Slashdot Mirror


The Myth of the Superhacker

mlimber writes "University of Colorado Law School professor Paul Ohm, a specialist in computer crime law, criminal procedure, intellectual property, and information privacy, writes about the excessive fretting over the Superhacker (or Superuser, as Ohm calls him), who steals identities, software, and media and sows chaos with viruses etc., and how the fear of these powerful users inordinately shapes laws and policy related to privacy and digital rights."

39 of 305 comments (clear)

  1. interesting, amd maybe not surprising by yagu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I live in a world where daily I hear people describing their monitor as their computer, and their computer as their "hard drive", or some other such mangled interpretation. That's actually very okay, it's not their job to have to know, and good for them for having some mental map.

    What I find not surprising about the article's conclusions is even in the computer professional world I've met many "whizzes" not much more intelligent about what computers are and how they work. Hence, much of the alarm over internet terrorism and superhackers potential to bring the IT world to its collective knees spawns from barely literate computer "geeks". At the same time I find it a little disturbing. And it seems the higher up the ladder one goes, the less competence there seems to be regarding making intelligent conclusions about the IT landscape (hmmmm, Peter Principle?).

    1. Re:interesting, amd maybe not surprising by jimbolauski · · Score: 5, Funny

      The solution to super hackers is simple, hot women need to take one for the team and date some nerds, this way their not in their parents basement but our with a real live girl. Girls on the plus side you can walk all over them and get anything you want.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    2. Re:interesting, amd maybe not surprising by Intron · · Score: 3, Funny

      I recently suggested to my boss that instead of mailing me web pages that he wants me to look at, he mail me links to the web pages, but I don't think that I got through to him.

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
    3. Re:interesting, amd maybe not surprising by ResidntGeek · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's not just the incompetent that think that way, I'd go so far as to say a vast majority of computer-interested people do. Which is more entertaining to read, and think about: Stealing the Network: How to Own a Continent, with its stories of master programmers writing the best rootkits ever made over the course of two weeks to install on the systems they're about to root with their 0days for the purpose of bouncing their traffic around the internet while they use IPv6 to get around firewalls on Japanese military computers as a test to find out if they're worthy to hack the computers of several African banks for a mysterious man named Knuth in conjunction with a phreak gaining access to an African telephone switch by use of a stolen cell phone so that Knuth can intercept the phone calls of an enemy while a third hacker, who happens to be a very attractive female drunk and recently returned from shagging a random good-looking but smart computer nerd she met at the club while on Ecstasy, uses steganography software to send a message across the globe to a chick she met a while back (who is also a good-looking female computer nerd), all this happening at the same time a 16-year-old college sophomore (with a hot, nerdy asian girlfriend) is pulling a sweet hack involving duct-taping a laptop to the back of a computer cabimet and using it to intercept all traffic to a lab computer for the purpose of concealing his SSN-stealing activities on the school's network so that Knuth can sufficiently conceal his identity for his trip to South America where he'll live comfortably off the interest for the rest of his life, free from any government oppression................ or a study showing that almost all botnets are built using one of two common worms?

      People want something to aspire to, and the idea of the existence of a superhacker controlling every aspect of the internet at a moment's notice is pretty good at taking up brain space.

      --
      ResidntGeek
    4. Re:interesting, amd maybe not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      ROFL!

      "Girls on the plus side you can walk all over them and get anything you want."

      You may want to define where that comma should go, or else you're gonna have some angry plus-size girls after you!

    5. Re:interesting, amd maybe not surprising by ookabooka · · Score: 5, Funny

      Mod parent up!

      Not only is he making a good point, but he did so with a single 1 paragraph-long sentence.

      --
      If you are about to mod me down, keep in mind that this post was most likely sarcastic.
  2. From 'The Usual Suspects' by Trigun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The biggest trick Satan ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn't exist

    1. Re:From 'The Usual Suspects' by Logic+and+Reason · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually that quote originally comes from the French poet Baudelaire in the 1864 short story "Le Joueur généreux." The Usual Suspects just popularized it.

