Slashdot Mirror


NSA Hiring At Black Hat

jfruhlinger writes "It may seem strange that the US government would be recruiting tech talent at Black Hat, a security conference whose participants have a notorious ambivalence about keeping within the letter of the law. But the NSA — a shadowy organization with its own reputation for dodgy behavior — is there recruiting, and pitching itself as a haven for geeks."

139 comments

  1. Are the NSA really that stupid? by elrous0 · · Score: 2

    It may sound like a great idea on the surface, but a leopard doesn't change its spots just because you give it a paycheck.

    So either the NSA are really fucking stupid or this is some sort of honeypot trap to target some specific (or maybe even non-specific) hackers and bust them on an espionage charge when they inevitably leak some fake secrets you give them after they become "employees." If it's the latter, I'm impressed. Never seen anyone go that far with a honeypot operation. But maybe Anon and LulSec are making them desperate. Hell, maybe they're hoping they can just *luck* into busting some Anon/LulSec leaders by throwing a wide net.

    So I guess it really comes down here to a question of who's more stupid--the NSA for thinking they can tame hackers or the hackers for possibly falling for a honeypot. I don't know which is the more scary possibility.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Like attracts like. Your reply implies that you don't think the NSA is an organization of black hats. Are you that stupid?

    2. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by chemicaldave · · Score: 2

      You don't get to work at the NSA (or any infosec govt. job) with access to classified information and power without a very thorough full-scope background check including polygraph. You're quite mistaken if you think otherwise.

    3. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by elrous0 · · Score: 2

      There are black hats and then there are black hats.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    4. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I recall how well the CIA vetted Humam al-Balawi. I hope the NSA is a little more thorough.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    5. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It may sound like a great idea on the surface, but a leopard doesn't change its spots just because you give it a paycheck.

      So either the NSA are really fucking stupid or this is some sort of honeypot trap to target some specific (or maybe even non-specific) hackers and bust them on an espionage charge when they inevitably leak some fake secrets you give them after they become "employees." If it's the latter, I'm impressed. Never seen anyone go that far with a honeypot operation. But maybe Anon and LulSec are making them desperate. Hell, maybe they're hoping they can just *luck* into busting some Anon/LulSec leaders by throwing a wide net.

      So I guess it really comes down here to a question of who's more stupid--the NSA for thinking they can tame hackers or the hackers for possibly falling for a honeypot. I don't know which is the more scary possibility.

      Of course that is an excellent place to be "recruiting" there arent that many places you can find bleeding edge techs all in one spot.

    6. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Jeng · · Score: 1

      Or as they put it in TFA.

      There is a huge difference between hackers â" who tread the line of legality regularly and often step over, but not with the intent of doing great harm â" and criminals who happen to work online, Moss said.

      One group you can train or encourage to focus on solving problems that affect national security, and trust to the same extent you would experts in other fields.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    7. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by vlm · · Score: 1

      You don't get to work at the NSA (or any infosec govt. job) with access to classified information and power without a very thorough full-scope background check including polygraph. You're quite mistaken if you think otherwise.

      You don't get to work at the NSA (or any infosec govt. job) with access to classified information and power without a very thorough full-scope background check including polygraph. You're quite mistaken if you think otherwise.

      Which includes credit checks. I wonder if they're running out of applicants, most of the locals bought $750K shacks and condos that have probably cratered back to normal by now. Think Vegas where the $1M condo wishing prices are now $50K foreclosure sales.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    8. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by nsaspook · · Score: 2

      No. Just try to double-cross the devil. These kids won't know that hit em if they get out of line.

      --
      In GOD we trust, all others we monitor.
    9. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are black hats and then there are black hats.

      Put another way... there are black hats (regular) who can be a real nuisance and make the life of one corporation or a few individuals really hellish for a while...

      Then there are black hats (government-sponsored) who are totally fucking evil, amoral bastards who would slit their grandma's throat if their commander said it was in the interests of national security. They would of course have full immunity from any murder prosecution after having slit their grandma's throat. They don't feel evil and no one tells them they are evil because after all it's in the line of duty and that makes everything OK.

      If you are willing to work for a shadowy unaccountable government agency that loves to violate the rights of its own countrymen, well, you didn't have much character or moral/ethical fiber to begin with. Compared to that, Anon/Lulzsec at least wait until a corporation or person acts like a total asshole and inconveniences many people before they give them a hard time.

    10. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Amouth · · Score: 2

      and yet some of the people i know that work there - i wouldn't hire...

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    11. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      You don't get to work at the NSA (or any infosec govt. job) with access to classified information and power without a very thorough full-scope background check including polygraph. You're quite mistaken if you think otherwise.

      However, it is a truism that every single traitor in those agencies was cleared, some very extensively.

      Meanwhile "secret" clearance is really nothing more than a credit and criminal records check, no poly required. "Top Secret" is the level at which they go around and talk to your neighbors and friends from college and that usually has only a basic poly. Plenty of SCI/SAP projects only need "secret" level clearance too.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    12. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by causality · · Score: 2

      Or as they put it in TFA.

      There is a huge difference between hackers â" who tread the line of legality regularly and often step over, but not with the intent of doing great harm â" and criminals who happen to work online, Moss said.

      One group you can train or encourage to focus on solving problems that affect national security, and trust to the same extent you would experts in other fields.

      It seriously doesn't help that most of the legitimate private-sector jobs available to those with strong computer/networking skills are thankless, offer little job security, tend to expand in scope with no matching expansion of pay, tend to demand overtime while paying salary, are dominated by managers who don't understand technology and (worse) refuse to listen to underlings who do, often require dealing with literate adults who fail to follow the simplest of instructions then blame the IT guy when it doesn't work, and don't treat their employees with anything resembling the amount of respect that should be due to people without whom the entire operation would grind to a halt.

      If anything, it's a miracle that there is not more criminal activity from the numbers of people who have strong skills and few legitimate places in which to express it.

      In a way it's like the highly intelligent kids who are bored to death in the public schools and start becoming disruptive "behavioral problems". Well yeah, no shit, you set up a situation that amounts to a formula for producing this. Shockingly, that's the result you obtained; be sure to act surprised! If this is analogous to the talent the NSA is reaching out for, this may be a good thing, assuming they really want to work for one of the more notorious government agencies.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    13. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by blair1q · · Score: 1

      NSA wouldn't run a counterintelligence operation against Americans. That would be illegal and easy to beat.

      FBI, on the other hand, could pose as NSA to do it.

      As for who can be tamed, don't kid yourself. Everybody's human. Beat us hard enough and we start hating Beethoven.

    14. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by causality · · Score: 1

      No. Just try to double-cross the devil. These kids won't know that hit em if they get out of line.

