Slashdot Mirror


Is This the Golden Age of Hacking?

Barence writes "With a seemingly continuous wave of attacks hitting the public and commercial sectors, there has never been a more prodigious period for hackers, argues PC Pro. What has led to the sudden hacking boom? Ease of access to tools has also led to an explosion in the numbers of people actively looking for companies with weakened defenses, according to security experts. Meanwhile, the recession has left thousands of highly skilled IT staff out of work and desperate for money, while simultaneously crimping companies' IT security budgets. The pressure to get systems up and running as quickly as possible also means that networks aren't locked down as tightly as they should be, which can leave back doors open for hackers."

213 comments

  1. Puhleeze by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is the Silver Age at best.

    1. Re:Puhleeze by Canazza · · Score: 1

      With the wacky antics of Anonymous and Lulzsec it certainly feels silver age.
      Just pray that it doesn't descend into a Dark age where even Batman is forced to murder kittens.

      --
      It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for being subtle.
    2. Re:Puhleeze by obergfellja · · Score: 1

      maybe Bronze?

  2. Methinks it be the script-kiddies by amalek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Meanwhile, the recession has left thousands of highly skilled IT staff out of work and desperate for money, while simultaneously crimping companies' IT security budgets... ?

    1. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anrego · · Score: 4, Insightful

      crimping companies' IT security budgets

      Most were already crippled, which is really what I blame for the problem.

      For a _long_ time "this could get hacked" was a theory. Yes if someone dedicated resources at you and knew where to look they could get in.. but who is going to target _us_.

      The availability of tools that can automagically find these vulnerabilities and exploit them is what I blame. All these little holes no one worried about because "no one will ever bother looking there" are becoming a big deal.

      Hopefully companies getting hacked left right and center will put the fear of the great fire cactus to the suits, and they in-turn will invest in real security.

    2. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by JoeTalbott · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This reminds me of a plumber I once knew who bumped his head on a brick and a gold coin fell out. Ever since then he's been bumping his head on bricks looking for hidden coins. A sad tale indeed from which I learned that 'security through obscurity' depends largely on the obscure remaining so.

    3. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Batmunk2000 · · Score: 2

      I agree, except these "hackers" need to be labeled criminals and called out by our industry as such. Sure the companies could do better (and need to be called out when they are grossly negligent), but that can be like saying a home owner *could* or *should* have put up cameras, steel doors and bars on the windows to help deter the burglar. Sure we could make every house Fort Knox, but that isn't cost effective nor is it always the proper front of the battle. There is a reasonable amount of security that should be in place, depending on what is being protected, and a reasonable amount of vigilance from the law to go after these criminals.

    4. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The suits are still happily living in la-la land, but at least it's harder for them to feign ignorance now, what with Sony, Citi, and such.

    5. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a long long time "this could get hacked" was a theory.

      FTFY

    6. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 1

      Was his name "Mario"? I know a plumber named Mario who hits his head on bricks and gets coins...

    7. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope the popularity of the word "Automagically" dies a quick death, I hate that word with a passion. Anyways, I do agree with your post though.

    8. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Culture20 · · Score: 2

      The truly sad part of that story us that the giant dragon turtle who hid all those coins in the bricks lost all his money. He should have diversified.

    9. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anrego · · Score: 1

      Wow, feels different to be the one using one of these silly made up words that everyone (usually including myself) generally hate.

      Either way, words been around since perl (that's where I first heard it I think), so probably not going anywhere ;p

    10. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by fermion · · Score: 1
      It is not the recession. 15 years ago, when every skilled person had a job, the script kiddies were hard at work

      What I think it is is that the tools have advanced so much, that one does not even have to rise to the level of script kiddie to call oneself a 'hacker'. Look at the iphone, all one needs to know how to do is run autoinstall and maybe hexedit.

      There has always been ample opportunities for real hacker. Just think of the first time that some hacked a stone into a knife. That must have been really cool. This is different from someone who simply applied the technology to make knifes. For instance when I first build my radio from a kit, I was not a hacker, or a maker, but a kit builder. I did not understand what was going on. OTOH, when I hacked my print buffer to connect my printer to my computer, back in the 80's that was not always so easy, I felt like that was a pretty good thing. I was using my skills to void the warranty and make the product do something that it was not intended.

      I am not saying that the new hackers are not as smart or capable as the old ones. Certainly the people who make the tools and crack the systems are as cleaver as any other hacker. What I mean is that I see kids hacking together solutions everyday, and the solutions are really quite good, yet what people are proud of are not the original and innovative solutions, which is what hacking is all about, but the breaking of trivial passwords or the running of scripts so they can download and install stuff on their iPhone.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    11. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by cgenman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Citi got hacked because you could plug anybody's account numbers into a website once you had logged in, and it would spit out valid information. That's just a complete lack of basic security. That's just bad initial design that wouldn't have cost any extra to secure if it had been developed by anyone with a clue.

      And automated tools have existed for years. I'd say that the big difference is that it used to be very few people knew how to move 200k freshly stolen credit card numbers. Sellers and buyers had to know specific IRC channels or dial-up BBS's to log into. Now, thanks to social networking and the explosion of 0-configuration bulletin boards, anyone with a use for a million credit card numbers can hop onto Google and find a place where sellers hang out. People can make a good living renting out botnets or selling identities in a way that had been very difficult.

    12. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by djowatts · · Score: 2

      I don't think you can draw a comparison between the safetey of a private residence, and the security of a corporations network. Put lightly, If a theif manages to break into your home, it is likely he will only get away with either one arge item (Such as your 40" TV) or maybe pockets full of Jewellry and whatever cash they stumble upon. In comparison, if a hacker can break into the network of a corporation, that means customer data and other valuable information (possibly trade secrets etc.) could be compromised. Another comparison to draw is that items in your home are likely to be secured by insurance, but if this data gets out there then there is no insurance.

    13. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a feeling it won't work that way. I think instead more laws will be passed and more government intervention will take hold across the interwebs, and things will become less and less open and free.

    14. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by cgenman · · Score: 1

      Most of these houses lock the front door with a twist-tie and leave the windows open. I'm sorry, but if a simple directory traversal will get your web server to serve up your password file, we're not talking about breaking into Fort Knox here. Most of the security these companies had was security theater. Even more "advanced" tactics, like using holes in common software that was patched two years ago, should never happen.

    15. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      From the board room's point of view security costs money with no tangible benefit. They find it hard to say to investors "we spent lots of money on securing our systems, it reduced our productivity and increased the size of our IT department but we were saved from all these hacking attempts, honest". On the other hand if they buy some cheap "network grade" anti-virus software they can claim to be both diligent and securing their systems and to be helpless victims of elite cyber criminal masterminds when things do go wrong.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    16. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Requiem18th · · Score: 1

      Actually the singularity awoke a few months back and it's cutting its teeth on back networks.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
    17. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sir deserve your name.

    18. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Aceticon · · Score: 1

      Nah, they'll just lobby to get laws passed to ban hacking tools ...

    19. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Zerth · · Score: 1

      Not likely, the word has been used in computing for at least 30 years. And was used to describe dishwashers back in the 1940's

      http://www.adclassix.com/ads/46thor.htm

    20. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too many PHBs go with "if I can't see it and it costs money, why pay for it?".

    21. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by cavreader · · Score: 1

      If you can't find a programming job today you are probably not looking very hard. There are literally thousands of jobs posted on job sites everyday. I made the mistake of posting my resume for 1 week last year and I still get 50 e-mails a week from people pitching open positions. Granted you might need to have more than 1 skill and you might have to work on something that you do not necessarily enjoy but at least an incoming paycheck can hold you over until you do find something you like.

    22. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Batmunk2000 · · Score: 1

      I agree in principle, my point is both need to be seen as a serious crime. (Theft of personal information even more so!) Like I said, companies that do not protect this information need to be called out and owe up to their lack of protection. A few years of massive lawsuits in response to customer's lost data will foster radical change.
      When protecting my home, I wish my only concern was items but there is the threat of physical harm to loved ones by an intruder. That's why when these crimes are reported the police response is serious. Their first response isn't "why don't you have more security?" (Even though a home could always be more secure in some way) To gain influence, I think we need to make sure our industry's response to these hacking stories is first to identify the act as a crime before preaching security. (Even though it is VERY necessary in most cases.)

    23. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoosh...

    24. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "That's just bad initial design..." I would not call it a design at all... even bubble-sort has more "design" in it.

    25. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are still plenty of skilled security professionals out there, things have changed though, there are 100x more technologies out now than in the 80s and all of them are secure / vulnerable in there own ways. Nobody wants to do monotonous boring tasks that are the same on all systems, me hacking my iphone and you hacking yours involve THE SAME EXACT PROCESS, so why not automate it? The tasks the automater does, I can, but would much rather not do. Doesn't add or take away from my skill sets, the only difference is I can choose to understand what is going on behind the scenes if I find it relevant to my interests.

      What's crazy is... tools like LOIC (DDOS tool used by groups mentioned here), a fairly skilled person writes it, posts it up, and disappears to watch the chaos unfold. Nobody using LOIC should be considered a hacker just for using that, but the whoever wrote it, did so with the intent that the tool be used to launch coordinated attacks, and should definitely be considered a high profile hacker.

    26. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by jareth-0205 · · Score: 1

      *wwwhooooosh*...

    27. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 1

      In a number of places, if someone breaks into your home and steals a firearm the first response of the police will be "why didn't you have more security?"

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    28. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by lostthoughts54 · · Score: 1

      is this not considered a serious crime? It seems to me, when they can manage to catch on of the people involved in a hacking scandal, they tend to overreact if anything. The issue is that their security is crappier than a home. If you are using the robbery analogy, falling to sql injection is like the robber walked up to the vault, pulled on the vault door, and it opened. That would be completely unacceptable for a bank, and should be for IT Security in corporations.

    29. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the singularity is more of an event than a tangible object. In that case, an analog to your sentence would be "the birthday awoke a few months back and it's cutting its teeth on back networks." So perhaps you meant "Skynet awoke a few months back and it's cutting its teeth on back networks, sharpening up for the singularity."

    30. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's not really a "whoosh", more like a "please don't feel the need to explain the joke."

    31. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      True, except the real difference is, if my house gets broken into only my stuff gets stolen, If a bank gets broken into, everybody's money gets stolen. The bank needs a whole lot better security than my house does (my house was just broken into a couple of months ago, they opened the back door with a pry bar). A rich man needs good security on his house, a poor man needs none at all. If I have nothing to steal, I have no worries about security.

      Some of these hacks, though, are like your borrowing my car, and leaving it running with the doors unlocked and the key in the ignition in a bad neighborhood. When I say "where's my car???" You (the corporation holding my data... er, car) shrug and say "why should I care? It wasn't MY car!"

    32. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      You could make the same argument for hiring security guards, buying an alarm system, or putting decent locks on the doors.

    33. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      "BUT THEY MUST BE AFTER OUR LOCHEED MARTIN SECRETS!! GIVE ME MONEY!"

      seriously, that's about it for the guy in the article. basically he is saying that any hack done that is not done for money is done by russian or chinese military hackers as part of a new super plan for world domination through polish cyber war! like the tokens wouldn't have been noteworthy booty for anyone, the guy should be fired. and oh macafee can't you code a non laggy hd-crypto login on a fucking two point something gigahertz multi core system..