    2. Re:From 'The Usual Suspects' by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      St. Augustine has a worthwhile point to make here.

      He was dealing with a fundamental theological problem: how does a good God create a universe in which evil exists. He came up with a novel solution: it's all good, but evil chooses lesser goods over greater goods -- an concept closely akin to the modern economic concept of opportunity cost. You cannot have the capacity to choose without the capacity to choose the wrong thing; if you were forced to choose the right thing all the time then you wouldn't have free will. Therefore free will implies the existence of evil, which is not a thing in itself, but a deficit.

      Dante sharpens Augustine's point in the Divine Comedy: evil is really the result of stubborn, even aggressive stupidity. As outlandish as the punishments that are meted out in the Inferno, they're all pretty much people getting unlimited quantities of whatever it was they pursued in life.

      The Devil, then, doesn't need to exist; at least if he does he has no power of his own. There is no need to believe in the nearly all-powerful devil of neo-Christian folklore. The power of Satan, both biblically and by orthodox theology, lies in the stupidity and stubbornness of humanity. A near omnipotent Devil is not really any better off than a powerless but tricky one because (a) near omnipotence is not very useful when the other side is omnipotent and (b) it is impossible to spread evil (in the Augustinian sense) by the exercise of raw power.

      Which brings us to the Superhacker. There is no need for a hacker to obtain near omnipotent technical skills. In any case people with extremely high levels of technical skills have better uses for them. Instead, a hacker exploits the stubbornness and stupidity of people who own computers. They won't pay competent people to manage them. They'll choose software for superficial convenience. In Augustinian terms they choose the lesser goods of short term cost savings and convenience over the greater good of security.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  3. This article is stupid by quokkapox · · Score: 5, Funny

    There are no super hackers out there.

    Disregard that, I suck cocks.

    --
    it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
    1. Re:This article is stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
      ...I suck cocks.

      If you're a guy, you should have waited for an Apple/Mac related story. Then, you would have been on topic.

      Mods - that was "Flamebait", the parent was "Troll", "Overated" or maybe "Offtopic".

      On the other hand, if he/she said "Macs are great!" and then said "I suck cocks.", then that would be on topic, although, redundant.

    2. Re:This article is stupid by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 4, Informative

      Mods on crack alert. The comment is a direct reference to this bash.org quote. Somebody please sort it out.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
  4. Hmmm by kildurin · · Score: 5, Funny

    I just came from a meeting on this very topic. The thing I came away from this meeting is that the real fear is that the Superhacker works for you. Or worse yet, you let him go yesterday. O. M. G.

    1. Re:Hmmm by multisync · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As far as I know, people take much better to being "accounted for" than they do being "hacked".


      I don't know about being "hacked." Is that something you do with a machete? Or a scalpel? Or, maybe, a golf club?

      I was talking about "hackers."

      You must be one of those people who thinks the word "hacker" refers to someone who uses a computer to commit crimes. Actually, we have a word for that already: it's "criminal." Hacker already has a meaning, and that isn't it.

      I don't presume to be an authority, and I would certainly never call myself one, but I know people who exhibit the hacker spirit in their work and their everyday lives, and they tend to be leaders in the companies they work for. Hackers are resourceful; they find innovative ways of using tools that get the job done more efficiently in less time. They see possibilities where others see obstacles. Remember that kid who took his toys apart (and probably yours, too) just to see how they worked, and even managed to put them back together - give or take a few pieces? He was a hacker. Or the one who found a new and novel use for something you thought was boring and mundane? Hacker.

      Do you have a friend who can fix your car, or a leaky faucet, or get your printer working again? Even though he's never worked with your particular printer or car before? He's a hacker.

      We used to celebrate free spirits who had an insatiable curiosity about how things worked, and who shared their knowledge freely with anyone who wanted to learn, and couldn't sleep until they found the solution to a problem they were stuck on. But the media has latched on to a buzz word, so hard working, honest, productive people get slandered by ignorant morons who want to feel superior, at least until they can't get their printer to work. Then they ask that guy in the office who is "good with computers" to help them, and they never see the irony in this.

