Slashdot Mirror
Researchers Now Pulling Out of DEF CON In Response To Anti-Fed Position
darthcamaro writes "Earlier today it, Slashdot had a story about DEF CON's position on not allowing U.S. Federal agents to attend the annual hacking conference. We're now starting to see the backlash from the hacker community itself with at least two well respected hackers pulling out of the DEF CON speaking sessions so far: "'The issue we are struggling with, and the basis of our decision, is that we feel strongly that DEF CON has always presented a neutral ground that encouraged open communication among the community, despite the industry background and diversity of motives to attend,' security researcher Kevin Johnson wrote. 'We believe the exclusion of the "feds" this year does the exact opposite at a critical time.'"
Meanwhile, Black Hat welcomes Federal attendees; this year's conference will feature as a speaker former NSA head Keith Alexander.
It's time the entire populace stand up and tell the federal government to go fuck itself. If these researchers want to take the wrong side in this fight, let them.
The Nazi dicks from the alphabet agencies can go circle-jerk themselves in their cubicles, the hardcore crackers will do as always surrepticiously, and the only losers will be event promoters and self-promoters. Sounds fair enough.
lets not beat around the bush here. "security research" has two applications - stealing people's shit and stopping people who want to steal other people's shit.
considering the close relationship of the government to all of this in the past few years, i mean, what the fuck?
the guy who runs the Cyber Insider Threat program, which is the biggest pile of intellectual conformist bizarro-world thinking in recent memory, is a former dude from l0pht.
back when i was a kid, 'hacking' meant you, you know, built cool demos, and cracked game protection.
it didnt mean you learned how to fucking infilitrate the data networks of the planet so you can get payed $120 grand a year to some spook agency to ruin peoples lives and act like a fucking dictatorship.
if this is what 'hacking' and 'security research' has become, then fuck it. and fuck these people and fuck their cons.
Some people ain't no damn good
You can't trust 'em you can't love 'em
No good deed goes unpunished
And I don't mind bein' their whippin' boy
I've had that pleasure for years and years
No no I never was a sinner--tell me what else can I do
Second best is what you get 'til you learn to bend the rules
And time respects no person--what you lift up must fall
They're waiting outside to claim my tumblin' walls
Saw my picture in the paper
Read the news around my face
And now some pepole don't want to treat me the same
When the walls come tumblin' down
When the walls come crumblin' crumblin'
When the walls come tumblin' tumblin' down
Door, arse, etc.
It's one thing to be neutral towards those who are vaguely threatening, but it's simply naive to be neutral towards those who are actively undermining you.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
I can't speak for the people who have chosen not to participate or their reasons for doing so.
I am sure it will be a loss for the event, but not as much as the one that comes from the lack of a public dialogue about the government's actions and activities tracking internet traffic.
Saying that Defcon fosters an open community where there are no sides is a little misleading. The government has it's own reasons for showing up and they are not all related to sharing ideas, learning and having a good time. It's just the other people who really lack an agenda.
I know people who are not going to Blackhat because the NSA is giving the keynote. What kind of strange alternate future is it we live in where this even happens?
>> "we feel strongly that DEF CON has always presented a neutral ground that encouraged open communication among the community,"
Whoever thinks the feds will at any time play fair is a fool. Those who actively violate the rights of the people should not be welcome anywhere.
And why in the fucking world would a sane person want to share security secrets with the Feds, knowing what kind of trash these people really are? If some hackers want to pull out of DEF CON, then GOOD....let them go find some other place to lick Federal boots.
They didn't "exclude" the Feds. They simply warned them that given the current atmosphere, it might not be wise for them to attend.
There's a pretty damned big difference.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if these two were contractors for the fed.
They can get bent if this is their attitude toward willful violation of my civil rights. I'm not interested in the opinions of people who lend ANY support to the ingrates who knowingly and willfully violate our rights for a day job.
I read this story on a site yesturday, it wasn't that they weren't allowed to, they were Asked not attend this year which they still could, due to the whole NSA spying issue that came up recently.