      No shit. These are seriously the wrong people to screw with.

      The mafia would be more likely to show mercy.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    15. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, to demonstrate that you're willing to commit illegal behavior under orders.

      You *have* reviewed their history of criminal behavior, right?

    16. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      NSA wouldn't run a counterintelligence operation against Americans. That would be illegal and easy to beat.

      What are you smoking and can I have some?

    17. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who's stupid?

      You for not realizing that the NSA can buy bullets very very cheaply.

    18. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by causality · · Score: 5, Insightful

      NSA wouldn't run a counterintelligence operation against Americans. That would be illegal and easy to beat.

      If they did, how would you ever prove it?

      A FOIA request? Denied - national security.

      A lawsuit? Denied - national security.

      Asking nicely? Denied - "we can neither confirm nor deny..."

      Without proof, well then, you'd just be a tinfoil-hat-wearing conspiracy nutter (and for major events like 9/11 you'll be called such names even with lots of proof). This is a roundabout, indirect way of saying that you're foolish and something is wrong with you if you don't blindly trust the goodwill of unaccountable government agencies with nearly unlimited budgets who certainly have the capability of spying on Americans and running operations against Americans.

      Not because it's true or might be true or would fit in with the long history of past abuses, mind you, but because people who are in denial want to feel comfortable about their denial and your doubts make that more difficult. When faced with such a situation, small-minded people will attack your character.

      At any rate, yes it would be "illegal" but without accountability and transparency that really doesn't mean anything. How would it be easy to beat? How would you ascertain that without intimate knowledge of the actual methods used? If you somehow attained such knowledge, why wouldn't they change the methods?

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    19. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There are black hats and then there are ARSE hats.

      FIFY

    20. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      Honestly,
      Had I no family ties out here on the left coast I would work for NSA.
      There are a lot of things I can do (not that I'm a maestro by any stretch) that would help them, and since I'm really just a total nerd at heart, all they'd have to do is pay me enough to keep me in toys.
      Sadly, I doubt they allow working remotely, and I really can't leave where I'm at. I have a good enough gig in a multinational corp in R&D/security already. It scratches most of the itches.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    21. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by conspirator23 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It may sound like a great idea on the surface, but a leopard doesn't change its spots just because you give it a paycheck.

      You're suggesting here that most (if not all) Black Hat attendees who might join the NSA are destined to betray the organization at some point? Either by embarassing the agency through extra-curricular activities or outright acts of treason? The short answer to that assertion is that you are underestimating both the people already in the NSA, and also underestimating the IT security community in general. Black Hat != Bomb Throwing Anarchist, and NSA != Bush(II)-era political appointees.

      So either the NSA are really fucking stupid or this is some sort of honeypot trap to target some specific (or maybe even non-specific) hackers and bust them on an espionage charge when they inevitably leak some fake secrets you give them after they become "employees."

      Must. Resist. Grammar... flame. *whew* Okay so to summarize, your contention is that the only good reason for the NSA to recruit at Black Hat is as a "trap" of some sort for Black Hat attendees. Why if that weren't such a transparent, easily avoided ploy, you might have something there. Black Hat attendees who truly see themselves as enemies of the NSA aren't going to apply for jobs... unless they are foreign agents trying to infiltrate the organization. THOSE hypothetical people are going to apply for jobs at the NSA and other agencies no matter what happens at the Black Hat conference. OTOH, there is a tremendous amount of technical talent at Black Hat focused on both the offensive and defensive ends of IT security. If you want to hire the best and the brightest, you go to where the best and the brightest hang out. If they don't want to talk to you, fine, but at least you tried. In some sense it would be irresponsible for the NSA to attend and not even bother trying to recruit because they just assume nobody would be interested. Especially because there are surely Black Hat attendees who would be thrilled to work for the NSA. Don't get me wrong. If your idea of being an el33+ h@x0r is demonstrating the size of your e-peen through acts of vandalism, you probably don't want to work for the NSA. Whatever nefarious things they might encourage, you don't get to brag about it after on Twitter. Likewise if you've already been radicalized politically, then you probably don't want their job offers either. Beyond those two subsets you've got whole categories of people who would have a different outlook on an NSA job. There are the wannabees who think cloak and dagger stuff is cool but wouldn't dream of comitting criminal acts. There are aging vets of prior hacker eras who have wives, and kids, and have worked all that "you're not the boss of me" stuff out of their system already. There are members of the "loyal opposition" who have specific objections to US govt. actions but not the US govt. itself.

      If it's the latter, I'm impressed. Never seen anyone go that far with a honeypot operation. But maybe Anon and LulSec are making them desperate. Hell, maybe they're hoping they can just *luck* into busting some Anon/LulSec leaders by throwing a wide net.

      So I guess it really comes down here to a question of who's more stupid--the NSA for thinking they can tame hackers or the hackers for possibly falling for a honeypot. I don't know which is the more scary possibility.

      Anonymous and LulzSec aren't even on the NSA's radar. NSA != LE. The NSA is interested in the next Stuxnet, whether that is authoring it or defending against it. They're interested in the cell tower intercepting UAV that was Slashdotted earlier today. They're interested in encryption algorithms, data mining algorithms, and language translation algorithms. Anon+Lulz primary weapons (SQL injections, voluntary DDOS) are as interesting to the NSA as gasoline bombs and homemade silencers.

    22. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

      "If you are willing to work for a shadowy unaccountable government agency that loves to violate the rights of its own countrymen, well, you didn't have much character or moral/ethical fiber to begin with."

      AC, The problem with this line of argument is that if no good people work there for that reason, it is bound to be even worse. It's a general problem with the US DOD more broadly. I feel the US military is being horribly misused by US politicans to fight wars whose main point seems to be to line the pockets of those in the war racket (see Smedly Butler), but, if only the worst of the worst join the US security forces because they are being misused, where does that leave us as a country?

      I wrote this about the CIA, but it applies equally well to a place like the NSA:
      "On dealing with social hurricanes (like the US CIA) "
      http://www.pdfernhout.net/on-dealing-with-social-hurricanes.html
      "This approximately 60 page document is a ramble about ways to ensure the CIA (as well as other big organizations) remains (or becomes) accountable to human needs and the needs of healthy, prosperous, joyful, secure, educated communities. The primarily suggestion is to encourage a paradigm shift away from scarcity thinking & competition thinking towards abundance thinking & cooperation thinking within the CIA and other organizations. I suggest that shift could be encouraged in part by providing publicly accessible free "intelligence" tools and other publicly accessible free information that all people (including in the CIA and elsewhere) can, if they want, use to better connect the dots about global issues and see those issues from multiple perspectives, to provide a better context for providing broad policy advice. It links that effort to bigger efforts to transform our global society into a place that works well for (almost) everyone that millions of people are engaged in. A central Haudenosaunee story-related theme is the transformation of Tadodaho through the efforts of the Peacemaker from someone who was evil and hurtful to someone who was good and helpful. Another theme is exploring the meaning, if true, of a allegation by Wayne Madsen about President Obama's deeper connection to the CIA than was otherwise known."