      Someone else in this thread pointed out that most people think their monitor is the "computer," and that box with the wires coming out of it is the "hard drive." These people don't know any better and don't care, until something stops working. Then they ask someone for help, and that person who solves their problem for them is usually someone who possesses at least some of the qualities associated with "hackers."

      Yet these same people will hear about an intrusion, or a virus or a worm and say "those damn hackers" because, once again, they don't know any better, and they don't care. As long as their printer works.

      And here you are, surfing the Internet and posting on Slashdot, oblivious to the efforts of all the "hackers" who wrote code, developed protocols and designed the computer hardware that would make it all possible.
      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
  5. Hollywood Strikes Again by gbulmash · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just as with any other field or profession, hacking is getting more specialized. It's not that the "superhacker" does not exist, but that such an animal's existence is getting harder and harder to maintain merely because of the expanding skillset and knowledge it takes to be a "hack anything" hacker.

    That said, a lot of exploits don't come from being a super techie hacker with the skillz to defeat any system through sheer programming ingenuity or brute force. A lot of them still come from social engineering... convincing foolish people to give you enough information that a middle manager could hack them using nothing more than a standard login.

    Where the "superhacker" mainly exists is in the movies. The guy who can pull out his laptop at any given location and hack into any given location on demand and with no preparation or research into the target. He's the human equivalent of the gun that doesn't run out of bullets and hair that dries into a perfectly coiffed do within seconds of getting out of the water.

    - Greg

    1. Re:Hollywood Strikes Again by businessnerd · · Score: 3, Informative

      Agreed... Kevin Mitnick, as we all know is one of the more famous hackers, yet many argue that it was not his technical skills that made him so famous. It was his social engineering skills. He knew how to extract the right information from the right people so that he could then exploit the system.

      Interestingly, they did make a movie about him, Takedown. While no Oscar winner, I felt is was one of the better hacking movies Hollywood has put out. As opposed to movies like "Hackers" or even "Swordfish", this movie's dialogue actually made sense to those who know the definitions of all of the acronyms (cause it's a true story), and the computers showed on-screen, actually looked like something people actually use.

      But getting back on topic, it's the social engineers that we should all be afraid of. These guys may not be really hackers (at least not in traditional sense), they're really just con artists. You don't need a computer to get pwned.

      --
      "It's not whether you win or lose, it's how drunk you get." -- H. J. Simpson
  6. The difference between a hacker and a superhacker by davidwr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nobody knows the superhacker was ever there.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  7. You too can be a Superhacker! by TibbonZero · · Score: 3, Informative

    Knightmare's "Secrets of the Superhacker"...
    http://www.amazon.com/Secrets-Super-Hacker-Knightm are/dp/1559501065
    Who's afraid of a little social engineering?

    --
    Tibbon
    tibbon.com
  8. I know the Superhacker exists... by operagost · · Score: 4, Funny

    I know the Superhacker exists... because he's me. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go back to my 3D virtual reality interface, hop on my lightcycle, and infect the alien mainframe with the Michaelangelo virus. If you need me, I'm at IP address 24.75.345.200.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    1. Re:I know the Superhacker exists... by istartedi · · Score: 3, Funny

      If you need me, I'm at IP address 24.75.345.200.

      Wow! You really are a super-hacker. I could never even get a stack to accept that, let alone have those packets route.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    2. Re:I know the Superhacker exists... by barrkel · · Score: 5, Informative

      IPv4 address is a 32-bit integer. Typical notation is in base-256, but you can use other bases.

      E.g. on my machine:

      ping 66.102.7.104

      is equivalent to:

      ping 1113982824

      Similarly, 24.75.345.200 is actually this address:

      PING 407656904 (24.76.89.200): 56 data bytes

  9. Re:Ah, just call me... by ez76 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It is a foregone principle in developing secure systems, that you have to assume every user is the "superhacker" and cannot be trusted.