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    34. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by aquila.solo · · Score: 1

      In addition to the good points made in other replies, don't forget that many of the hackers are working from outside the U.S. and countries with whom we have extradition agreements. Labelling them a criminal is fine and good, but it may be next to impossible to serve justice without military action.

    35. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know what I said silly.

    36. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This sums it up quite nicely. Until we start imposing mega fines for these breaches, companies will continue to be lax with consumer data.

    37. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So who do you think makes the scripts the script kiddies are using, dumbass?

    38. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Genius!

    39. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by lightknight · · Score: 1

      Skynet has been delayed several weeks. The AI refuses to eat the kitten, so we are going back to the drawing board. ^_^

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    40. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by drb226 · · Score: 1

      highly skilled IT staff

      Am I horrible if my first thought when I read this was "oxymoron"?

    41. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by flonker · · Score: 1

      How many companies hire security guards, buy alarm systems, and put decent locks on the doors?

      Usually it's reactive rather than proactive. "Our office was robbed, let's throw some money at it and hope the problem goes away." Or it is done by mandate: HIPPA, PCI, various military security standards, etc.

    42. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      Maybe he has, the fortunate plumber just hasn't found the other coins.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    43. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by dragon-file · · Score: 1

      The problem is, even if a company decided to bring in skilled IS staff... it would most likely be a one or two month contract position. As soon as the holes are plugged, thanks for your time, here is a check, good bye.

      --
      Whenever a player quits EVE to go play WoW, the Average IQ of both games increase.
    44. Re:Methinks it be the script-kiddies by Anrego · · Score: 1

      And people do!

      Cheapest locks you can find, cosco security system, and if you are really lucky... some rent-a-cop.

      The only time you ever see real security is when:
      - you have an "incident" and company makes a token gesture to appease everyone
      - it's required by some regulation ... and even then it's usually the bare minimum to meet the requirement

  3. Golden Lulz, not plain old gold by Beautyon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Umm no, its the Lulz age of hacking.

    --
    ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
    1. Re:Golden Lulz, not plain old gold by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd give you a mod point, but instead I'm going to just try and highlight your point more clearly, since you seem to be accruing mod points anyway.

      LulzSecurity is doing a bunch of high-profile, childish, silly things. That's all the weather there is to report. There's nothing else going on. There's no golden age, no silver age, no information age. Just one group being trollish, and otherwise, the attacks we're hearing about aren't that out of the norm. The exponential curve is right on schedule, as usual.

      Hopefully, however, the LulzSec attitude—that you don't have to be important in order to be an interesting target for having your pants pulled down in front of the rest of the class—will drive organizations toward better security policies. TFA is obviously not interested in this aspect of things (and ends in a pessimistic note about people asking for help with test configurations) which is... not that surprising from PCPro.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    2. Re:Golden Lulz, not plain old gold by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd call it the Eternal September of hacking. Seemingly endless waves of hackers, yet it's more noise than anything else.

    3. Re:Golden Lulz, not plain old gold by xeon13 · · Score: 1

      no this is silver.. the golden is protect the hacking.

    4. Re:Golden Lulz, not plain old gold by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      There are a lot of other hacking groups out there doing it for profit, first for stealing, then spamming, then encryption ransom for a bit, now it's botnets for hire. The lulz days of hacking were much earlier in the 80s and 90s when viruses and worms were made for fun and breaking into accounts was a kids' sport. Lulzsec is a throwback.

    5. Re:Golden Lulz, not plain old gold by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alright, but if you can get some people doing it for the LOLZ, imagine what can be done with people who are actually the in the know criminal underground (which there certainly is, not to mention nation states!). Remember the idea is not to break into your computer system and break everything. The idea is to break in and leave with all the information without leaving a peep you were there. There are groups that do this. The world governments are actively recruiting and building their cyber offense and defense capabilities, keep in mind some of the targets and people doing these things, Iran centrifuges, China hackers on Google, US NSA, Anonymous, etc. The US is certainly worried about what cyber attacks can do to our national infrastructure.

    6. Re:Golden Lulz, not plain old gold by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, LulzSec only does trivial "hacks". Really simple SQL injection, etc. To be vulnerable, a website has to have been designed without the word "security" popping into anyone's head while it was developed.

  4. 1980s by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2

    I guess they have forgotten about the 80s?

    --
    Palm trees and 8
    1. Re:1980s by Canazza · · Score: 1

      I loved that film

      --
      It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for being subtle.
    2. Re:1980s by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      80's are over rated. The 60's and 70's with IBM 360's were, where it was at.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    3. Re:1980s by polymeris · · Score: 1

      *Now* can't be the "Golden Age" of anything... golden ages are always long past. Like the good ol'days, and those day that were.
      Perhaps the 80's qualifiy, yes.

  5. recession has nothing to do with it by bhcompy · · Score: 0

    Most of these hackers are from foreign countries, and many of them are on government payrolls. Recession impact? Nah.

    1. Re:recession has nothing to do with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, right. You may also want to play the CP and Godwin cards, else you're not fearmongering properly. Scary foreign terrist people, omg omg everyone panic!eleven!

  6. Perhaps not more common, just more visible by gman003 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Haven't RTFA'd yet, but I would suspect that hacks aren't any more common now - just more visible and more reported. It's like when the news media has a "summer of the shark" - after a few notable incidents, the media realizes that these stories bring in viewers, and then any further incidents, no matter how insignificant, are publicized when they otherwise wouldn't be. Just look at the recent Bethesda hack - that kind of thing goes on all the time, and I was surprised anyone bothered paying attention to it. Sure, some of them were big - the first Sony attack was significant, and the US Senate hack is noteworthy - but a lot of these recent hacks have been relatively minor.

    There's also the possibility that all this attention is actually causing more hacks - after the initial Sony hack, hackers realized that Sony was a big, vulnerable target. By extension, they realized that big companies actually aren't bulletproof - in fact, many of them have terrible security. I'm sure such knowledge was widespread in the black-hat world, but now the secret is public knowledge.

    1. Re:Perhaps not more common, just more visible by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      This. The idea that there is some outbreak of intrusions is all because of the Anonymous "hacktivism" which opened the floodgates for attacks on Sony's poorly secured systems and the spinoff of LulzSec's random attacks which were both intentionally publicized.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    2. Re:Perhaps not more common, just more visible by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      Frankly, I would think that there is less cracking activity these days than there was 20 years ago. The phone system is a lot more secure, which certainly killed off a lot of hacking. People have access to very powerful computers in their own homes, so there is less incentive to try to gain access to corporate or research computing systems. We have the Internet, which lets us communicate over unspecified distances at a fixed rate (say what you will about the behavior of ISPs, we are still better off than we were when people were dialing into BBSes over long distances).

      Sure, there is still plenty of activity, but a lot of would-be crackers are able to put their creative abilities to other uses now, and they probably do. The only incentives crackers have today are lulz and money; those incentives were around 20 years ago, along with plenty of other incentives.

      Now, if we use the more correct definition of "hacking," then I suspect that there is little change.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:Perhaps not more common, just more visible by bigpet · · Score: 1

      I wish they would stop their "look what we can do" campaign. If you are gonna do some cracking then keep it to yourself and your l33t crew-mates. The only thing that the publicity is going to give us is even more stupid internet regulations which won't affect the guys behind an array of proxies anyhow. It's like they are hellbent on annoying not only corporations but also provoking governments into more regulations.

    4. Re:Perhaps not more common, just more visible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, and more corporate intervention to prevent hacking itself at all levels. Proprietary systems, eula's, patents, cease and desist letters. Well, at least it is a golden age for lawyers.

    5. Re:Perhaps not more common, just more visible by aBaldrich · · Score: 1

      There's a crucial difference: 20 years ago you didn't have an army of bored teenagers with metasploit.

      --
      In soviet russia the government regulates the companies.
    6. Re:Perhaps not more common, just more visible by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Close. I think it's because several groups are, at the moment, hacking FOR publicity.

      Anonymous, LulzSec and some of the others are hacking specifically to generate publicity for themselves, their cause, or against a particular organization (like Sony). The regular background of criminal hacking doesn't get reported much because both sides don't want publicity.

  7. Hacking vs Cracking by trrichard · · Score: 1

    You probably meant Cracking not Hacking. See http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/C/cracker.html

    1. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by gman003 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think it's time we give up on this. Sure, most of us know about the technical distinction between "hacking" and "cracking". But the mass public hasn't picked up on that, and even many hackers (old sense) now use the term hacking (new sense) for cracking.

      At this point, trying to push the term "cracking" is futile. We won't change anyone's mind. In fact, all we'll do is come across as semantics-arguing dweebs. It's probably best to just accept that "hacking" now means "gaining unauthorized access to a system". It'll be easier to make a new term for "person who messes with computer systems for fun".

    2. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by Anrego · · Score: 1

      Oh give it up all ready.

      "Cracker" was a lame attempt to regain our beloved word. It failed. The battle is lost. Hacker as used to refer to someone who breaks into a system with criminal and/or malicious intent has been absorbed by the masses and it's not gonna change. Saying "don't you mean cracker" at this point is just silly.

    3. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by metlin · · Score: 2

      Indeed. And I think we can use black hat vs. white hat to distinguish the intent of the hacker.

      That's something that the public can relate to a lot more easily, and in fact I've seen the terminology used in non-technical journalism as well.

    4. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 1

      One thing about English is so many words have different meanings and connotations depending on the context. I still hear people use "hacker" in a positive context, though not as much...

    5. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by Darfeld · · Score: 1

      Black hat and white hat only distinguish the intent of "crackers" (using this word for clarity purpose...)
      We need a word for people messing with there computer on any level, not just on the security stuff. Hacker is a cool word, but it seems desperate to keep it for that.

      Also I don't see a better word to give to people messing with there computer on whatever level... Stupid media! (Yeah I know, nothing new here.)

      --
      (\__/) This is Lapinator
      (='.'=) copy it in your sig
      (")_(") so it can take over the world
    6. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It'll be easier to make a new term for "person who messes with computer systems for fun".

      TInker.

      It even works with the British connotation of "marginalized persons" because those poor tinkers have been lumped in with a bunch of lulz-loving, black-hat hackers.

    7. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by Anrego · · Score: 1

      I actually think "hacker" as used in a positive context is gaining some traction in mainstream. As you say, words often have different meanings, and I think the two can generally co-exist.

      I've definitely used "hack" used outside of the geek community to refer to something that words but is "not quite proper". "Yeah it's a hack, but it'll work".

      At the very least, it's probably easier to come up with a new term for the positive meaning of "hacker" than try to get it back. Just don't let the guy who came up with the word "cracker" do it.

      Seriously.. cracker.. how the hell did someone come up with that and think it would go. I can just see someone on the news: "yeah, a team of crackers broke in and stole some credit card info". Maybe we could have saved our word with a term like... cyber criminal (ew, but much more media friendly).

    8. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the word was "boffin".

    9. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by gman003 · · Score: 1

      Hmm. I like how that is mostly a homophone for "thinker", but for some reason it just seems lame. Can't tell exactly why, but that doesn't seem right.

      I would think that something related to "cyborg" might be better, since to most hackers the computer is an extension of the brain. "Borg" itself is obviously out, but "Cybe" might not be. Kinda close to the slang verb "cyber", ie. "to have cybersex", though, which might not be good either.

      Maybe I should check some different languages. Once I get home, I'll crack open my Esperanto dictionary, see if there's anything good.