      The thing is, we all need security. The issue is how to go about getting it in a non-ironic way, whcih I suggest here means focusing on intrinsic security and mutual security:
      http://www.pdfernhout.net/recognizing-irony-is-a-key-to-transcending-militarism.html

      One other alternative is for civilians to take on more of an interest in security and other public intelligence matters; see:
      "The need for FOSS intelligence tools for sensemaking etc."
      http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/2846ca1b6bee64e1

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    23. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by networkBoy · · Score: 2

      Really?
      Seriously?
      You realize that currently the government is obviously over its head WRT computer security. Having a team of grey hats that can see the challenge of hardening a massive network against a Chinese attack is being heartless?
      Taking things to the extreme is never good in any argument. I'd like to think that I'm one of those black hats, but that doesn't mean I'd betray either my country or my personal morals. Where the two collide I likely would do nothing or flip a coin.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    24. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oh noes not a polygraph!!! Are they going to check my thetan levels too?

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    25. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      Will: Why shouldn't I work for the N.S.A.? That's a tough one, but I'll take a shot. Say I'm working at N.S.A. Somebody puts a code on my desk, something nobody else can break. Maybe I take a shot at it and maybe I break it. And I'm real happy with myself, 'cause I did my job well. But maybe that code was the location of some rebel army in North Africa or the Middle East. Once they have that location, they bomb the village where the rebels were hiding and fifteen hundred people I never met, never had no problem with, get killed. Now the politicians are sayin', "Oh, send in the Marines to secure the area" 'cause they don't give a shit. It won't be their kid over there, gettin' shot. Just like it wasn't them when their number got called, 'cause they were pullin' a tour in the National Guard. It'll be some kid from Southie takin' shrapnel in the ass. And he comes back to find that the plant he used to work at got exported to the country he just got back from. And the guy who put the shrapnel in his ass got his old job, 'cause he'll work for fifteen cents a day and no bathroom breaks. Meanwhile, he realizes the only reason he was over there in the first place was so we could install a government that would sell us oil at a good price. And, of course, the oil companies used the skirmish over there to scare up domestic oil prices. A cute little ancillary benefit for them, but it ain't helping my buddy at two-fifty a gallon. And they're takin' their sweet time bringin' the oil back, of course, and maybe even took the liberty of hiring an alcoholic skipper who likes to drink martinis and fuckin' play slalom with the icebergs, and it ain't too long 'til he hits one, spills the oil and kills all the sea life in the North Atlantic. So now my buddy's out of work and he can't afford to drive, so he's got to walk to the fuckin' job interviews, which sucks 'cause the shrapnel in his ass is givin' him chronic hemorrhoids. And meanwhile he's starvin', 'cause every time he tries to get a bite to eat, the only blue plate special they're servin' is North Atlantic scrod with Quaker State. So what did I think? I'm holdin' out for somethin' better. I figure fuck it, while I'm at it why not just shoot my buddy, take his job, give it to his sworn enemy, hike up gas prices, bomb a village, club a baby seal, hit the hash pipe and join the National Guard? I could be elected president. -Will, Good Will Hunting

    26. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by causality · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Honestly, Had I no family ties out here on the left coast I would work for NSA. There are a lot of things I can do (not that I'm a maestro by any stretch) that would help them, and since I'm really just a total nerd at heart, all they'd have to do is pay me enough to keep me in toys. Sadly, I doubt they allow working remotely, and I really can't leave where I'm at. I have a good enough gig in a multinational corp in R&D/security already. It scratches most of the itches. -nB

      To be blunt, the fact that I have a conscience would prevent me from working with such an organization. I don't really care what cool toys they can hook me up with. Toys are to be enjoyed after essentials (like not dealing with the devil) are established.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    27. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Why would they bother. That would be the English or Australian equivalents job.

      One hand washes the other. Constitutions don't restrain your allies from spying on you citizens for you.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    28. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh shut up you little weasel.

    29. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by blair1q · · Score: 1

      >What are you smoking and can I have some?

      Brisket, and no.

    30. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by blair1q · · Score: 1

      If they did, how would you ever prove it?

      At some point, they have to admit it into evidence. At that point you show the judge the law against NSA conducting operations against Americans, and they go to jail instead of you.

    31. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by blair1q · · Score: 1

      But the clicks on my cellphone recordings don't have accents.

    32. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Larryish · · Score: 1

      And then if you decide to leave the fold, they take everything you earned and give you a shit deal for being "reintroduced to society".

      The abbreviated people eat their young.

    33. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever been to Black Hat? It's Defcon for responsible grownups with jobs.

    34. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BlackHat is not a bunch of criminals.

      Large companies like Cisco and Microsoft and large consulting groups like Accuvant are primary sponsors. It certainly has a shady underbelly, but for the most part, some of that attitude is a bit tongue-in-cheek these days.

    35. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      polygraph?

      you had me up until then.

      in fact, I would just guess that anyone who cannot fake their own PG would NOT be good for an org who makes its whole business in deceipt and lying and betrayal. think about it! liars and psychopaths are their ideal employee type.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    36. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      The mafia would be more likely to show mercy.

      I have probably been watching too many movies. I admit that. but given the rep of both of those orgs, I would probably want to take my chances with a nice italian family job. (only half kidding; and that's a sorry statement about american life right now).

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    37. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by jbp1 · · Score: 1

      Its not a scam. I heard their bringing in this fellow As Sange to head up the branch......

    38. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..or this is some sort of honeypot trap to target some specific (or maybe even non-specific) hackers and bust them on an espionage charge when they inevitably leak some fake secrets you give them after they become "employees."

      I think you're on the right track. My feeling is this is actually 'federalizing' of the hacking business.

      When a state or corporation becomes bankrupt and then federal property, the assets become federal owned in a sense.

      If a person is bankrupt and needs money and has highly desirable skills, that person can become owned by working for the NSA to put bread on the table.

      It looks to me on the website as if blackhat is already co-opted by the government as Microsoft and IBM are sponsors. At least they're being honest.

      Let's ignore them! ^-^

    39. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Would that be the polygraph of make believe, react to the question not whether you lie or tell the truth. The test that uniform fails with psychopaths (now that's going to be really useful) or that can simply be defeated by tensing you butt cheeks. As for the background check, derp, they are blackhats by definition they have done 'bad' things with computers on computer networks.