    It doesn't take much reasoning to show why this must be the case.

    So why is Ohm resistant?

  10. You punctuated incorrectly... by beckerist · · Score: 5, Funny

    You're punctuation is wrong. You wrote:

    Girls on the plus side you can walk all over them and get anything you want.

    What you meant to write:
    Girls (on the plus side), you can walk all over them and get anything you want.

    1. Re:You punctuated incorrectly... by PitaBred · · Score: 5, Funny

      Your use of "you're" is your mistake, though.

  11. Ohm's Law by tjhayes · · Score: 4, Funny

    Law School professor Paul Ohm
    I wonder if he teaches Ohm's Law?

    1. Re:Ohm's Law by tachyonflow · · Score: 4, Funny

      I wonder if he teaches Ohm's Law? As a law professor, I imagine if Professor Ohm sought to teach electronics, he'd encounter a lot of... resistance.
    2. Re:Ohm's Law by e9th · · Score: 3, Funny

      No. There was simply too much resistance.

  12. Re:Ah, just call me... by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 5, Funny

    So why is Ohm resistant?

    Get out of here! Now!

    --
    This guy's the limit!
  13. Whois Paul Ohm? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Funny
    I tried to run a "whois 'Paul Ohm'" like they did in the movie "The Net", but it didn't give me picture of his employee ID badge. What gives? Perhaps if I hit the Esc key a few times, I can hack into his computer and get it...

    I can't imagine where people get all these ideas about "super hackers" and the like. Now where are my VR goggles? I need to hack a Cray using this pay phone down the street...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Whois Paul Ohm? by digitalhermit · · Score: 4, Interesting

      All it takes is a little ignorance.. There's a saying that goes, "The man with one eye is king in the kingdom of the blind." I'm hardly a guru and know about as much about DNS, TCP/IP, networking and operating systems as the next career IT guy. But it's cool how things get started..

      At one company I was asked to "break into" a Windows machine. The previous user had left and only he had the password. He was not on speaking terms with the company. Luckily, the user had given me the password to another system. Even luckier, he used the same password. So after about fifteen minutes of making myself look busy, I tried his password and got in. No one asked how I was able to get in; everyone assumed that I was able to hack the system.

      At another company there was a dusty router that sat in a rack. One day it stopped working. They'd tried power cycling it (their usual troubleshooting step), but that didn't work. So I went in, unplugged it for a few minutes, plugged it back in. I was looking through the manual for a troubleshooting guide when someone comes over and congratulates me.

      Richard Feynman had a similar story but it involved safe cracking. And most people know the joke about the plumber, the punchline being, "but knowing where to hit costs $300." Forget the latter, it's not relevant...

      Anyhoo, the point I'm making is that it's easy for people to mistake dumb fool luck and bullshit for real expertise. I know this firsthand.

  14. Quote? YOU FAIL IT! by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's too bad the quote is "the devil" or you might have gotten yourself some free geek credibility there.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  15. Re:Ah, just call me... by JakusMinimus · · Score: 3, Funny

    +1 insightful
    +1 pun

    Well done friend, well done.

    --

    You can be an atheist and still not want to succumb to some weird cross-over sheep disease -- AC
  16. control by wall0159 · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Hackers, terrorists, drug dealers, child molesters, communists:

    Useful tools for the control of a fearful and gullible populace.

    1. Re:control by petrus4 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Are you alive? Many thousands of people are not.

      I notice there's one word you keep using, here. Thousands. Last I looked, the population of the planet was around 6 billion and climbing. My mathematics is hit or miss, but it sounds to me like you're saying that laws that affect at least a major chunk of those 6 billion people should be made on the basis of actions that kill less than 1% of them.

      To me, that isn't terribly logical. On that basis, to me it'd make sense that if a War on Terror was going to be valid, surely a War on Ebola would be even moreso, since I'm guessing the number of people it's killed would be higher.