    10. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by ginbot462 · · Score: 1

      As others have said, proponents of this should give up convincing "the mainstream". The word will eventually swing somewhere else after this as well. Repeatedly performing the same action and expecting a different action is just gay. I think that's how the quote went ...

      --
      Atlas Shrugged : Thematic Story :: Battlefield Earth : Organized Religion
    11. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by steelfood · · Score: 1

      a new term for "person who messes with computer systems for fun".

      I believe we're called geeks now--computer geeks.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    12. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      At best the general public just see computer Vandals as a sub tribe of vandals, much like graffiti is a form of vandalism. They care about the details as much as I, (a member of the general public), care about the details of graffiti tags.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    13. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by Eulogistics · · Score: 1

      I've also seen "modder" used in a lot of hobbyist literature - this includes software modding like the original Counter-Strike and hardware modding like cutting blowholes into a standard aluminum case and adding water colling.

    14. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by arielCo · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure about this. When I read the title I was updating CyanogenMod7 in my rooted smartphone and my background thoughts were about some nifty projects I'm going to post on Instructables.com. Imagine my disillusion upon reading the summary.

      --
      This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
    15. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever heard of a "Safe Cracker"?

      How about a "Code Cracker"?

      "Cracker" wasn't coined to contrast against "Hacker"; it's its own word.

      Oh, an example of "Hacker" being used in a positive context in a non-tech context: www.lifehacker.com

    16. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by VoidEngineer · · Score: 1

      Indeed. I was going to mention that 'hack' has two or three definitions now days, but upon looking at dictionary.com, it appears there are *twenty three* known uses of the word! And another 15 if you consider the definitions of 'hack' that are derived from 'hackney', and yet another 6 if you consider the definitions of 'hack' that are derived from 'hatch'. With 40 variations of 'hack' currently in use, I think the English language will survive if we add one more, related to 'cracking'.

      7a. Computers . to devise or modify (a computer program), usually skillfully.
      7b. Computers . to break into, illegally




      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hack

      –verb (used with object)
      1. to cut, notch, slice, chop, or sever (something) with or as with heavy, irregular blows (often followed by up or down ): to hack meat; to hack down trees.
      2. to break up the surface of (the ground).
      3. to clear (a road, path, etc.) by cutting away vines, trees, brush, or the like: They hacked a trail through the jungle.
      4. to damage or injure by crude, harsh, or insensitive treatment; mutilate; mangle: The editor hacked the story to bits.
      5. to reduce or cut ruthlessly; trim: The Senate hacked the budget severely before returning it to the house.
      6. Slang . to deal or cope with; handle: He can't hack all this commuting.
      7. Computers . to devise or modify (a computer program), usually skillfully.
      8. Basketball . to strike the arm of (an opposing ball handler): He got a penalty for hacking the shooter.
      9. British . to kick or kick at the shins of (an opposing player) in Rugby football.
      10. South Midland and Southern U.S. to embarrass, annoy, or disconcert.

      –verb (used without object)
      11. to make rough cuts or notches; deal cutting blows.
      12. to cough harshly, usually in short and repeated spasms.
      13. Tennis .
      a. to take a poor, ineffective, or awkward swing at the ball.
      b. to play tennis at a mediocre level.
      14. British . to kick or kick at an opponent's shins in Rugby football.

      –noun
      15. a cut, gash, or notch.
      16. a tool, as an ax, hoe, or pick, for hacking.
      17. an act or instance of hacking; a cutting blow.
      18. a short, rasping dry cough.
      19. a hesitation in speech.
      20. Curling . an indentation made in the ice at the foot score, for supporting the foot in delivering the stone.
      21. British . a gash in the skin produced by a kick, as in Rugby football.

      —Verb phrase
      22. hack around, Slang . to pass the time idly; indulge in idle talk.

      —Idiom
      23. hack it, Slang . to handle or cope with a situation or an assignment adequately and calmly: The new recruit just can't hack it.

    17. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      this includes software modding like the original Counter-Strike and hardware modding like cutting blowholes into a standard aluminum case and adding water colling.

      And that's just sad, because speaking as an electronics enthusiast, I would reserve the term 'hardware modding' for people who actually modify the part of the hardware that is the actual computer, i.e. hacking in more memory, an extra co-processor, grafting new I/O onto a system. The people who cut windows into off-the-shelf PC cases and install cooling systems are metal-shop types, not hardware hackers.

    18. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by westlake · · Score: 1

      At this point, trying to push the term "cracking" is futile. We won't change anyone's mind. In fact, all we'll do is come across as semantics-arguing dweebs.

      It is much worse than that.

      The distinction between white hat and black hat is being lost as well.

      No one cares anymore about the hacker's political causes. His technical skills. His geek cred. No one cares anymore whether he is out for laugh or going for the gold.

      To the public he is simply an arsonist.

    19. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by alostpacket · · Score: 1

      Alright fine. Time to move on to using "red shoes" vs "fuzzy car dice"

      That should make it more clear.

      --
      PocketPermissions Android Permission Guide
    20. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by gman003 · · Score: 1

      "Modder" might work. The gaming community already understands the term (both "game modding" and "casemodding" are common, although "modding" alone usually refers to the former), and it's probably easier to expand one word's definition than it is to change one completely.

    21. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by mckorr · · Score: 1

      "Technophile" Like an "audiophile" is someone who is always trying to improve their sound system.

    22. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by jgrahn · · Score: 1

      I think it's time we give up on this. Sure, most of us know about the technical distinction between "hacking" and "cracking". But the mass public hasn't picked up on that, and even many hackers (old sense) now use the term hacking (new sense) for cracking.

      I don't know -- about the only place I hear or read "hacker" or "hack" in the new sense is on Slashdot. At my workplace, for example, people always use the words in the original sense(s).

    23. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      "Audiophile" is someone that likes audio. Not one that improves it.

    24. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by Executive+Override · · Score: 1

      It'll be easier to make a new term for "person who messes with computer systems for fun".

      I know, let's call it 'cracker'!

    25. Re:Hacking vs Cracking by randyleepublic · · Score: 0

      I nominate "tweaking".

      --
      Social Credit would solve everything...
  8. Recession is important by biodata · · Score: 1

    not especially because of the number of engineers with time on their hands, but because of the number of people who watch their wealth being given to the wealthy by those they voted for, and decide they have had enough and why not burn it all down..

    --
    Korma: Good
  9. We need to take users out of the loop. by FyRE666 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem most websites have is one of users choosing insecure login details, either through ignorance, laziness or disinterest. Although this is not a huge problem if it's front-end users, the same problem exists with admins, and those with elevated privileges. The most secure fortress is little protection if the passcode to open the front door is "1234".

    I don't think this problem can be fixed by "forcing" users to choose long passwords, or to have a different password on every site they use. As we've seen, they simply won't do it, and why should they? It's different if you have a technical, or security-related background, and understand the risks - the average Joe isn't interested in spending the effort to maintain and organise a secure list of passwords in an offline location.

    i think the only way this can be fixed is by using SecureID style authentication - either with stand-alone units, mobile apps, or units built into laptops or keyboards (separate from the other components). Obviously it would need to be physically separated from the machine being used to login (or at least sandboxed, in the case of a mobile app). We just need a good cross-platform authentication API that's easy for developers to implement, and cheap hardware/free software for the client.

    1. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by dkleinsc · · Score: 2

      If you are authenticating a user, the user will be involved. That's the reality of it.

      Any of the pure hardware solutions you describe suffer from the fatal flaw that they aren't authenticating that the user is who they say they are, they're authenticating that the user has access to a particular piece of hardware. If, for instance, it's built into Alice's cell phone, and Mallory steals Alice's cell phone, then as far as Bob knows he's talking to Alice rather than Mallory, and if Alice tries to talk to Bob to correct the situation then Bob won't recognize Alice's new hardware.

      There is no silver bullet in security.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    2. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by Anrego · · Score: 2

      I've never seen a pure hardware solution. Enter multi-factor authentication, which while not a silver bullet, is a lot better than a password.

      Mallory can guess Alice's password. He can also steal her cell phone. Doing both however is considerably more difficuly. He needs the phone to even start guessing passwords, and once the phone is stolen there is only a short window for the guessing.

      You can even throw in a biometric method, though personally I don't see much future for them. Most can be copied, and you can't just change your fingerprint when someone at the gas station makes a copy. As a third factor maybe they add some security, but I would never rely on them to replace either a token or a password.

    3. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The hardware is still an improvement. Alice may notice that her physical key was stolen, but she may not notice that there are billions of people who might try to guess her password ("1234", of course) remotely.

      That's part of the fact that good-old-fashioned keys (the ones used for opening mechanical locks) remain so successful, despite their obvious weaknesses. Yes, someone can pick the lock, but they have to be there, so you don't need to worry about someone picking your lock from China. Someone could steal or copy your key, but again that requires some physical contact, which entails some risk and precludes automated, parallel attacks. So while stealing the key or picking the lock work wonders in spy/heist movies, it's not something you need to worry about when logging into your email (as long as you are not a big enough target that someone would want to assume the risk and expense of sending a real "spy" after you).

    4. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      I don't think this problem can be fixed by "forcing" users to choose long passwords

      It can be fixed by forcing users to use long passwords: "Your new password is 'lately watching Seinfeld, I drink Pepsi'. Write it down, repeat it a hundred times, whatever. You can request a change, but you can't choose a password because we don't trust you." Bonus is that you can maybe get some ad money from Seinfeld or Pepsi for making people memorize the password.

    5. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by Darfeld · · Score: 1

      Yeah right!

      Almost none of the recent mediated hacks involved password breaking. At this point I think password isn't the biggest issue with internet security today. Breaking a password isn't fast enough for profitable mass-hacking. And a good password won't be of any use against key-loggers (or any other method to get a password without force breaking it).

      A bad password is an issue if you are a particular target, not if you are one of the crowd. (Except maybe an exceptionally bad password like "1234"... damn!)

      --
      (\__/) This is Lapinator
      (='.'=) copy it in your sig
      (")_(") so it can take over the world
    6. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by FyRE666 · · Score: 1

      You know that a well implemented hardware authenticator cannot be defeated by a key logger, right? (code is based on the date/time, and one-time only - so even if the attacker entered the exact same details as you, it wouldn't gain them access.)

    7. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by Darfeld · · Score: 1

      So you can't access your profile on an other hardware? sounds like a lot of fun.

      But It's just irrelevant. The principal issue those last month is where you can gain access without identifying yourself to a lot of profile at a time.

      --
      (\__/) This is Lapinator
      (='.'=) copy it in your sig
      (")_(") so it can take over the world
    8. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I notice you've used the name Mallory for the evil imposter persona in your example.

      Are you by chance dating a woman named Eve?

    9. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not SecurID, smartcards.

      SecurID had a single fail point whereas smartcards can provide detached (from any server) real cryptographic security.

      New computers should come with card readers built in (they're cheap as hell, like $2 or less in bulk). The cards themselves are also very cheap.

      You still run the risk of someone stealing your card and using it but the cards have a self destruct mechanism if someone doesn't know the PIN (protected in hardware). Even simple PIN's are relatively secure because you could set the self destruct at like 3 attempts or something.