      The best way to hire blackhats is to monitor all their activities, the employ hire them to conduct criminal activity without the, knowing they are being monitored and all over an extended period, say a year, then you reel them in and throw the key away (no excuses for them as they took money to conduct illegal activities). You might call it, permanent part time employment, the permanent coming after the part time.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    40. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Without proof, well then, you'd just be a tinfoil-hat-wearing conspiracy nutter"

      The way things are going, no matter what you say, right or not, proof or not, you're likely to be drowned out by FAKE conspiracy nutters set up just to make you look like another one.

    41. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by mcvos · · Score: 1

      If they were to ask me to work for them (they won't, but let's suppose), I'd probably tell them that they don't want me, because I have a strong sense of morality. I consider doing the right thing more important than following the rules. They may be looking for people who occasionally cross the line of legality without meaning to do harm, but they don't want people who cross the line of legality meaning to do right. They'd have an army of Bradley Mannings.

    42. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It may sound like a great idea on the surface, but a leopard doesn't change its spots just because you give it a paycheck.

      So either the NSA are really fucking stupid or this is some sort of honeypot trap to target some specific (or maybe even non-specific) hackers and bust them on an espionage charge when they inevitably leak some fake secrets you give them after they become "employees." If it's the latter, I'm impressed. Never seen anyone go that far with a honeypot operation. But maybe Anon and LulSec are making them desperate. Hell, maybe they're hoping they can just *luck* into busting some Anon/LulSec leaders by throwing a wide net.

      So I guess it really comes down here to a question of who's more stupid--the NSA for thinking they can tame hackers or the hackers for possibly falling for a honeypot. I don't know which is the more scary possibility.

      Uhh... dude, most hackers, even ones that are 'hardcore' are basically tame and ready to go for the NSA. People think they are rocking the boat when they are actually just helping paddle.

    43. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by stewbacca · · Score: 2

      Huh? I left the NSA 10 years ago after 13 years and there has been no acrimony. I've actually used my bosses as references for later jobs.

    44. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I'd like to think that I'm one of those black hats, but that doesn't mean I'd betray either my country or my personal morals. Where the two collide I likely would do nothing or flip a coin.

      Doing nothing is itself a moral or immoral act in many circumstances, and flipping a coin to make moral decisions suggest that you're some sort of psycopath who has no morality at all.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    45. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      NSA wouldn't run a counterintelligence operation against Americans. That would be illegal and easy to beat.

      Especially considering "counterintelligence" is not one of the missions of the NSA.

    46. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      You haven't seen the vast pool of nerds who work at the NSA. Those guys can get bullets cheaply but wouldn't have the first clue of what to do with them.

    47. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Uh, yeah, then you aren't a good candidate. The rest of us are like, "I just cracked this code and a hundred bad mofo's are dead! Sweet!" (high fives all around).

    48. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      The problem with this line of argument is that if no good people work there for that reason, it is bound to be even worse.

      That's the age-old "I'm better off trying to change it from the inside" argument that a lot of people use to morally justify working for an immoral organization. The problem is that this almost never works. People who start off vowing to "change it from the inside" almost always end up just becoming corrupted themselves. Once you take your first step on the road to hell, each successive step becomes easier and easier.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    49. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      NSA wouldn't run a counterintelligence operation against Americans. That would be illegal

      I can't believe that didn't get modded funny.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    50. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      At some point, they have to admit it into evidence. At that point you show the judge the law against NSA conducting operations against Americans, and they go to jail instead of you.

      How old are you?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    51. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Had I no family ties out here on the left coast I would work for NSA.

      You know, they will pay you enough so that you can move out of your mom's basement and get a place of your own.

    52. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      heh

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    53. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

      "People who start off vowing to "change it from the inside" almost always end up just becoming corrupted themselves."

      Yes, that is a big risk. You are right that institutions have their own internal dynamics. Langdon Winner talks about this, how a person not filling their role in an organization will be replaced like we might swap out a bad memory stick in a computer. So does Noam Chomsky when he talks about "What makes the mainstream media mainstream".

      There are no easy answers, though I tried to "think outside the box" with some of my essays that I linked to.

      There is also some useful advice in books like these:
          http://www.disciplined-minds.com/
          http://www.amazon.com/Have-Fun-at-Work-Livingston/dp/0937063053

      But others might suggest that total institutional collapse will be the only way "forward":
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_collapse

      But I'm not sure we have that "luxury" considering how many WMDs the USA has stockpiled... It would be better and less risky to find a transformational or transcendent way forward to something better.

      Better suggestions always welcome.
         

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    54. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by xclr8r · · Score: 1

      Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. It may be easier and cost effective to employ these guys/gals than to actually build up defenses against them. Even better if they can actually learn something from the black hats and build a more robust system

      --
      Beware of those who profit off the docile and persecute the unbelievers.
    55. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Agripa · · Score: 1

      NSA wouldn't run a counterintelligence operation against Americans. That would be illegal and easy to beat.

      If they did, how would you ever prove it?

      Bait them with a canary trap.

      If you succeed, there will be plenty of evidence although the State Secrets Privilege makes it moot unless your evidence includes a captured or dead agent and maybe not even then.

    56. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Agripa · · Score: 1

      At some point, they have to admit it into evidence. At that point you show the judge the law against NSA conducting operations against Americans, and they go to jail instead of you.

      The State Secrets Privileged would prevent court review.

      Now if you submit the dead home invader who inexplicably has Federal credentials . . .

    57. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      Except I think it almost never turns out like that. It's "a hundred bad mofos are dead, plus that girl's private school that happened to be in the line of fire."

    58. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      I don't really care what cool toys they can hook me up with. Toys are to be enjoyed after essentials (like not dealing with the devil) are established.

      Some of the toys would be awesome though. I couldn't work for them either but I would love my own missile launch capable UAV. I could lose it somewhere in inventory, park it nearby. Stream my illegal MP3's through its loudspeakers via a hacked RIAA satellite and fly it around those dickhead patent/music industry lawyers houses. Maybe even send it to Lars house to play some poorly encoded low bandwidth Mettalica.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    59. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (and for major events like 9/11 you'll be called such names even with lots of proof)

      TROLL DETECTED!

    60. Re:Are the NSA really that stupid? by causality · · Score: 1

      Apparently you missed this part of my post:

      "Not because it's true or might be true or would fit in with the long history of past abuses, mind you, but because people who are in denial want to feel comfortable about their denial and your doubts make that more difficult. When faced with such a situation, small-minded people will attack your character."

      Nice of you to self-identify, AC.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  2. It doesn't seem strange at all by lordandmaker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That's exactly the sort of place I'd expect them to be recruiting.