Pulling out of conferences, pulling out of US clouds, mail services, pulling out of US based everything.
you wanted an enemy, looks like you got one, everyone !
i can guess the next steps are infiltrate and sabotage, no more malware, no full disclosure, no more simple infection removals and 2 hours of inconvenience for a junior techie.
but you can expect much, much more nasty rootkits, polymorphic file infectors, seek&destroy engines, logic bombs, back doors, unrecoverable deletion except this time its not mischievous eastern European kids but by hardened state sponsored professionals.
not really an ideal situation, but make no mistake unless justice is done to the people involved in this whole creepy spying crap and its shut down, bad guys will do it for you and they are ruthless and dont care who they hurt as long as they american.
the US gov, ruining the tech industry one leak at a time
Under cover agents pull out of DEF CON because they have been banned.
Let's get this clear. The ONLY reason these scumbags want the 'Feds' present is because these events are actually recruitment fairs for some of the most psychopathic personality types in the IT industry. The idea that 'hackers' in the public eye are ever 'good guys' is just plain laughable. When such people seek publicity, and the appreciation of their 'peers', they are demonstrating personality traits that are the most disturbing possible.
Some hackers that choose to stay in the shadows, and work with tight-knit groups of friends can certainly have normal personalities, and be working on projects that may serve the greater good. But those that need to flaunt their egos in a public setting can be clearly designated as the types who will be happy to serve ANY master.
I cannot understand what has happened to reading comprehension today. When did "Advised not to attend" become "forbidden to attend"?
I honestly think there's a significant aspect to the move to "ban" Feds that people are overlooking: safety and liability. DEFCON gets a bit rowdy at the best of time, in the current climate re: PRISM, Snowden, etc. I seriously think the move will save a few bloody noses, possibly broken bones, and likely lawsuits and criminal charges stemming from the same. The conference also shields itself from the associated liability. A lot of people, especially in the hacker/DEFCON community, are *seriously* pissed at the US gov't right now, and that's gonna cause a lot more friction than normal.
GStreamer - The only way to stream!
http://rt.com/usa/snowden-americans-majority-poll-906/
It just occurred to me, one of the researchers pulling out was slated to give a presentation on how to hack sharepoint.
While it would be an enormous loss for the community not to have the opportunity to learn more about the specific ways this guy attacks M$'s premium CMS ... ... how much effort would it really take for a bunch of Defcon attendees to put together a session with equally useful information about hacking sharepoint to replace it?
they were probably on the payroll of feds anyway !
While registering to the conference, have attendees fill in a form with the two questions "Are you a government employee, and if so in what quality" and "Are you a journalist, and if so, in what newspaper(s) do you publish?" The people that you want to attend will be happy to have a name tag saying "Government employee, University of so and so". The people who feel the need to hide their affiliation are probably the ones you want to be escorted by security.
Perhaps the organizer wish to avoid apolitical and protest maelstrom that could appear? Preferring to keep the conference at least somewhat apolitical?
These are probably the same researchers that have been crying "no security is better than a false sense of security" for years now in a devious (and successful) attempt to keep our communications channels completely unencrypted, by default. Lucky OTR (Off the Record) didnt to listen to such mal-aligned researcher advice so now we have a widely deployed chat encryption method...
It is amusing that they think that Feds will not attend because they are "not allowed". It is foolish to be divisive in this way. The "Feds" likely make a useful contribution to the conference.
We do not want to make this a "political" move, and we do not make this decision based on their motivations. The issue we are struggling with, and the basis of our decision, is that we feel strongly that DEF CON has always presented a neutral ground that encouraged open communication among the community, despite the industry background and diversity of motives to attend. We believe the exclusion of the "feds" this year does the exact opposite at a critical time.
James and I do not feel that this should be about anti/pro government, but rather a continuation of openness that this event has always encouraged. We both have much respect for DEF CON and the entire organization and security community.
The specific inclusion of the federal government was never the intent of DefCon. The intent was to provide a neutral ground for people working in the security industry or on the fringes of the industry to be able to come together and discuss ideas, problems, and solutions. The Feds began coming, not to participate in the DefCon community but hoping to catch hackers or to recruit them. Obviously there may be some federal employees who attend for the same reasons we do, but DefCon prizes anonymity and those who would legitimately be attending obviously could not and would not be excluded.
For your team to purposely pull your talk from DefCon because they have asked that the feds not attend this year is absolutely silly. If your purpose is openness and community, it seems rather fishy that the organizers simply asking that the 'Feds' don't attend (i.e. the guys trying to track hackers) would incite you to pull your talk. I think it is completely disingenuous to say that this is not a political move because the community will still be there - you just aren't targeting the community anymore with your talks and your target audience may not be present...at least that's the way you make it seem.