    10. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a great solution:

      1) some hashes place limitations on significant bits (thankfully the worst offender, the old-Unix crypt(), is no more, but there are still websites which limit passwords to 8 characters in length - presumably because their backend is an ancient version of Oracle or something else that uses the original crypt algorithm)

      2) forcing of valid dictionary words - ESPECIALLY known ones - helps in the attack. Length mitigates, but if you also force valid sentences, as the example above... In other words, if all the passwords (or even a significant number) contain "Seinfeld" and "Pepsi", you've shortened the space for brute-force search significantly. If flaws are found later in the hash algorithm you use, then the ability to quickly scan for matches is increased to the point where it could be minutes rather than days. Remember that cracking nowadays will be done by a distributed cluster, if not by pre-calculated rainbow table.

    11. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      "using SecureID style authentication"

      Um, you know SecureID was hacked, right? It's easy to blame users, but the really big problem seems to be incompetence on the server side. Not hashing passwords, doing stupid things that allow different account numbers in the URL to access other accounts, etc.

      If you're an idiot and use an easy password your account might get hacked. If you're an admin and use an easy password it COULD be bad. But the big scores, taking down millions of accounts, have almost all been gross errors in server setup.

    12. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the passcode to open the front door is "1234"

      That's amazing! I've got the same combination on my luggage!

    13. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by Terrasque · · Score: 1

      We already have some of that. It's far from perfect, and it authenticates the browser session not the user.

      The key ingredient is called "OpenID" - There's been a lot of things said about it, some being nonsense, and some being true. However, it has some very good points:

      1. It's secure. I don't know of any successful attacks against openid directly.

      2. It allows a web page to check if the user really is that user without actually asking the user.

      3. Since it's SSO and only one place to authenticate the user, it can be done properly I mostly use google's openid provider, and have 2 factor auth configured for that account.

      It's not perfect, but it's what we got, and it's miles better than the current standards (username + password)

      --
      It's The Golden Rule: "He who has the gold makes the rules."
    14. Re:We need to take users out of the loop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, until they ignore you and write it down anyways just like 95% of users will do in the real world. Which is why few people *require* long passwords. Brute force hacking is not the problem. The problem is people getting the hashed passwords in the first place.

  10. The Negative Side of a Fight for Users' Rights by eldavojohn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What has led to the sudden hacking boom? Ease of access to tools has also led to an explosion in the numbers of people actively looking for companies with weakened defenses, according to security experts. Meanwhile, the recession has left thousands of highly skilled IT staff out of work and desperate for money, while simultaneously crimping companies' IT security budgets. The pressure to get systems up and running as quickly as possible also means that networks aren't locked down as tightly as they should be, which can leave back doors open for hackers.

    But by that logic, we could have seen similar things when the dotcom bubble burst, right?

    My view of this comes from a completely different place. I see an exceptionally large amount of users' rights being debated and discussed and we're seeing communities popping up devoted to this. Frankly, it seems like the users are just getting shit on. And, like any struggle for rights, there are negative things that happen. There are always going to be people that take it to an extreme level and there are going to be innocent bystanders turned into victims. While I still see this as a bad thing, some of these actions remind me of a sort of John Brown at Harpers Ferry incident. Similarly, there's the mindless looting during rights demonstrations and protest crowds at the G8 summit but it's not the overall message that's doing that. The opportunists come out of the woodwork.

    Similarly the public and citizens of the internet are demanding more rights. While this fight is going on with Facebook, Sony, world governments, etc, the communities are going to pop up that take it to an extreme offensive. They will do bad things and I'm not going to be one condoning it but I see it as part of the growing pains of companies respecting peoples' rights.

    It's a sort of vigilante justice that I don't agree with nor condone but I can somewhat sympathize when I feel like I've been unjustly wronged by some of the targets and have had no sense of justice in the matter. People who feel strongly about this and have that negative spark in them would have a motive to become a part of these new communities. And in my opinion that's a more plausible explanation as to why you're seeing an explosion -- not the recession or turnover in network employees.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:The Negative Side of a Fight for Users' Rights by dintech · · Score: 1

      It's a sort of vigilante justice that I don't agree with nor condone but I can somewhat sympathize when I feel like I've been unjustly wronged by some of the targets and have had no sense of justice in the matter.

      that's a more plausible explanation as to why you're seeing an explosion

      Can anyone name the other fans of explosions that think this way?

    2. Re:The Negative Side of a Fight for Users' Rights by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Can anyone name the other fans of explosions that think this way?

      The half a million people sitting in US jails because they dared to temporarily alter their own state of conciseness with something other than alcohol.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    3. Re:The Negative Side of a Fight for Users' Rights by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Most of the people who simply altered their state of consciousness don't land in jail.

      It's the people who are out distributing the substances that make it easy for average fools to alter their state of consciousness. It's a little like someone handing out chain saws to a bunch of 12 year old kids. Who doesn't think they should be punished for doing something that dangerous?

    4. Re:The Negative Side of a Fight for Users' Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mythbusters?

    5. Re:The Negative Side of a Fight for Users' Rights by bzipitidoo · · Score: 1

      You mention Harper's Ferry. Are you an American citizen? If yes, will you go back to Britain, change your citizenship, and swear allegiance to the crown? Because the American Revolution was illegal. The rebels committed thousands of illegal acts. If you won't disown your American citizenship, then I guess you condone acts such as the Boston Tea Party, the meeting of the First Continental Congress to plead for royal intervention, which the king declared treasonous after it had happened, and finally the Declaration of Independence.

      I suppose you have too much to lose by saying anything else. But really, how else do we get bad laws changed? For the radical stuff, going through proper channels takes too long and is too likely to fail. Almost certainly some of the power brokers will cheat in an attempt to bury the issues, and stifle the dissent. They should hear these issues, instead they abuse their power to manipulate the technicalities of our system to ignore it all. What do you do then? Sometimes they get stupid, and pull stunts such as the imprisonment of Sklyarov, and police raids on businesses such as Steve Jackson Games. That gives us an opportunity to force some changes. But mostly, they manage to hold the line, and constantly push back with garbage like ACTA. The issues remain unsettled. Should Terry Childs not be in prison? Even the hacker community has doubts on that one. He should never have been in the position he was put. I don't mean his job, I mean being the only one with the Keys to the Kingdom. That was a huge policy failure on the part of his employer, and they covered their mistakes by railroading him. All the easier because he made mistakes too.

      Someone has to make the first noise, make us heard. Squeaky wheel, you know. After the Revolution, the Brits saw what idiots they had been in their handling of the colonies, and took a much softer approach to Canada and Australia. It was also a loud demonstration of the flaws of their monarchist government, as many of the provocations had been initiated by George III himself. He was perhaps the biggest hawk of them all, wanting to fight on after 1783.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    6. Re:The Negative Side of a Fight for Users' Rights by JonySuede · · Score: 1

      the freedom fighter ;)

      --
      Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
  11. This? by rossdee · · Score: 2

    "Is This the Golden Age of Hacking?"

    This what?

    This century?
    This decade?

    How long is an 'Age'

    1. Re:This? by artor3 · · Score: 1

      Since I'm pretty sure they're talking about the PSN hack, it looks like an age is about two months.

      These things just don't take the time they used to.

    2. Re:This? by haxwk · · Score: 1
      And for that matter, what do they mean by "Golden". Are hackers using gold computers now? Did they give up on those diamond computers they were developing?

      I just don't get this figurative language stuff.

    3. Re:This? by Zephyn · · Score: 1

      They're probably drawing a parallel between this and the 'Golden Age of Piracy' in the 16-1700's. A surplus of people capable and willing to take from the system what they've been unable to legally earn, and a lot of poorly defended, inviting targets.

    4. Re:This? by ginbot462 · · Score: 1

      20 turns by default - Civ III. Hey, you asked :)

      --
      Atlas Shrugged : Thematic Story :: Battlefield Earth : Organized Religion
    5. Re:This? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      It's a stupid use of your gold ingots to make computers out of them. Gold computers wear out quicker than the cobblestone ones! Use your gold ingots to make powered rails.

    6. Re:This? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      10 turns long

  12. Wasn't 'Secure'ID one of the victims? by biodata · · Score: 1

    Centralising security creates a single weak point, as recently demonstrated when someone stole the keys from SecureID. If Facebook can recognise us from our friends' pictures now, perhaps all our systems should be doing the same through webcams. It's too creepy to contemplate but not too far fetched technically.

    --
    Korma: Good
    1. Re:Wasn't 'Secure'ID one of the victims? by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      So I can grab your photo off facebook and use it to login?

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  13. I'd argue the opposite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course, I didn't RTFA or even the RTFS, but I did RTFT, and based on that I'd argue that as time has moved on, we're moving further and further from whatever was the Golden Age of hacking.

    Was it the 1990s that elevated Open Source to the mainstream's radar--whether or not it was able to achieve mainstream acceptance as an option. The creation of GNU/Linux, and eventually spawning what would become the Mozilla project.

    Was it the 1970s-1980s with the Homebrew Computer Club and a culture that spawned several modern day behemoths (Apple, MicroSoft)?

    Was it the 1940s where we we split the atom, and rooms full of people were biological calculators working on solving nature's mysteries? Enigma and the intelligence/counter-intelligence measures in place around them.

    Does it predate our modern idea of technology? The analytical engine? The mechanical turk was a social hack. Complex but memorable and human-only usable ciphers have been popular for centuries.

    Given our modern view point, and view that more-recent history is always most important, I'd say the late 70s to mid 80s was the golden age. Never was so much technology readily available and hacking actually encouraged by the companies in place.

    But is this? Where even the "open source" Android platfom is usually provided via devices that require bypassing firmware crypto, and you can't even view without breaking the law, privately, on your personal computer, the contents of a medium you purchased in a reputable retail store?

    Well, given the amount of effort spent hacking around CSS, encrypted firmware, and a mess of other attempts to keep people out of their toys, I guess you could make a case for it.

    1. Re:I'd argue the opposite by nomadic · · Score: 0

      Was it the 1990s that elevated Open Source to the mainstream's radar--whether or not it was able to achieve mainstream acceptance as an option. The creation of GNU/Linux, and eventually spawning what would become the Mozilla project.

      Did the creators of GNU/Linux break into other people's computer systems? It's not hacking to write software that isn't intended to do so; unless you are going by the incorrect jargon file definition of hacking. By the way, Mozilla's significance is severely overrated; a better example of successful, brought-to-the-mainstream open source design is Apache.

    2. Re:I'd argue the opposite by Darfeld · · Score: 2

      If you consider that "Hacker" now mean "Evil Spawn who do something illegal with a computer", I would say TFT is right, by your own argumentation. More and more people feel the need to break law on a level or an other to do what they want with their devices. So effectively the number of hackers raise.

      Me I think that the more lucrative informations will be hackable, the more hackers will be happy.

      --
      (\__/) This is Lapinator
      (='.'=) copy it in your sig
      (")_(") so it can take over the world
    3. Re:I'd argue the opposite by Thud457 · · Score: 1

      1990, Legion of Doom steals AT&T Unix source code
      August 25, 1991, Linux Torvalds releases the Linux kernel

      coincidence?

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  14. Dawn of the novice script-kiddie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The issue is that ANYONE can crack these days. People with non-existent computer skills can easily acquire tools with point-and-click interfaces for hacking. Combine this with epic-level apathy on the part of the targets and it is a little like the destruction of the buffalo population during the wild west. Only if the cowboys were 12 years old, rode tanks, and had auto-target.