    1. Re:It doesn't seem strange at all by vlm · · Score: 2

      That's exactly the sort of place I'd expect them to be recruiting.

      Really? I thought they had an absolute fixation on mathematics, physics, and CS PHDs. Also computer engineer / electrical engineer types. Like, don't both applying unless you've got those diplomas.

      Basically the same group the financial companies used to love.

      Also I heard horrible things about their recruitment, like they jerk you around for months, if not years, multiple interviews, etc.

      They had a rep for having the absolute highest ratio in the world of cool toys vs dilbertian bosses. Dinosaur pens measured in acres, paperwork to requisition a package of bic pens measured in inches, that kind of place.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    2. Re:It doesn't seem strange at all by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      I'd think defcon as a more logical place, IE a mix of grey hats etc... Black hats are good and all, but if you want an organization, you want people who know to play by YOUR rules at least.

    3. Re:It doesn't seem strange at all by gknoy · · Score: 2

      God help you if you want a metric pen, too.

    4. Re:It doesn't seem strange at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a government job after all so yeah the bosses are PHB's but remember the bosses sometimes get their job by political appoinment thus breeding more PHB's. So yeah recruiting at Black Hat because they probably need some real talent to off set the stupid.

    5. Re:It doesn't seem strange at all by Neil+Blender · · Score: 1

      They're giving those out at 100 o'clock in the exhibit hall.

    6. Re:It doesn't seem strange at all by Tom · · Score: 2

      Blackhat is the name of the conference. The people who are there are much closer to the industry than the Defcon people. If you're looking for people to hire, Blackhat is the better choice.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    7. Re:It doesn't seem strange at all by bradorsomething · · Score: 1

      Really? I thought they had an absolute fixation on mathematics, physics, and CS PHDs. Also computer engineer / electrical engineer types. Like, don't both applying unless you've got those diplomas.

      I hear a diploma is required. But remember, they're not all number pushers. They need analysts, too.

    8. Re:It doesn't seem strange at all by SecurityTheatre · · Score: 1

      Defcon is more akin to ComicCon... BlackHat is where the real industry heavyweights come out...

    9. Re:It doesn't seem strange at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The pen thing is an IQ test.

      Why would you get all the way to the NSA only to let everyone and their mother know how much ink you are going through? Conversely, what value would there be in fudging such a thing?

      Either you:
      A) disclose your ink consumption by ordering - thus appearing as a leaky bucket to your peers, or
      B) lower yourself to gerbil level by deliberately mis-ordering - thus appearing as a piss filled bucket to your peers.

      As ordering at all draws every orderer's motivation into question - challenging group dynamism and cohesion - ordering pens is itself an act of aggression. Hence - the only winning strategy is not to order pens.

      See you all at the booth.

  3. No Thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sincerely,
    Anonymous

  4. Not that I by Stargoat · · Score: 1

    Not that I know anyone working at the NSA, but it isn't exactly a geek paradise.

    Most geeks that I know are none too fond of rules. This is exactly the opposite of what the NSA is about. There are many rules stemming from security. Of course, all rules get extended beyond their original purpose. This makes it difficult to get any work done, which of course is the antithesis of geek.

    --
    Hoist Number One and Number Six.
    1. Re:Not that I by Kildjean · · Score: 1

      Not that I know anyone working at the NSA.

      There is No Such Agency... but trust me its more than a "haven" for geeks, specially the Lab at the Rock... There are far more notorious "hackers" working for HS and NSA than you could imagine... then again, there is a reason most people don't know about them or it... ;)

      --
      Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d encule de ta mere.
    2. Re:Not that I by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like Google, you all sit on bean-bags and they come around and do back/neck massages. :)

  5. NSA Joke by Gunfighter · · Score: 1

    Q: How do you know who the extroverts are at the NSA?

    A: They look at other peoples' shoes.

    All kidding aside, the NSA does have quite a powerhouse team of mathematical geniuses, computer scientists, etc. and from everyone I talked to who worked there (I'm no longer in the intel game, so it has been a while), it is a great place to work with a lot of flexibility and innovation.

    --
    -- Stu

    /. ID under 2,000. I feel old now.
    1. Re:NSA Joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Q: How do you know who the extroverts are at the NSA?

      The word is extraverts, you fucking idiot.

      You see, it's "introvert" and "extravert." Yes one of those uses an "o." No, that doesn't mean the other word uses an "o." I know this is all very advanced and difficult for native English speakers to understand.

      You can always express how much of a functionally illiterate fuck-up you are by confusing "where" and "were" if you want to follow the latest trend. Idiots love to follow a crowd, so I thought I'd mention that.

      In America, less than 5% of adults read books. It shows. Damn, does it ever show.

    2. Re:NSA Joke by Gunfighter · · Score: 2

      Thanks for the feedback, but it is spelled both ways.

      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/extrovert
      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/extravert

      "The spelling extrovert is common in general use (Merriam-Webster has extravert as a variant of extrovert), but extravert is more typical in psychology (The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology and Corsini's Encyclopedia of Psychology use the term "extravert")." http://bit.ly/p0wLlK

      Don't forget these gems of confusion:

      * your vs. you're
      * their vs. there vs. they're

      Cheers!

      --
      -- Stu

      /. ID under 2,000. I feel old now.
    3. Re:NSA Joke by screwzloos · · Score: 1

      If you're going to be pedantic, at least check to make sure you're right. The two words (extrovert and extravert) are both correct and interchangeable.

    4. Re:NSA Joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can always express how much of a functionally illiterate fuck-up you are by confusing "where" and "were" if you want to follow the latest trend. Idiots love to follow a crowd, so I thought I'd mention that.

      Please look up "pedantic" and "arsehole" in the dictionary. Can you use them in a sentence?

    5. Re:NSA Joke by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      We used to call them "wall walkers"...you know, you are walking down the hall, they'd see you coming and they'd immediately suck up against the wall and creep past you.

    6. Re:NSA Joke by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Q: How do you know who the extroverts are at the NSA?

      The word is extraverts, you fucking idiot.

      Nice people skills. You are probably one of those extroverts he's talking about.

  6. Are you really that stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aside from the silo they are assigned to (which is probably classified itself), why would they have access to classified information? Most likely they'll be in an untrusted DMZ given very specific information on what to do. Find a way to crack X, then the crack is given to someone else who can be trusted. Don't underestimate them, they make mistakes and cultivate an mythos of superpowers, but they are also very good at what they do.

    1. Re:Are you really that stupid? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      So the plan is to hire some Houdini's, put them in a cage, and tell them not to escape, huh? Hope that's a really good lock.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:Are you really that stupid? by bluemonq · · Score: 1

      Solution: weld the cages shut. Alternatively, give him a few good punches in the abdomen.