  17. Re:Myth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "My high school still has absolutely zero knowledge of some of the hacks I pulled, and they never will know."

    FYI Andrew Matecha of Vancouver BC, there is enough information on your band's website and MySpace page to identify you and figure out which school you committed your crimes against. Not that I care, but you might want to think about that before you brag about illegal activity you've participated in.

  18. Re:Nothing speical about hackers by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but in reality most of the crimes are committed out of stupidity or drug influence

    I don't think that inside theft of database dumps containing hundreds of thousands credit card accounts and SSNs is done by stupid or drug-addled people. I don't think that people who systematically probe for SQL insertion vulnerabilities on transaction systems in hopes of defacing something with some politicized rant are stupid or drug-addled. I don't think that people plant stealth FTP servers to serve up kiddie pr0n from unknowing desktops are being stupid or drug-addled. You're confusing malice with stupidity, and poisoned ethics with drug dependence.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  19. This article is dumb by MattW · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The first mistake is to think that anything mentioned even requires you to be a "superhacker". Identity theft is trivial. Stand on a street corner and say you're registering people for a contest, and put name, address, social security number on the form, and 90% of people who stop to fill it out will just put their SSN down. Stealing "software" and "media" hardly makes you a superhacker; hundreds of thousands of people do it every day, 99% have probably never even compiled a program. Virus writing isn't difficult either; it's finding the hole to exploit in the first place that CAN be difficult. But given an exploit, turning it into a virus isn't that tough.

    Even when we take it up a notch and look at actually dangerous attackers, like people using widespread vulnerabilities to deploy custom rootkits, we're not talking about superhackers.

    Then there's a class of people who, if they are inclined to be lawbreaking and antisocial, are superdangerous. Take a look at someone like Michal Zalewski, who's been pumping out advisories, proof of concepts, and gems like a hobby OS for...well, a long time. Can you imagine him in the wild as a black hat? Ugh, scary.

    Then there's real superhackers. One former coworker built a railgun for fun, cracked DES (key recovery in 24 hours on a p3, given certain fairly common preconditions), cracked the remote management on a major commercial firewall (because we lost the password, and it was easier than going offsite for password recovery), then founded a security company, got rich when they got bought out, and moved onto toy around with things for nasa and the DoD. So, if someone like somehow finds their way onto - and stays on - a black hat path, well, the mere fact that securing something is harder than cracking it means he will always find a way in, if he wants to badly enough. I think they'd have to be unbalanced to stay black hat, since that sort of talent will either get them illegitimately rich enough that they'll avoid danger, or get them legitimately rich enough that they'll give up black hat activities to go legit.

    But identity theft? Please. Peanuts. They're more likely to use large scale espionage to find some valuable nugget; perhaps upcoming M&A activites. Then they sell this info to a third party with plausible deniability and a lot of cash - say, George Soros (not that I'm saying he'd buy, but for example) - and let them profit massively off it and take a kickback. Just one significant score like that should be worth 7-8 figures. That's just one example out of a hundred scenarios where a true uberhacker could illegitimately profit. And they'd almost certainly only do it once, if money was their motivation.

  20. So very wrong by lostboy2 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I read the abstract of his paper, read the beginning of TFA and skimmed as much of the rest as I could stand and I have to say this guy is so wrong it feels like my head and heart are going to explode. There's no way I can do justice to how wrong he is, and this is going to devolve into flamebait, so I'll just pick a few points:

    For example, law enforcement officials talk about the spread of zombie "botnets" to support broader computer crime laws.
    Yes, governments and law enforcement agencies use fear tactics to support broader crime laws and curtail civil liberties. Guess what, that's not the doing of IT professionals and computer security experts. Governments and law enforcement agencies have been doing that long before there were computers.

    We know that the Superuser's power is often exaggerated for three reasons:
    First, some statements of Superuser harm are so hyperbolic as to be self-disproving
    So, because some people exaggerate the problem, there is no problem?