    1. Re:Dawn of the novice script-kiddie by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      That was true 20 years ago too. Script kiddies are not exactly a new phenomenon. The term "script kiddie" was developed a long time ago...

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    2. Re:Dawn of the novice script-kiddie by Anrego · · Score: 2

      The issue is that ANYONE can crack these days.

      In an ideal world, this wouldn't matter because with decent security these script-kiddie attacks shouldn't have any teeth. Things like "got in because they were using an unpatched version of..." just shouldn't happen.

      The _real_ problem is that people said for years "well yes technically it's probably a vulnerability, but who is ever gonna target us and find it". For a long time this was true. People ran outdated software on public facing systems and left them fully connected to the internal network, fully aware it was a bad idea, because unless someone dedicated time and energy at them (and who is gonna do that to _us_), it wouldn't be a problem.

      Now script-kiddies just run a (sometimes _graphical_) tool that scans an entire network for any of 10 bazillion vulnerabilities, and all these little holes suddenly get found.

  15. Retroactive only. by Chardansearavitriol · · Score: 1

    A golden age can only exist by looking back on what was. Anyone declaring anything to be a golden age is therefor automatically wrong.

    1. Re:Retroactive only. by haxwk · · Score: 1

      Luckily for journalists, that little thing called a question mark lets you make big claims without actually "declaring" anything ;)

  16. Cryptographic authentication by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

    The way to fix the problem of bad passwords is to do away with passwords entirely, and start using cryptographic authentication methods. It may require us to issue a special dongle to users, but at the end of the day people should be able to use their public key to log in to online systems. Naturally, there would be some issues -- users would need to have a way to revoke keys, increase their key sizes to compensate for new algorithms and faster computers, etc., but it would still be an improvement over what we have been doing for the past few decades.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
    1. Re:Cryptographic authentication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So instead of having to beat a password out of someone, you just have to steal their dongle?

    2. Re:Cryptographic authentication by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      So instead of having to beat a password out of someone, you just have to steal their dongle?

      Yes, assuming the dongle requires no passphrase or other token to decrypt you private key. This moves the security problem to something that people have more experience dealing with: protecting their personal possessions.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:Cryptographic authentication by GravityStar · · Score: 1

      Aaah, yes. TPM and Palladium to the rescue!

  17. Weak Security by wintercolby · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What do you expect to happen when you hire Systems Administrators for 6 month contracts to build your systems, and then let the contract expire after the servers are built? Servers don't usually patch themselves, nor do they remain compliant with your security standards once you give developers and DBA's root access.

    --
    Most ignorance is vincible ignorance. We don't know because we don't want to know. --Aldous Huxley
    1. Re:Weak Security by magamiako1 · · Score: 1

      I wish I could mod you up significantly.

    2. Re:Weak Security by xero314 · · Score: 1

      ...nor do they remain compliant with your security standards once you give developers...root access.

      Restricting access to those that write the software that runs your mission critical systems, is not going to increase security. I will tell you from experience that it will decrease your security. When a developer does not have the access they need to complete their job, and have to spend unnecessary time contacting system administrators to handle small changes, you will end up with developers creating workarounds. These workarounds are usually written out of desperation and frustration, which is not a mindset conducive to security conscious decisions.

      I am not saying that developers should be granted full root access, I'm just saying that every limitation that is placed on a developer is in itself a security risk as developers work around those limitations.

      If you can't trust your developers you are already fucked, just as much as if you can't trust your admins, or your security experts.

    3. Re:Weak Security by wintercolby · · Score: 1

      I've worked with one too many developer that thought everything under the / filesystem needed to be mode 777. Devs should have root on Dev and maybe test systems. They should only be given temporary root access on production systems after they've proven their changes in dev and test environments.

      --
      Most ignorance is vincible ignorance. We don't know because we don't want to know. --Aldous Huxley
  18. Not exactly golden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you look at some of the 'hacks' like getting into CityBank, there isn't any real 'l33t uber haxor' going on here. Those sites were remarkably insecure. No stateful inspection of ID/Password, unsalted passwords/ids, declaring what should be very private information in the clear for all the world to see, multiple access points to private data, likely an unencrypted (non-ssl) connection, its also very likely that packet sequencing was non-random, so a border gateway protocol man in the middle attack using packet injection would work, as well as (much easier) ribbon tables to break poor passwords (brute force, but not that much force). The list goes on. Golden age? Not really. This is like when the kid taking his first introduction to scripting course came up with the ILUVYOU virus. If a newbie script kiddie can make off with the keys to the kingdom, then clearly the castle walls shouldn't be made of single ply wet tissue paper.

  19. Software by DaMattster · · Score: 2

    I think it is more bugs in software than the network infrastructure! Everyone is so quick to blame the infrastructure engineers when I have seen more poorly written applications with memory leaks and ones that run with root privileges than poor network designs.

  20. Blame? by Kingrames · · Score: 1

    It takes a special kind of person, who, when presented with lots of free time and the tools to do amazing things, says: "I think I'm going to horribly violate the entire online world today."

    Perhaps I should be thankful that I'm turning my talents to more productive ends. But I doubt I'll be hired before these assclowns find work.

    If you want to blame someone, we could blame Obama, whose administration has practically continued the war on hackers and then wondered "why are we so short on competent programmers?" or we could blame wall street and its "rape the economy and then blame those that tried to stop us" philosophy, or we could blame industries that engaged in military action against america, deliberately using their racketeering scheme to attack children and college students, knowingly and willfully attacking our country's supply of future skilled labor - something they did for over a decade prior to "the crash", or there's china and india who are or at least were doing so well in spite of our country's failures, or there's our own prior administration who spent countless times more money than we had or would ever have to wage war against iraq, an enemy of the terrorists that bombed us on 9/11, or there's the new fascists of america who are using the words "liberal" and "homosexual" instead of "undesirable" and "jew", or there's global climate change, or those that deny it, or sick and twisted people in power in every position they could be in...

    Fuck it. When the world runs out of victims and points in my direction I'll be happily enjoying life on Mars, in my secret volcano lair at Olympus Mons, with my consciousness-infused computer "phylactery" keeping me immortal, enjoying the ability to do in the real world what we do online now.

    --
    If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
  21. Media attention by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it that there are more incidents of hacking, or just higher publicized ones?

    You know how our media works. Summer of shark attacks, and all that.

    Most of what lulzsec has done, for instance, is really penny ante script kiddy bullshit that's been overhyped. Wow, you saw the httpd.conf -- but didnt and couldnt edit it. Just like any other untrusted user with access to the box.

  22. Insecure designs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Javascript, Java, ActiveX in our browsers, trojans on phones!? Did I mention my neighbours have WEP wifi networks? Why are routers still being made that don't warn people when they turn WEP on that it is largely insecure... There is a systematic culture of choosing convinence over security in software design.

  23. Golden opportunity, maybe by zbrook · · Score: 1

    Golden age implies that great (or, at least, impressive) things are accomplished. Nothing much impressive about (to paraphrase) shooting fish, in a barrel, twice in the head, with an elephant gun.

    More online services each year = more targets each year. Inadequate investment in security = easier targets. I'm sure crackers are getting more sophisticated, but probably no more than in any other field. It's definitely easier to find victims.

    One could imagine an age of some kind which grows from all this, but not quite there yet.

  24. Cloud solutions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People rely more on the Web, putting more stuff up into clouds from different providers. Thus, the target interest shifted. Why hack one PC if you can hack one ps3 network and access millions of users data?

    The recent hacks show how the cloud computing world does not solve any problem, it creates them.

  25. Perfect storm actually... by mlts · · Score: 5, Informative

    There are a lot of reasons for this to be an age of intrusions galore:

    1: Corporate philosophy. I mention this often, but it is very true -- security is a cost center, so in a lot of firms, it gets hind teat in the budget.

    2: Ease of getting away with intrusions. Got a botnet? Just create some PPTP/L2TP connections and you can manually try breaking into machines and one can either not be traced, or have the blame shifted to another party. Especially if the intrusions come from a country that is disliked.

    3: Lack of international cooperation. All it takes is one proxy to be in a country that doesn't like another, and there is no way an intrusion can be traced, much less prosecuted.

    4: Lack of meaningful security tools. A lot of the tools used in businesses are all sizzle, and not much steak. Take AV programs. They are great at catching last week's stuff. However, most attacks are polymorphic 0-days that just zing past AV program detections.

    5: Ease of infecting via ad rotation services. Ad rotation services can sling malware without ever getting caught because people will blame the website, not the servers slapping the ads on it. The same ad servers that can target by demographic can target a company and just that company for malware.

    6: Using the Internet for all traffic. In the past, there were backbones that were not accessible to anyone that transactions ran across. Now the same wire that gets pr0n to Joe Sixpack also carries bank data and transactions.

    7: Failure to use basic security protocols in password storage. Hell, crypt(3) is better than most ways passwords are stored. The best thing is to look at known secure utilities like TrueCrypt and follow their example.

    8: SQL injections and parametrized queries. Simple stuff, but because a lot of dev projects just want a code base regardless of bugs, this stuff gets ignored until the breaches start.

    9: No real network security. A firewall doesn't cut it anymore. Instead, companies have to use VLANs and keep departments separated. This way, a compromise in receiving doesn't mean finance or HR is pwned too.

    10: Legacy protocols. FTP (other than anonymous FTP), telnet (except for use for debugging), and other insecure protocols need to either be limited via packet filtering mechanisms and router ports, or eliminated altogether. Instead, if two machines need to share data, have them use a LUN presented to them and a filesystem that allows for this.

    11: Lack of internal policies and procedures. Security isn't just clicking "secure mode" on an appliance and walking off. There needs to be a process if someone calls in from an internal line demanding info, or someone physically is picking a lock.

    12: Separation of duties and data. This is expensive relatively, so it tends not to be done, and the same server with the source code build may have the HR payroll data. This makes for a field day for an attacker.

    13: Chain of custody of data. Either the machine it sits on is properly secured, or the data is stored encrypted with proper key management. For example, some enterprise level backup programs have data encrypted at the client end, and only that end has the key. This way, if the enterprise backup server gets compromised, the data can be destroyed, not accessed or modified.

    14: Morale. Morale is so easily forgotten, especially with companies that do the low bidding among the last 3-5 candidates. High morale means people are proactive on security. Low morale means people will ignore breaches assuming they won't be thrown under the bus.

    15: Cloud computing. There is no benefit for a cloud provider to give anything but token gestures for security financially, so one is begging to be compromised unless there is solid encryption with good key management done before the data leaves the client. Even then, blackhats can have free and unfettered access to the encrypted data and can detect patterns over time. SLAs are meaningless; a cloud provider can change hands or go bankrupt and all the privately stored data can be made into a torrent or sold to anyone with cash.

    Because most businesses pay lip service at best to security, it is no wonder why blackhats are having a field day.

  26. No it's not by blahbooboo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The golden age of hacking was the late 1970s and 1980s. Things they pulled off back then were far more impressive and interesting to watch.

    1. Re:No it's not by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      Interesting, maybe, but I don't know that I've seen anything more impressive than heap spraying. That's a hard technique to pull off.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:No it's not by blahbooboo · · Score: 1

      Just thinking back then there were modems to dialin, there wasn't this huge network of computers all connected. Pretty impressive (and ballsy) to figure out ways to dialin and hack into a system --- for example, finding the telephone number to even call

    3. Re:No it's not by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      You mean wardialing? Or did you have some other type of hack in mind?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  27. Oh they are talking about cracking... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    I did agree, more people are hacking now than ever before, Magazines like Make and Makerfaire as well as the rise of the Hackerspace has significantly made inroads on bringing hacking back to the masses...