    3. Re:Are you really that stupid? by kpyke · · Score: 1

      You make some pretty serious errors in logic here But the most egregious is the supposition that all who attend Black Hat are untrustworthy, bad people. The vast majority are actively engaged in cyber-defense related activities. They are there to gain a better understanding of what the potential threats are, what current techniques are used in exploitation and how to defend against them. There is, of course the standard spread of good/bad/indifferent people, but don't make sweeping assumptions about people out of ignorance. That being said, the United States has a very serious asymmetric threat issue in cybersecurity. No nation is more connected, more dependent or more vulnerable. It is in the best interest of this nation to have NSA recruit where the smart people are. And this week, that's in Vegas. p.s. You can be a "bad" hacker, one who builds attacks, exploits and payloads and still be a "good" American. Exploits and payloads are no different than bullets and missiles, it takes special talent to build them, they cause damage and they are exceptionally useful.

    4. Re:Are you really that stupid? by renegadesx · · Score: 1

      No, the plan is to hire some Houdini's, put them in a cage, tell them to escape and write down how they did it.

      --
      Make SELinux enforcing again!
    5. Re:Are you really that stupid? by stewbacca · · Score: 2

      Sorry, but there's no reality in your fantasy land scenario. Working for the NSA is quite banal and very typically office-like. Part of the allure of the NSA is that it's all this cool super secret stuff, when in reality, its just a bunch of UNIX and Windows boxes and a pool of laborers with clearances run by PHBs.

  7. Nope by nilbog · · Score: 1

    Nope, that's not surprising at all. I'd be surprised if they weren't using it as a recruiting pool.

    --
    or else!
  8. So was the FBI and NCIS and a couple others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The NCIS had some nice schwag too, the FBI was giving away cheap plastic cups =(. Problem is federal pay grades suck a**, private industry pays much better. So unless the person is patriotic or something it's probably tough for them. Plus us foreigners can't get a job with them, but we can in private industry pretty easy.

    1. Re:So was the FBI and NCIS and a couple others by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Well, NCIS has gone Hollywood. It's been a decade since the FBI was living up to a reputation someone else was building for it.

    2. Re:So was the FBI and NCIS and a couple others by Larryish · · Score: 1

      I don't think patriotism has much to do with FBI service.

      It is more likely TDS.

      Tiny Dick Syndrome.

      I have a brother-in-law and a sister who work in emergency services and another sister who works as a med tech. They all say that in their experience, a statistically significant percentage of cops have smaller-than-average penises.

    3. Re:So was the FBI and NCIS and a couple others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on. Even if that were true shouldn't you consider the medical fact that flaccid length has little to do with erect length?

      Or are you implying these loved ones deal with cop penii that are... standing at attention?

    4. Re:So was the FBI and NCIS and a couple others by Larryish · · Score: 1

      Well, all 3 of the people in question do watch Fox News and American Idol.

      So maybe take it with a grain of salt?

  9. If you are interested in working for NSA by the_B0fh · · Score: 1

    Send a copy of your resume to your grandmother...

    1. Re:If you are interested in working for NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... Or speak it into any telephone in the country...

    2. Re:If you are interested in working for NSA by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Or encrypt it in MS Word. Don't send it anywhere. Just encrypt it.

  10. real tech guy or HR doing hiring? auto screening by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    real tech guy or HR doing hiring? auto screening / key words based resume screening?

    It seems that in many big corporations and GOV it's who know and or who can best game the HR system to get the job or who can be the best suck up to the boss.

    And I am not talking about dress codes and behaviors. I am taking about hiring base on degrees over real would work or based on TOP school as in overall VS top tech schools VS a non tech college CS degree. More then 4-6+ years degrees VS 2-4 year degrees.

    TECH / IT so big that a theory based CS degree is to board and maybe even to much away from the hand on real work. Tech schools / apprenticeship are a REAL GOOD FIT for hardening a firewall, keep up software patches and updates up to date, do penetration testings also you want a team with people in skills in different parts and not just a team filled people who need to be able to do it all. Better to have a GOOD Tech GUY and poor coder then a sub par tech guy and sub par tech guy. Also need Good coders even if they suck at other IT skills.

    Certifications is other area that is good and bad to based hiring on.

    But hiring based on degrees only can give you people who know alot of theory but not much on the side of doing IT / hacking / coding. People who have any degrees Even NON TECH / CS ones getting jobs over some one with years of doing hands on work.

    Also baseing hiring on degrees and Certifications can get you people who are good at taking tests and not knowing how use the stuff covered.

    Saying no to it contractors, consultants over people with more a fixed at one place jobs is a other area that keeps good people out as well.

  11. It's not wrong. by blair1q · · Score: 1

    Most of these people are frustrated authoritarians.

    It's how they can justify imposing their view of the legality of their actions on their victims.

    1. Re:It's not wrong. by causality · · Score: 2

      Most of these people are frustrated authoritarians.

      It's how they can justify imposing their view of the legality of their actions on their victims.

      I am curious about what makes you see it this way.

      Almost all of the targets of Anonymous and Lulzsec have been large corproations who not only are never going to be seriously punished by the law, but in fact have the power to buy whatever laws they want to have on the books It is the corporations themselves who work to destroy the whole notion of "rule of law" and undermine the legitimacy of law. We are not all equal under the law if a few of us can remake the laws at will at the expense of the majority, all without ever running for election or holding a political office.

      You may not like the vigilante actions. I find them distasteful myself. However, I see them as effects. Whenever I want a situation to change, I don't bother looking at effects. I examine causes. Sony and others thought they could be asshats with impunity. The punity finally caught up to them, it just didn't happen in the more legitimate form of government law enforcement.

      But if your concern is "imposing their view of the legality of their actions on their victims", to whom does that more strongly apply? The corporations with politicians in their pockets who buy whatever laws they find convenient that never get repealed that everyone else has to live under for generations afterward? Or a couple of online groups who produced a handful of high-profile incidents in retaliation? At least Anonymous hasn't rewritten the law to make their tactics legal. That would place them on equal footing with the real authoritarians.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    2. Re:It's not wrong. by blair1q · · Score: 1

      The corportations may be wrong, but instead of pointing that out to the authorities repeatedly until something gets done, the black-hats decide they're the ones who are above the law.

      If they ever actually accomplish anything, it just emboldens them, and they grab for more.

      They may use the "but we're doing it for freedom" argument, but they're really just fucking up someone's business for their own gain, whether monetary or egotistical.

      And ask the people whose accounts they've published how they feel about the corporation or the hackers.

    3. Re:It's not wrong. by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Most of these people are frustrated authoritarians.

      It's how they can justify imposing their view of the legality of their actions on their victims.

