on correct terminology, well all I will say is it is really demeaning to be associated with script kiddies. And it really isn't much is it? Just two letters of the alphabet replacing one with a fairly significant difference in meaning.

And besides look at the press are doing.They are puting ppl like Linus, Alan Cox in the same category as some really desperate ego mongers.

Re:New word for hacker (!= cracker)

[Anonymous Coward]

Good distinction.

A. Programming enthusiast -When he runs into trouble, he'll find something else to do.
B. Hacker -When he runs into trouble, he'll persist until he finds out why.

The driving motivation behind a hacker, to not let a stupid computer get the better of him, is incomprehensible to the media and probably represents a value system that is anathema to the media's value system.

Codesmith would represent someone skilled and fluent whose excellent output was within his competence. Probably a very rare breed.
Hacker represents someone with more determination than skill whose output exceeds his competence. Extremely desirable when you want/need stuff to work even in a SNAFU environment.

Hacker has very much the sense of "to hack" which is decidely non-complementary. The use of the term as a high complement is recognition of the determination, persistence and effort that have to have gone into producing the results. This hits at the essence of a world where everything is supposed to be "easy" and "now".

Who cares about any of this???

[swordgeek]

1) How crackers view themselves
Who cares. Criminal behaviour is criminal behaviour. Any decent sociopath will justify his or her actions as morally correct. Just ask a pedophile about how six year old kids can seduce them, or a rapist about how his victim was 'just asking for it.'

2) On cracker vs. hacker
Yes, hacker was once used as a complimentary term. Then it was used (mostly by the media) as a derogatory term. Then a subset of the "good" hacker community came out with cracker to differentiate. Well guess what; it didn't catch on. Nobody except a small, vocal subset of the 'good' hackers uses the term, and it's just awkward. It doesn't flow well. Whingeing about "proper" terminology in this circumstance is a lost cause. Use whatever terms make you feel better (either cracker, black hat, malicious hacker, or whatever), but quit getting so bent out of shape over your new term not getting accepted.

3) On proper sample size.
It's not statistics here, it's a series of interviews! She's not extrapolating numbers, and my reading was that it was the article author, not the PhD candidate who was extrapolating behaviour to the rest of the community.