    But the article is written by a illiterate journalist that seems to not realize that the term "Hacker" has been retaken and what he is talking about is simply a cyber-criminal or cracker.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Oh they are talking about cracking... by Chardansearavitriol · · Score: 1

      I dont get this definition of hacking. At all. It seems to share the definition of "Life" or "Doing stuff with stuff." Its among the most bizarre names for a very simple idea that i know of. You should check out my room. Ive hacked my enviornment so that, instead of a lack of oxygen causing panic, my breath refelx works off rising Co2 levels! Or, hey, I hacked this peice of wood by hacking some metal and hacked myself a table whih my hacked physics box hacks on. It seems completely redundant.

    2. Re:Oh they are talking about cracking... by elrous0 · · Score: 2

      Denial isn't just a river in Egypt. "Hacker" was decided back in the 80's. You can keep pretending if you like, though. Myself, I still like to delude myself that there's a chance "Firefly" may come back.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    3. Re:Oh they are talking about cracking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, we should stay with terminology from the 80's... when was the last time you bit the head off a chicken, "geek"? Or do you mean 1880's... immature coley, a type of fish?

    4. Re:Oh they are talking about cracking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to crawl out from under your rock and take a look at what a "hackerspace" is and get yourself a copy of "make"

      you seem to have been left buried in a old out of date raised floor datacenter that only get's fox news and CNBC.

  28. "continuous wave of attacks" by mcmonkey · · Score: 1

    Are they talking about hacking or cracking?

    For hacking, this could be a silver age. The days of HomeBrew and phone phreaks were the golden age.

    For cracking, as others have noted, it's the lulz age.

  29. Could it possibly be...all the crappy code by AngryNick · · Score: 1

    I'm not longer writing code myself, but I'm constantly amazed at how utterly horrible the code being written by my successors appears and works. Where is the craftsmanship and pride in writing clean, fast code today?

  30. Re:Yeah but I miss the Demos by Darfeld · · Score: 1

    Indeed since hackers now refer exclusively to the people doing bad stuff on the Internet. Well maybe not exclusively on the Internet, but you get the idea.

    --
    (\__/) This is Lapinator
    (='.'=) copy it in your sig
    (")_(") so it can take over the world
  31. Re:Weak Security - and COST by gr8_phk · · Score: 1

    What do you expect to happen when you hire Systems Administrators for 6 month contracts to build your systems, and then let the contract expire after the servers are built? Servers don't usually patch themselves, nor do they remain compliant with your security standards once you give developers and DBA's root access.

    I was going to say something about cost. As the hacking becomes more widespread, companies will notice it is a problem and start to DO something about it. Systems are more vulnerable now because the money has not been spent to secure them - because it hasn't been too much of a problem. We'll probably go through a phase of increased security breaches until people take it seriously and fix it. Now would be a good time for some data driven analysis comparing various OSes and their configurations from a security point of view. That's difficult, but we need to start looking at what works, doesn't work, and why.

  32. Jealousy, or Stupidity? by Subratik · · Score: 2

    Now, I do not condone Lulz Security or Anonymous, but the fact of the matter is they're not just 'script-kiddies'. Every tech-savvy webpage I've gone the ones that are user-submitted have belittled the efforts of both hacking groups as if they could do the same things so easily. I'm not sure why there is such a pretentious atmosphere of 'pro' coders here... but to be real honest with everyone, they have spent a lot of time researching web security vulnerabilities, and the biggest joke of all is that a good portion of readers on slashdot are probably sysadmins who think their system is protected by a golden firewall, which they probably bought from some other software vendor.. Blah, blah, it's just sql injections... lol, yeah... that's the greatest joke of all, they guessed your table names and you allowed escape characters... And these people certainly realize they don't even have to lie or fabricate their stories considering they get in with the simplest, MOST known vulnerabilities.. I think some of lulz's actions deserve merit, the fact that they haven't been caught yet is a sure sign that they're somewhat competent at what they do.... much better in-fact than the security companies that supposedly get paid top-dollar to ensure data protection.. In essence, the biggest joke is not the simple attacks of the hacking groups, it's honestly the over-abundance of hypocrisy and finger pointing that essentially does nothing next to actually coming up with valid security solutions.. The best example of all this is simply Mitnick, he didn't even have to hack.. he just called someone up for a password.. you know why, because the smartest hacker doesn't waste 9 years trying to guess/crack a hash, especially when people are so much easier to manipulate than software.

    1. Re:Jealousy, or Stupidity? by Chardansearavitriol · · Score: 1

      Bugs are inevitable. You can never be sure you you dont have bugs. Hows your head doing? Sure you didnt replace that period with a decimal? What, youre gonna run checking software? Thats all well and good once you can know tha tit will always report correct values. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilemma for the faults in your reasoning.

    2. Re:Jealousy, or Stupidity? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's less a question of "Can I do it?" and more one of "Is it worth getting caught? Do I care enough to invest time in this?"

      The answer to the first question is "Of course". Computers are not unknown anymore, it's pretty easy to do a lot of the things that make the media go "OMG HACKERS!!!!1111" if you've been tech savvy for at least two decades. The answer to the latter two questions would be "No". I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm plenty busy with my own business. Getting caught doing this kind of thing is never worth it. Kevin Mitnick, anyone?

  33. Have to leave this age first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "Golden Age of XXXX" can only be determined when it has been left.

  34. Hackers 2 by jimmerz28 · · Score: 2

    Can we make another movie with Angelina and just throw in Brad Pitt so we can get the 2x the eye candy in a techy movie? Keep Megan Fox out she's way too dumb for a hacker-esque movie...

  35. No sympathy for them! by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 1

    The availability of tools that can automagically find these vulnerabilities and exploit them is what I blame.

    I have no such sympathy. Those tools with find holes are not just as easy for security staff to obtain, but those tools were made FOR the security staff. If someone works in IT Security and don't know how to run Metasploit on their own infrastructure, then they are utterly useless to the point of being the real point of blame. And if companies can't hire those individuals, they are as to blame as banks that don't take security measures to protect tellers from armed bank robbers.

    The same trend to "open environment" that has removed the bullet proof glass from bank tellers is the same BS "open environment" pushed by company websites. Yeah, they opened it, alright. They flew so fast to become "social" that they exposed their nickers!

    --
    I8-D
  36. The golden age has passed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Actually most would consider the "golden age of hacking" to be the mid-to-late 80's.

    None of the large, corporate scale intrusions that have been in the news of late were born out of curiosity, or executed using self-derived skillsets or self-crated tools.

    On the other hand, it's probably a good time to be in security, as the expected overreaction from the corporates is sure to be the gravy train the various HBGary-esque security firms have been waiting for.

  37. If hacking tools are outlawed by amliebsch · · Score: 1

    Then only outlaws will have hacking tools

    QED

    --
    If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
  38. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  39. You know what else has opened back doors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Porn stars.

  40. talking about my generation by pstils · · Score: 1

    Could it also be the right generation - there is now a generation of "politically motivated" people out there who will have grown up with a computer+internet environment from an early age....can this reasonably be said of any other generation? Is this the reason so many hackers have been "created"? Other generations used other tools, ours will use the internet.

  41. Golden Age? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, like, the 1300s were the golden age of bacteria?

  42. No i dont think so. by drolli · · Score: 1

    Nowadays its easier than 10 year ago to explain why you dont want an openly writable share on a network drive. Nowadays its easier to explain to people why they should choose their passwords well.

    While i think anonymous-es script kiddies are stupid a-holes who should go to a therapy, i have to say all these things have made the job of the security admin much easier, since you will get more attention than 10 years ago when "but the my network is still working" was a usual response to a "hey, i think this is insecure".

    So systems will get more secure, and at some point people may even learn about cryptographic certificates.

  43. In the words of Cereal Killer by silentphate · · Score: 1

    "Hack The Planet!"

  44. Spiele by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is totally random and about a month late, but just out of curiosity, does anyone on here have a ffffound invitation or know how one goes about obtaining one? They seem very elusive

    Spielen

  45. no by AxemRed · · Score: 1

    This is the golden age of hacking-for-publicity. I have seen a few people comment that the 80's were the golden age of hacking. I wasn't old enough then to agree or disagree, but I do think that hacking was just as big in the early to mid 90's, when I first came on the scene, as it is now. The only difference is that hackers get a lot more publicity now, and that has cause some to seek publicity.

  46. The hacking tools are a symptom, not a cause by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

    Earlier today Obama talked about a lack of engineers in the US. The same goes for IT professionals. The problem is that those professions are often underappreciated and underpaid, so smart ambitious people go into business and law not tech.

    I work for a Fortune 500 company whose IT department just sent down a command to uninstall Firefox 4 and replace it with 3.6. So they went out of their way to decrease the security of someone's workstation. Hacking is so prevalent because the best and brightest go into CS, and the dumbest drop out and go for IT. Those people make departments less secure, not more secure. The IT managers are usually just as bad or worse. And in my experience, the bigger the company the worse the IT department.

  47. Golden Showers of BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While anyone can put the spotlight on any code or binary, the problem is the difference in language used by lawyers and solicitors who are holding office vs that of the reverser in the field of creativity, one falsely freaks out and makes everything an expensive terror emergency; problem, solution, reaction, the other is calm or willing to test different results, and takes the attitude that your lack of preparation doesn't declare any emergency on my behalf. Both make new words and language up, but neither is on the same page. One holds 23 pages of the definition of the word "AS" and the other holds 23 pages of op codes

    people stuck in the middle are going through life with no goals at all.
    While someone reading this might have goals still, put yourself in the other shoe to see how unhealthy this is in the big timeline, could you go through life with no goals because these were crushed by some new law?

    The uncertainty, and the lack of fixed reference is no mistake when the source only contains ever changing lies and fear scenarios. It also creates apathy at the expense of creativity. Why invest in the stock market, if I can't have my HFT flash crash computer cheating right next to their insider trading one? After all it's a rigged game, I'm only thinking big, how much did you say you can print a day again?

    through language creating law everything is controlled by those making the new law.
    there should be a ban on lawyers and retired lawyers from holding office or appointed for government. Or else a ban on their ability to make law, or use their inflammatory language. I don't know, but I do know I can hear an unhealthy spring has come loose in the the box making these sick boing sounds, and smells like burned plastic and the guys doing the op codes can't concentrate with all the annoying noises and stench, with the guys doing the twenty three pages of the word "AS" hash out some new emergency directive limiting how much fresh air the op code guys might have left.

    you know what the answer won't be Tunisia styled twitter-ing and facebook-ing across fios-spyOS splitters

    you know what the answer is

    Learn the language, that's the hack we need now. This way we can maybe dis assemble the crap in an orderly way, as opposed to being forced to smash it later with the "oop's we fucked up" hammer. when getting smashed by such a hammer would suck equally at a time we ought be re-thinking everything. It's like the snake that eats it's tail now, a careful proper surgery can repair it since it hasn't been too long the head has bitten the tail, but much more and it's done, no matter how it's sliced. We need the language of that surgery in the hands of the people, or at least allowing people to do the surgery. Not the language of the surgery with twenty three pages of "AS" inserted. Think about it, you need a collector, emitter and base, coils, caps and resistors, not a mandated AS encrypted AS de-bounce circuit front end with an mandated AS destructive "off" kill switch. I mean who the fuck is soldering this shit together?

    people must refuse to bite their own tails, and point out that tail biting is unproductive and killing jobs

  48. I remember what it was like before War Games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember what it was like before the movie, "War Games" came out. *THAT* was the golden age.
    >/

  49. "Hacking" to become the new mass "fear" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The reasons are plenty, but none of this is good for end consumers or citizens. This pesky open ground called "the Internet" is becoming quite a nuisance for IP owners/enforcers [RIAA/MPAA], governments [WikiLeaks], ISPs [taking note of cellular telecom providers], etc. Everyone wants their unfair share of the pie and keep the mass population in fear.