      Are you talking about the NSA or Anonymous?

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    4. Re:It's not wrong. by ranpel · · Score: 1

      YOu said "If they ever actually accomplish anything, it just emboldens them, and they grab for more."

      and now I've forgotten who "they" is...

      --
      \r
    5. Re:It's not wrong. by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      when the system breaks down, you find ways to make things works.

      you are complaining about the people trying to make things work; but you should actually be mad at the fact that this is the ONLY way they can try to make things work.

      the 'right way' is broken and so its not valid so tell people to go that route. that route is expensive and common man has no say in things of law anymore. because common people are excluded (their will, at least) - vigilantism rises.

      in fact, blame the system. if the system actually worked, V's would not have to be on the rise. think of it as a feedback or corrective effect.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    6. Re:It's not wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are people who point things out to authorities repeatedly and not a whole lot gets done. I don't exactly advocate their methods (partly because they're not really effective) but I can kind of understand if trying to effect change from within the system gets frustrating, and people look for alternate avenues.

    7. Re:It's not wrong. by causality · · Score: 1

      If they ever actually accomplish anything, it just emboldens them, and they grab for more.

      This point is inseparable from the next I shall make.

      They may use the "but we're doing it for freedom" argument, but they're really just fucking up someone's business for their own gain, whether monetary or egotistical.

      If by "their own gain" you mean "no discernable profit of any kind that you could inventory or itemize or sum up", except of course sending a message to people who think they have perfect impunity that they are in fact "touchable" and accountable, then okay. I suppose they are "egotistical" but man, that's a funny way to phrase things. I suppose Mohandas "Mahatma" Ghandi was an egotistical bastard, too. Oh and when Henry David Thoreau refused to pay his taxes and was jailed as a result, I guess that was just for his own ego. After all, a good citizen pays his taxes no matter what, right? Fact is, those members of Anonymous/Lulz who do what they do know that they are risking serious jail time. That does not deter them. You have to wonder what could be more important to them than their own freedom.

      You seem to have a mind to dismiss in the least favorable terms possible anyone who stands up and declares with action that they've had enough of the bullshit. I suppose likewise the British government referred to our Founding Fathers as something like terrorists and/or treasonous. From their point of view that was likely the case, but that doesn't mean the Founders had no good reasons for what they did. If the Founders had a peaceful "working through the system" method of effecting real change they would have used it. Likewise, if these vigilantes could take their grievances to a more legit authority and actually have them addressed in a meaningful way, I doubt they'd be committing so much hacking and online vandalism. The fact is, "working through the system" is for monied interests. If you're not in that club, you have no legal means to change anything.

      I guess "good little citizens" would just accept their powerlessness and would never break any laws in an attempt to change that. Naturally you'd blame them for using the only option available to them other than grabbing their ankles and greasing up, rather than taking a hard look at a system that offers no other approved option. I am not sure what else to say to you. Any and all vigilanteism is the result of a failure of the legitimate system to take care of a situation before it rotted away. There are no exceptions.

      Do I like what vigilantes do? No. It's ugly. It should never be necessary. I don't personally do these things. I deal with it differently. If I don't like Sony, then I refuse to ever do business with them for any reason under any circumstance. Does that mean I cannot understand why others would go farther? No. It doesn't. I'm tired of the powerlessness and disenfranchisement myself. That someone would be more extreme than I, would break laws I wouldn't personally break, well really that's so fucking predictable and foreseeable becaue the entire situation is a formula for producing it. You deal with that by having an un-fucked, unbroken system. Anything less than that will breed this kind of vigilante. But if you have a fucked, broken system, a few computer vigilantes are the very least of your problems.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  12. Re:real tech guy or HR doing hiring? auto screenin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    real tech guy or HR doing hiring? auto screening / key words based resume screening?

    Are you kidding me? Have you never applied for high profile jobs and got rejected? If it was not clear, then yes, real tech guys do go outside to find out what potential candidates know. HR is only for finding out when they are ready to join, and to negotiate the pay.

  13. Sophomoric assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Black Hat is a security conference that, over the last decade or so, has become predominantly attended by security executives, government employees, etc. E.g. very few "black hats" and it never really was about that. DefCon has been more the open casting call for all color of hats. Black Hat is a professional conference that costs thousands of dollars to attend. So... why wouldn't you go to the one place that has top CISO/CSO and security researchers in it?

    If the article was "NSA to open recruiting booth at DefCon..." then the rest of the article would be somewhat accurate... other than they forgot to talk about all the 12 year olds, rave fiends, clove cigarette smokers, scene wanna-be, etc.

  14. but does HR put roadblocks to what tech guys want? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    I head about the people that the tech guys want just to get shot down by HR for any number of things.

  15. So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Umm, they don't want em' to change their spots. Do you think the Chinese or Russians hire good little boys for their industrial espionage programs? If you're breaking the law, then you either hire criminals, or else try to make ordinary people into criminals (patriotism, ribbons, etc.).

  16. NCIS? Did you get to meet Ziva David? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She's the hottest NCIS cop around!!!

    1. Re:NCIS? Did you get to meet Ziva David? by mcvos · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't mind working with Abby, actually.

  17. just guy the who told them where it is not the one by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Who did the ground work to see what is really there and or the one to push the kill button.

  18. To the extent that the hackers are criminals ... by rlglende · · Score: 1

    They will fit right into NSA, the organization that is wire-tapping everyone in the US without a warrant.

    Criminals, in other words.

    --
    "The Constitution, the WHOLE Constitution, and nothing but the CONSTITUTION."
  19. obvious choice by Tom · · Score: 1

    Definitely the choice for recruitment.

    Heck, I'd work for the NSA if I were an american. If you're a security freak, wouldn't you want to go work for someone who takes security serious for a change? Where your request for a firewall isn't overruled by marketing because they fear (without substantiating facts, of course) that it'll slow down the website and impact the "user experience" ?

    Sure you have other pressures to bow to (politics) - but, as has become a frequent saying in several companies I worked for, often accompanied with a sigh: Working with professionals, just once.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:obvious choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you have a personal experience where that happened (the marketing firewall thing)? That's nuts!

    2. Re:obvious choice by Tom · · Score: 1

      Some very close to it that I can't disclose, yes.

      The real world is, of course, a little more complicated than that. Usually, complications start with marketing not knowing nor caring what a firewall even is or why you need it.

      Ok, maybe it's 2011 and they've learned that by now. Replace "firewall" with some slightly more advanced technology.