    Second, experience suggests that some online crimes are committed by ordinary users much more often than by Superusers.
    Emphasis mine. So, again, does that mean we shouldn't be concerned about people who DO have the skills to do serious damage? What was that about the ASUSTek website being hacked? Was that done by an "ordinary user"? And you're saying that Bob from Accounting is responsible for all of those 0-day exploits? Great, I'll go bash him right now.

    The third way to dispel the Myth is through studies and statistics. As one very recent example, Phil Howard and Kris Erickson of the University of Washington released a study which found that sixty percent of reported incidents of the loss of personal records involved organizational mismanagement, while only thirty-one percent involved hackers.
    Ah, so 31% is negligible. By that reasoning, I don't have to pay any taxes this year. Plus, that's only one study about reported incidents. How many people reported when their PCs were infested with a virus or trojan? Who would you even report that to?

    I've seen new Windows XP computers plugged into a network get pwned before you could finish going through the Windows setup wizard. The reason stuff like this doesn't result in "loss of personal records" is because IT professionals and security experts put in a s**tload of effort to make sure it doesn't. But IT professionals and security experts can't prevent a PHB from putting sensitive info onto a laptop and then taking it home only to have it stolen.

    There has never been a death reported from an attack on a computer network or system.
    Yeah, well, I work in a hospital. Every time there's a large-scale problem with the network or enterprise system, it seriously affects the staff's ability to perform their duties. That translates to worse care for the patients. So, do you want your hospital to be running smoothly or not? Do we have to wait until someone IS killed to take security seriously?

    In stark contrast, experts in the field of computer crime and computer security are seemingly uninterested in probabilities.
    The problem is that so-called computer experts tend to have neither the training nor inclination to approach problems statistically and empirically
    Buddy, I'll take Bruce Shneier's assessment of security over yours any day.

  21. Odds you will be a victim of by king-manic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hackers

    Ever had your credit rating trashed by someone who lifted your financial info through a crack of a third party system? Many thousands of people have.


    Odds 1:10,000
    worse is you bank with retarded banks.

    terrorists

    Are you alive? Many thousands of people are not. Another couple dozen just died in Algiers today, killed by the local franchise operators of the same group that has attacked embassies, a US naval vessel, the WTC, the Pentagon, bars, nightclubs, hundreds of markets and restaurants, etc. This month, they are on a new campaign to ambush and kill anyone who reports to work in rural Afghanistan to teach young women how to read. It's super duper, though, that you don't find the people in London, or Madrid, or Detroit that preach the warm-up act for the same crap to be any concern at all. That's comforting!


    odds 1:1,000,000
    worse if your brown and live in a poor nation

    drug dealers

    You cite drug dealers, and then complain about "control?" These bastards deliberately seek to make behavioral slaves of generations of their neighbors, and think nothing of the resulting waste of lives and all of the accompanying damage. You'd rather that Wal-Mart sold heroin? Have you ever met someone with their teeth rotting right out of their meth-cooked skull? What is it that encourages you to gloss over the people that seek to make money peddling meth to school kids, or pretend they don't exist?


    1:2
    But the majority are pot pushers who sell to your kids. Your kids use it like you used to use beer... or pot/lsd. The potential harm for most people is minor.

    child molesters

    Ever met someone who had their youth stolen by someone like that? Let's find you a few thousand of them, and then you can address them, explaining how the people who did it to them don't exist, or aren't really a problem, and should be allowed to keep doing it. I'm sure you'll be persuasive.


    1:100,000
    Although these sick bastards affect everyone around their victims, they aren't that numerous. Many people still lead okay lives afterwards with some issues about security and sex. It's not a very homogenous group either.

    communists

    Well, you've got me there. They only killed a few hundred million people in the last century, so that's not so bad.


    0:1
    Communism is an idea. What killed most of the people your refering to is mob justice, fear, racial hatred, green, xenophobia, and poor management. Communism is general is a useless idea that was never fully implemented by anyone, could never be so, and used liek religion to clobber people.

    --
    "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."