    With Osama down, the US government needs a new public fear to play on. I won't be remotely surprised when all of this starts to be commonly coined as "cyber-terrorism" [blargh!].

  50. No, it's not. by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1

    That would have been when all services were exposed to the Internet, plaintext protocols were the norm, exploits were of the single-packet variety, etc.

  51. It's the Golden Age because it Will End Soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I know it seems that governments are powerless against hackers, especially with many operating in countries that are not currently serious about stoping them, but this will eventually change. Eventually, all governments are going to impose harsh and swift penalties for any and all hacking activities. I'll use an old west analogy to explain...

    Back in the old west, if you stole a horse, pretty much whoever caught you could hang you on the spot, or at least any semi-legitimate 'deputy' could do it. Why was horse stealing dealt with so harshly? We don't hang current car theives.

    It was because of two things. Stealing a horse was pretty damned easy in most cases, yet the old west economy depended on horses. As such, the importance of protecting the business structure allowed the punishment to grow out of whack to the crime.

    Hacking is the same now... It's painfully easy to do, but the economy is becoming more and more dependant on electronic comerce, and more and more damage can be done. Eventualy, this will drive any and all hacking to be targeted as a serious crime, not just hacking that really damages a company or government. Eventually, you will end up going to jail for 10 years for changing your friends facebook page without his permission, so there will no longer be an avenue fo casual hackers to practice their skills, and fewer folks will graduate to serious hacking.

    I'm not saying hacking will be eliminated, but that there won't be any casual hackers, just like there aren't any casual murderers, only hard core cyber criminals who need to start in and stay in obscurity. As such, this is the golden age of hacking.

    1. Re:It's the Golden Age because it Will End Soon by mlts · · Score: 1

      We already had the great punishment for cattle rustling. The end result is that it left the US government with the inability to find whitehats, much less blackhats that are loyal.

      Operation Sun Devil forever changed things. Before that, a good blackhat might have taken a job with the USG for patriotic duty. After that, and the fact that there was the fear that anyone who showed skillz would be caught up in a possible witch hunt, pretty much nobody would offer help in manning defenses for fear they would be tossed to the wolves the next time someone wanted to see some arrests done.

      This has been done, and this is part of why American companies are paying the price. In other parts of the world, armies have their blackhat squads and actually have as much prestige as the guys on the ground with the rifles.

      If another pogrom against "hackers" happens, where some guy who finds a link not indexed by Google gets 20-life in a PMITA prison, it means the real blackhats will never be of assistance to the US.

      Unlike horse thieves, if you have a clue, it isn't too hard to cover tracks. Take the people that were caught recently for "hacking". The guy who got into Palin's account used a VPN service (which more than was willing to spill the beans.) Had the guy used an offshore VPN, or just used a wireless network while sitting in a van, he would never have been caught. Politicans will feel good going after the low hanging fruit, but it will cost them dearly in the long run.

      Also, one can look at criminal groups that form when laws banning stuff get passed. Prohibition brought us the mafia. The "war" on drugs has brought us gangs who possess actual tanks that put M1A1s to shame. Laws against "hacking" will just mean that hacking groups will form that will besiege US and European companies on a daily basis without mercy.

      It can be foreseen that the hacking groups could end up making deals with the drug cartels and criminal gangs, for both their mutual benefit. For example, a drug cartel would end up with the GPS coords of every single policeman in a district in real time, as well as the names and addresses of every LEO's family member. In return, the blackhat group would get a portion of the take of any home invasion done.

      We already have enough criminal elements from prohibition, and the war on drugs. Imagine what a "war on hackers" would bring down on us.

  52. Re:Weak Security - and COST by McNihil · · Score: 1

    Not really. In a capitalistic environment only the ones that have enough money to have proper security will flourish. So its good with these security breaches because it will cull the cruft. I wouldn't be surprised if lulzsec already has complete ownage of everything relevant on the net. And with that I hope they'll ramp up the disclosure so the rest of us know how bad it really is. My estimate so far is that it is worse than we can imagine.

  53. The golden age was when hackers didn't go to jail by elucido · · Score: 1

    Way back in the 90s, when people could deface a website and get slapped on the wrist. Hack a dozen corporations and not be investigated.

    Now you do any hacking at all, and you get investigated and locked up by the FBI. It's definitely not the golden age. It's the age where hacking is as stupid as selling drugs used to be in the 80s.

  54. Five types of economies by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    * Subsistence ("There are some lovely berries here")
    * Gift ("This deer is too big to eat before it spoils, so let's share it, and others will share next time")
    * Exchange ("You give me some meat, and I will give you fruit").
    * Planned ("You over there will hunt the meat and you over there will gather the fruit and we will divide it up")
    * Theft ("Give me your fruit and meat because I'm stronger or cleverer than you")

    The balance shifts with technological and cultural changes.

    Theft is, sadly, a form of self-employment, or even subsistence in a sense, for desperate people, even if it is illegal (although privatizing profits and socializing costs by big companies often is not, as what is theft and what is legal is relative to cultural norms).

    Other options would be improved subsistence through 3D printing and solar panels and local gardening, a bigger gift economy like more of Freecycle and food banks, a basic income to soften the exchange economy, or better planning like to have quality local free-to-the-user public housing and cafeterias and workshops. Each state chooses what balance it is going to have based on culture and ideology and existing power centers.

    More on this here:
        http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Economic_Transformation
    (But the "theft" part was insightfully suggested to be added by someone else on slashdot after I wrote that.)

    See also:
        "The Mythology of Wealth"
      http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/402

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  55. Hacking isn't about "tools" by elucido · · Score: 1

    Anyone can acquire tools. If that were all it took to pull off a successful hack then yes everybody would be doing it but it depends on the nature of the hack.

    Hacking a website, DDOSing, anyone can do. Actually infiltrating the entire network, not anyone can do this. This requires a team of somewhat skilled hackers.

    And not any programmer can be a hacker either. There are millions of programmers and anyone can learn to be a programmer, but you cannot learn to be a hacker, you need a talent for it.

  56. The reason? Unsafe technologies hegemony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Old school hacking requiered intimate knowlege of hardware, and because of limited resources OS implementation were done very carefull... and therefore harder to subvert.

    Now: hardware its so powerfull that the "good compromise" on sofware development management its to "save" on programers time using easy, unsafe, teorical weak technologies. A couple of economic bubbles made some of this unsound engineering "options" full range solutions fads.

    Unsafe technologies hegemony, result on ecosystem requiring best practices for expected availability, but still perpetually in danger of the latest unknow exploit.

    Old news: The same old race for the bottom quality accepted by the market, in search of maxing the profits for the top descition makers, bites the proverbial...

  57. There is no sudden hacking boom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is just a hacking news boom. Hacks were done before but not as many people cared. The reason they care now is because of the potential for easy and beneficial hacks such as anything from homebrew enablers and jailbreakers to social hacks like wikileaks. "Hack" has become a buzzword because common people are able to easily benefit from hacks, and that was not the case before. News jumps on the bandwagon for ad impressions, but you can say that about any trend.

  58. It's more likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that cheap hardware permits sub-optimal solutions to survive, and the present mentality of "learn something new today, flush it down the sink in the evening" leads to a mentality of newer is better without ever having the time to really understand what is happening. Eventually we will hit limits in processes and materials and computers will stop changing so much. Hopefully we'll be able to build permanent solutions to existing problems and work out all the bugs, or as close as is humanly possible.

  59. 2 reasons by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    1) Never before has there been so many things one could hack and in so many different ways. There is more online presence today than ever, thus more opportunity.
    2) Many of those online, do not take security seriously, just look are large recent examples. This culture will change eventually, however for now it's the wild west.

    Take those two, add the fact that there are more people online with more computer knowlege than ever before (perhaps not as a ratio of the whole, but in shear numbers yes), and all one has to do is pick off the low hanging fruit. Targeted hacking might be tough still if they actually have any security, however Citibank and Sony has shown that even large institutions show a blatant disregard for basic security. Even with great security, it can always be circumvented by insiders either intentionally for gain, or unintentionally through stupidity (bad practices or human engineering).

  60. The golden age is over by br00tus · · Score: 1
    The predecessor to the golden age of hacking revolved mostly around Bell and phreaking. Some of the phreaks were blind. Abbie Hoffman was involved with a magazine called YIPL (Youth International Party Line) which later became TAP. TAP had meetings in New York City. Phreaks from around the country used to call each other, and have conference calls and the like. In the Bay Area were people like Captain Crunch, and even Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak built blue boxes (they even credit doing this with helping the invention of Apple)

    The golden age started around 1977. In 1977 the TRS-80, the Apple ][ and Commodore PET were all released. In 1978 the Hayes modem began being produced on a mass scale (followed soon by Novation's CAT). By 1980 there were BBSs like 8BBS which were open to the nascent hacker culture (it was raided by the FBI in 1982), and this culture could be seen on Modem Over Manhattan in 1981 and after. There were other hacker BBSs like OSUNY around in 1982. There were also overlooked hacker discussions on Micronet/Compuserve and The Source. Then in 1983, WarGames was released around the time news of the 414 busts were hitting major newspapers. You also had computers like the VIC-20 that could attach to a TV selling for less than $100, with a modem for less than $100, allowing many people to afford to buy these things. So you have an influx of kids onto BBSs, in a young culture which was full of discussions of WarGames and the 414's, with some older, semi-radical technicians who knew about mainframe systems thrown in the mix. You began to have magazines like 2600 in 1984, Phrack in 1985. TAP meetings in the early 1980s gave way to 2600 meetings. Summercon began in 1987.

    What happened is what happens with many movements. It began to get more organized, into sophisticated groups (LoD, MoD, L0CK, Phonemasters, The Posse - not to mention European groups like 8lgm and the people around the CCC, Hack-tic etc.) who eventually gained effective remote control of core Internet pillars (Internic, major gateways like MAE-West, corporate computers of Cisco etc.), as well as x.25 (Tymnet, Sprintnet), Baby Bell computers (COSMOS to SWITCH/FOMS, SARTS, TIRKS etc.).

    The consensus seems to be this ended in 1995, not with a bang but a whimper. The rise of the Internet killed it off. There are a few reasons for this. One is some hackers or hacker groupies started making a lot of money working for start-ups (a lot meaning hundreds of millions, to less than that). Another is the old BBS culture was killed off and replace by the Internet. It used to be there were thousands of BBSs in kids homes, and then other dialups, the mainframes, that the kids would go raid. It was Manichaeism - the hacker network of BBSs where hackers would talk and go raid mainframe (or x.25) dialups, and on the other side the corporate mainframes, totally closed off, with all of the data and so forth. The Internet blended this all together - our network of our own private BBSs disappeared, and suddenly corporations opened up their computers to a large extent via web pages. Changes in production affected relations of production.