      And don't get me wrong, in business there are other things to consider besides security. The problem isn't that security risks are taken. The problem is that the common case is not one of conscious risk-acceptance based on a solid risk analysis. But some kind of "ah, we'll risk that" gut-feeling based on basically hot air.
      And we have scientific facts backing us up when we say: Your gut feelings suck - and the worst part about it is that the same brain that makes them up also convinces you that they're solid and that you've usually been right in the past. Unless you've kept notes, you are almost certainly wrong about that memory.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  20. Is it really a conference for black hats? by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 1

    Sounds more like it should be "black hats" sponsored by Target. And that might even be funny if one of the sustaining partners of this conference didn't happen to be Microsoft. Anyone who's a real black hat probably wouldn't be caught dead here anyway.

  21. Anyone else feel... by tin.kidneys · · Score: 0

    Anyone else feel like Defcon has lost it's potency? I could be wrong, but i feel like the more popular it gets, etc. There are some great presentations, but there's certainly less great presentations.

    Also, with more popularity comes... lawyers. From what i can remember there were five presentations that were canceled due to court ordered gag orders.

    Not to mention if you are a black hat, the last place you'd want to be is hanging out in a crowd full of law enforcement officials.

  22. not really. look at the Drake case by decora · · Score: 1

    the government was able to convince the judge to use an obscure 1959 NSA law to redact UNCLASSIFIED information from the defense exhibits, so that they would not be publically shown at trial.

    there is a lot more to the Drake case regarding evidence, the CIPA, and the Silent Witness Rule.

    1. Re:not really. look at the Drake case by blair1q · · Score: 1

      The judge saw that evidence and allowed it.

      The judge would see how this evidence was gathered and order the gatherers arrested.

    2. Re:not really. look at the Drake case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly, you've never been in a courtroom for anything other than traffic tickets.

    3. Re:not really. look at the Drake case by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      The judge saw that evidence and allowed it.

      The judge would see how this evidence was gathered and order the gatherers arrested.

      Do you really believe that? That's so sweet.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
  23. talked to binney, wiebe, and loomis? by decora · · Score: 1

    how about thomas drake, did you talk to him?

    1. Re:talked to binney, wiebe, and loomis? by Gunfighter · · Score: 1

      After my time, but I was happy to see them step up to the plate and call their colleagues out for their illegal actions.

      --
      -- Stu

      /. ID under 2,000. I feel old now.
  24. Obligatory joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The National Security Agency has many fascinating career opportunities for talented mathematicians, scientists, and engineers. If you're interested in working for the NSA, pick up the phone, call your mom, and ask for an application.

  25. Why NSA and not NASA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why does NSA have mountains of money and NASA none? Don't we have our priorities backward!

  26. maybe its changed. by decora · · Score: 1

    maybe its changed alot.

  27. Hahahahahaha - nsa, dont ... by unity100 · · Score: 1

    even if you portray yourself as a 'haven for geeks' and recruit some of the people from black hat, eventually you will be asking those recruits to take actions against their own comrades in black hat world. and you will ask them to turn against some principles the underground world has. they will turn against on some of them sometimes. and sometimes, they wont. what is 100% guaranteed is that, there WILL be times they wont turn back - and thats not something you, as a secretive government organization, would want.

    yes, its a dodgy, black underworld in which there is little law. but, it has its own principles that noone codified or maintains. and even if you can find one or two henry morgans to betray those, there will be endless number of blackbeards to do them in. not to mention that, even the henry morgans you can get, will occasionally and eventually turn on you. yeah, its not too much different than pirates of the earlier ages. however, there is much more social consciousness present in this era of piracy.

    actually i shouldnt even be telling you that. any casual observer would have known these, if s/he had been interested in i.t. in any way since 1985 or so. you should probably already have some such people in your employ, and yet, you are still hiring at black hat. i guess you dont take on advice/recommendations from your employees .... bad for you. good for 'the people'.

  28. let them hire you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Be aware that they only hire you for a fixed period of time (18 months on average) with a strict contract, and they get all up in your shit, analyze your web browsing, learn about all your family friend networks and then add you to their database before ending your contract and wishing you well. Unless you are can dig up enough dirt on your superiors during the time you are there to blackmail them into keeping you around. That is how it works.

  29. Re:just guy the who told them where it is not the by sjames · · Score: 1

    Nobody does the ground work, that's HARD. Just drop the bombs and move on, so many targets, so little time.

  30. Conference Confusion by Aero77 · · Score: 1

    Black Hat != Def Con. Def Con is the convention for Hackers. https://www.defcon.org/html/links/dc-about.html Black Hat is the convention for Corporates. http://www.blackhat.com/html/about.html

  31. Re:To the extent that the hackers are criminals .. by stewbacca · · Score: 1

    Yes, because they NSA has the time and inclination to wiretap 300 million people.

  32. Recycling Human Talent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is one way to get geeks to work for the "good side" or at least to use their talents for a job. At least someone at NSA is thinking in a right way. One way is to spend $ to train and hire applicants and the other way is to train talented people who think differently. It is usually easier to swing a liberal minded individual or a geek. You will be hitting 2 birds by one stone, removing one potentially bad hacker from the pool and gaining a talented employee.

  33. if you cant beat them, hire them.... by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    Seriously, this goes hand in hand with wall street hiring all the engineers, to avoid them going elsewhere and providing competition to a market that is already running over every other. If there is no one left smart enough to understand and question what wall street is doing, then wall street wins, and the NSA is following in the same direction....avoid any possible discovery by having all the good ones playing for your team.

  34. News? by dokc · · Score: 1

    After reading several times I still can't find any news here...

    --
    In love, war and slashdot discussions, everything is allowed.
  35. Sounds like they are GETTING SMART(er)! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ever heard the old adage of "It takes a thief (to catch one)"? This is GOOD, SOLID REASONING on the part of the NSA!

    Now, since you're calling them "stupid"? Ever heard of "SeLinux"?? Guess who's largely responsible for THAT excellent "bolt on" to std. Linux??? That's right - THE NSA!

    APK

    P.S.=> Want to CATCH hacker/cracker types, OR @ least be able to understand their "mindset, std. modus operandi, &/or motivations"?? HIRE THEM! Most effective defense weapon they could be using, no questions asked!

    ... apk

  36. Black Hat the Conference != criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The people who attend black Hat have to pay and in some cases a significant chunk of change. My 2 day class was about $2200 (granted I could have saved a bit if I had registered early). The presenters are, for the most part, some of the industries best and brightest with some of the most up-to-date topics you will find anywhere. Not to mention that some of them already have clearances (be it through 3 letter agencies or them being contractors for companies that support 3 letter agencies). Black Hat is a logical choice to look for and recruit talent while learning what might be the cutting edge.

  37. Re:real tech guy or HR doing hiring? auto screenin by hoggoth · · Score: 1

    Command of the English language is probably on their checklist as well. Thanks for sending your resume.

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)