    Hacking did not completely stop in 1995, but you have nothing like what existed then now - a network of technologically sophisticated groups who shared information and techniques, who had the capability to get into virtually any system. It's possible things could get to that point again, but I haven't seen sign of it. And it is hard to have the network of people necessary to do something like that and keep it completely secret.

  61. Agreed, with some "addendums" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're going to LIKE, & probably appreciate (if not empathize with) this:

    "1: Corporate philosophy. I mention this often, but it is very true -- security is a cost center, so in a lot of firms, it gets hind teat in the budget." - by mlts (1038732) * on Wednesday June 15, @10:51AM (#36450552)

    Agreed, & for pointing out problems in security once, in a company I was hired to do SFTP coding for data transfers + Stored Proc & bind variables usage alongside removing business logic from app front ends to DB's (all good security measures)?

    Well, it GOT ME FIRED ONCE even... I couldn't BELIEVE IT!

    Why?

    Well - First, I pointed out that my systems mgr. had setup Trend Micro AntiVirus wrong! (I.E.-> It wasn't updating to all of the client nodes/workstations, & was 6++ months out of date... I didn't put the blame on him either, I just pointed it out! Turns out he WAS the one who set it up wrong though!)

    How'd I discover this?

    Well - I found that out when my system & others turned up infections multiplying over their network!

    So, on the off chance?

    I asked my mgt. if they were "shadowing me" via some app, they said no... so, I showed them the rogue .exe running in memory on my machine & others!

    Mind you, & this happened AT A FAIRLY MAJOR INSURER, that has data on folks healthcare!

    (E.G.-> Clients are WWF for example)

    That company, which I was doing secure FTP data transfer development for, stored procs, bind vars, & business logic movement to DB out of the app itself (& moving apps from VB6 to VB.NET &/or ASP.NET back in 2006)?

    You can secure apps & db's all to hell, but if you're NOT COVERING WORKSTATIONS vs. malware - you're screwed anyhow: It's like locking all your doors & leaving the windows WIDE OPEN!

    Heh, kicks my ASS to this day: I pointed out a problem, & guess what? They fired me for it!

    HOWEVER - Those same managers got fired later though: As they got caught using AVG freeware edition ILLEGALLY in place of Trend's erroneous setup!

    (The company got fined large from what I understand too, & they made up for it by canning those 2 stooges (one was a "paper MCSE" & the other? NO COMPUTER SKILLS AT ALL beyond maybe that of an typical end-user (& yet, he was "mgt." - give me a break: How many of YOU have seen that BEFORE too??)))

    Mgt. today (not all, but many) are MORE INTERESTED IN "BURNING BUDGET" so they can get the same next yr. or MORE, or, getting bonuses instead of doing their job - especially in security (especially nowadays).

    ---

    "2: Ease of getting away with intrusions. Got a botnet? Just create some PPTP/L2TP connections and you can manually try breaking into machines and one can either not be traced, or have the blame shifted to another party. Especially if the intrusions come from a country that is disliked." - by mlts (1038732) * on Wednesday June 15, @10:51AM (#36450552)

    Or, by using anonymous proxies... small addendum, but you overlooked it.

    ---

    "3: Lack of international cooperation. All it takes is one proxy to be in a country that doesn't like another, and there is no way an intrusion can be traced, much less prosecuted.." - by mlts (1038732) * on Wednesday June 15, @10:51AM (#36450552)

    Gov't.'ally & law enforcement wise? Yes, agreed... HOWEVER:

    "GEEKS" all over put out data you can use to secure yourself!

    Classic case of "the community takes care of itself/it's own" but... you have to find, and USE, said data, yourself to your security advantage...

    I.E.-> It's NOT really fully automated for you!

    (E.G.-> I get data from all over the world, every 15 minutes, that populates a protective HOSTS file & firewall rules table here via Python scripts my nephew & I built in fact, that way! Pure "hands of

  62. "Great minds think alike" on the "Wild West"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used the same "train-of-thought" (literally) in my responses this week on LulzSec/Anonymous here http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2231322&cid=36416026 by my LITERALLY calling today's internet "The Wild West" there... lol!

    * Great minds DO think alike!

    APK

    P.S.=> It pretty much IS, and it's gotten "wilder" since around 2002-2004 period - I know it literally by numbers doing the talking for me, in fact!

    How?

    Well, here, in my populating a custom protective HOSTS file for "layered security" here!

    E.G.-> From 1997 when I started it, to around oh, 2007 or so? I had MAYBE 400k-500k entries in a 10 yr. span!

    However, from 2008 to present?

    I am up to 1,444,000 entries of bad sites/servers/hosts-domains blocked in it (blackhole 0.0.0.0 blocked vs. loopback 127.0.0.1 slower & more ops type)!

    That as of 15 minutes ago!

    So - that tell anyone anything (think differential equations, & growth over a timeframe)? Does me!

    I.E.-> I tripled the # of entries of KNOWN bad sites/servers/domains-hosts in it, in far less time than I spent the first decade on it, in the last 3 yrs. now... apk

  63. Law Enforcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The FBI is documented to have infiltrated the Black Panthers and pushed them towards more aggressive militancy in order to bring about their downfall. Is it possible the same thing is happening with hacker groups at the moment? The gubment, at least on the law enforcement side, would love a way to push through additional controls and restrictions on the Wild, Wild Web. What better way to win support for that then show what is possible by active/aggressive Bad People?

  64. true age of hacking was pre 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    after that its all script kiddies and feds dont kid yourselves real hackers are in background doing little and keeping low profiles.
    this is the age of rage against corporations. IT has just begun.

  65. Have U read Cliff Stoll's "The Cuckoo's Egg"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'd like it... it points out a TRUE tale of a guy (stoll himself) working in academic environs & finding that a backup logging system students wrote the year before wasn't "jiving" w/ std. NIX logging... he started checking into it, & voila:

    He found that that academic institutions systems were being penetrated by German Hackers in the employ of the KGB (how he caught them was hilarious & inventive - a keyboard believe it or not, iirc!).

    In fact, iirc (been years since I read it, around 2001 iirc)? It was the "chaos computer club"... precursors really to today's "Anonymous" &/or "LulzSec"!

    (Except they were TOTALLY in it "for the money" - I don't feel LulzSec + Anonymous are though (in fact, I think THEIR goals are a LOT more noble, if you could call it that (especially LulzSec, because of this http://uk.ibtimes.com/articles/160624/20110610/lulzsec-lulz-security-nhs-health-service-cyber-attack-weak-hack-hackers-hacked-sony-nintendo-network.htm where they actually DID DO "Good"... instead of abusing it for themselves... I have to give them that! )))

    Great read too... even if "geekish" (normal folks could appreciate it too, reads like a mystery-detective novel - geeky/nerdy computer types would for sure, as they understand the material).

    It was a "best seller" also iirc, even if based on "geek" materials as well... good stuff! Look into it IF you haven't read it...

    APK

    P.S.=> Weirdest part, even if it was YEARS-to-DECADES ago? He pointed it out to local law enforcement. They said "contact the feebs" (FBI)... or was it another agency like interpol?? Not sure anymore but... everyone kept "passing the buck", that is, UNTIL the man found that MILITARY INSTALLATIONS WERE BEING HIT (Ft. Stewart in Richmond Hill Ga. (reason I recall that is my brother was stationed there no less, he's a Major in the military now))... great read, you'd love it!

    I think it should be "required reading" for ANY person in academia in a course-track for computer security in fact!

    ... apk

  66. Hackers: Still Childless Weirdos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Scumbags then, scumbags now,

  67. The better question is... by RichM · · Score: 1

    I think the more important question here is: are they (the companies) being attacked more or are they being more honest about being breached?

  68. What bull by JustAnotherMike · · Score: 1

    The average system plugged in today is way more secure than the average system from 5 years ago which was way more secure than the average system from 10 years ago which was way more secure than the one from ... yada yada yada.

    Two simple reasons.

    1 - Disclosure laws. Yes they're important but because of mandatory disclosures way more of these things make the news than they would of back in the 80s or 90s. So not only do we hear about it more often, but many groups/individuals are more motivated to go after the low hanging fruit because they can get bigger headlines out of it.

    2 - There's gold in them there hills. Credit cards, SINs, online bank accounts, whatever. It's all the same thing: Money. And there's a heck of a lot more of it floating around on this Internets thing than there ever was back in the day.

  69. Help the End Users along a little by zigmeister · · Score: 1

    Here's a list of things that I wish the major consumer OS's especially the desktop ones would do, and they'd be fairly easy to implement:
    -push hardware vendors to use full disk encryption by default with a hardware managed key
    -password manager built into the OS that logs in when the user logs in and "integrates" with the OS/browser well, and automates most of the bullshit picking new passwords and so on, so users actually use it and use it properly that is no longer use weak passwords, reuse passwords etc
    -two factor authentication to log in
    -update automatically in the background system that requires no user interaction to run updates, doesn't noticeably slow down the system, and doesn't require the software to be installed from the OS's "app store" to work, and doesn't require user interaction to add new programs to the list
    -No list is complete without: not run admin by default (but this one has been repeated a thousand times)

    Things I wish they'd do that would take a little more work:
    -push software vendors to use ASLR (and to really take advantage of that, push them to make 64-bit versions of their programs)
    -push software vendors to use DEP, with these two I am specifically talking about, the major web browsers, browser plugins like flash and financial software like quicken

    Overall, I guess it's still a young industry and these things take time. I think that security will hugely improve once the hardware underneath stops evolving, at least quite so quickly. OTOH that won't happen for the forseeable future so stuff like this could go a long way towards helping.

    Also while I'm asking for diamond studded saddles for my herd of ponies, get the government to abolish the SSN system. Stupid friggin system. And they have the gall to investigate other entities for poor security practices, gimme a break.

    --
    Failure formatting five FAQs of financial facts.
  70. More like by AP31R0N · · Score: 1

    Is this the golden age of shitty question headlines?

    --
    Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
  71. It shouldn't be done and it won't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Making it illegal to develop a software product is a bad idea. Software security experts use some of the VERY same tools to test network security as those who 'test' it with the intention of breaking things or stealing data. The only exception is that the real, most dangerous crackers make their own tools (or mod existing ones), while the script kiddies are the ones who get prosecuted.

    It's completely unenforceable. The only thing a law like this will do is make it more difficult for legit IT security experts to do their job.

  72. Golden age of hacking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, it's the year web based business was forced to grow up.

  73. "the illiterate dolt" = JonySuede, lol! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The CORRECT spelling & phrase is not what you wrote:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2234578&cid=36429134

    "Gotos have there place" - by JonySuede (1908576) on Monday June 13, @05:10PM (#36429134)

    It's THEIR, indicating possessive, not THERE, you blatantly obvious illiterate dolt!

    (LOL, If that's how you write english? I'd HATE to see your code you write (that is, IF you even do)).

    APK

    P.S.=> Payback's a BITCH, yea? See here, and I am waiting on your trolling behind to show up there:

    http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2248218&cid=36479278

    Just so I can publicly make you look more stupid than you already have clearly evidenced yourself to be!

    ... apk