This is how you find out who's snitching to the feds.
I can well understand why anyone in the non-corporate, civilian security community would have absolutely lost any shred of trust they had in the feds.
Those guys in DEFCON know who Aaron Schwartz is. They probably know people like Edward Snowden. They know that the federal government could bring their whole world crashing down in a heartbeat, without anything like constitutional rights.
I bet there are some feds who are sad about missing the parties, and about missing all the intel. But seriously, if any of them were decent people, they'd be blowing whistles, too.
Anybody who's working for the federal government in cybersecurity needs to make a decision about their future. Are they OK with being part of a police state? I know jobs are scarce, but if the day ever comes where push comes to shove, understanding of why they chose to continue to be part of this American StaziTM is going to be even more scarce.
You are welcome on my lawn.
It's just 2 people from the same company who decided they didn't like DEF CON's stance this year and wrote a blog post saying they wouldn't attend. This means nothing. If me and a buddy decide we don't like Coke anymore that doesn't warrant a headline saying "People now giving up on Coke in response to [whatever]".
The way that I read Jeff's comment was not so much as a ban of the Feds but he seemed to be politically cautioning the attendance of Feds on potential hostilities from attendees who aren't particularly thrilled with the recent disclosures. We can all argue the maturity level of the conference but in the immortal words of Friedrich Nietzsche: "Madness is rare in individuals, but in groups, parties, nations and ages, it is the rule" Surely there would be severe consequences on both sides were there to be pranks or aggressions on Feds in attendance. Of my many years of attendance, I have never considered Defcon to be a completely open environment free from danger, but rather a Hackers Mos Eisley where you can interact with all walks of life, but that you had better be aware of those who do not like you.
The people making up DEF CON hijacked the term "hacker" for their security-related work. Give it back to the people who actually deserve it: smart, clever engineering types.
the NSA walks into the room and starts getting names of people in attendance, then goes back and digs into PRISM and finds what those people are doing. And then, ultimately, either uses it for their own agenda or passes the information on to someone who will. is that really in the best interest of anyone who wants to retain not only their freedom but their civil liberties?
It's certainly not in the NSA's interest. The hackers they catch this way would not be the best and the brightest. It would also tip off the best and brightest that the NSA is doing something underhanded like this. That would cause them to strengthen their defenses and anonymity.
It's like misusing antibiotics; if you don't get all of them, the remaining ones will only become stronger.
"Once we've identified and embraced our sickness, we'll have strength...and that's when we get dangerous." - John Waters
The cold, hard truth is the vast, silent majority of Americans are apathetic about personal privacy.
From what I can tell (discussing this issue with my non-technically-minded family members), they're not apathetic, they're cynical. The best response was from my mom -- "if they know everything about everybody, why can't they stop these damn telemarketers from calling me?"
"Once we've identified and embraced our sickness, we'll have strength...and that's when we get dangerous." - John Waters
Not really. They don't really contribute a ton to the conference. The thing I find funny is there are random people in the Defcon org who work for different parts of the three letter organizations, and not new people. Some who have been there almost from the start.
I claim the first "Spot the fed" siting. i.e. Kevin Johnson
Enjoy your security contracts. Your grandchildren will thank you for the police state you helped create.
We don't want people like yourself at this convention anyways. DEF CON has always been Anti-Fed one way or another. That you fail to realize that is your own short-sightedness.
Now pardon me while I nail your blog with my new 97% accurate OCR-based captcha breaker, since you've still failed to stop it two years in a row.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
"......... this year's conference will feature as a speaker former NSA head Keith Alexander."
EH!!?!? Keith B. Alexander is the current Director of the National Security Agency (DIRNSA)!!!
97 posts of bullshit, and not one of you fucking geniuses caught it.
LMFAO
Perhaps you have not spent much time at these gatherings, but the amount of crossover between the them and the bone breakers is rather limited. It is more likely that additional mean spirited T-shirts will be created AND displayed.
..you don't know who the sucker at the table is. Just sayin.
Gen Alexander is still very much the DIRNSA, not former as indicated.
As of this writing, this comment was moderated 'insightful'...
I know we aren't supposed to comment on moderation but Parent is pure flamebait. The whole concept is a trolling concept...'blame government' is half a point and one way to start a never-ending argument.
I HATE these never ending arguments about straw man aspects or red herrings...I downmod these type of comments when I have mod points and I encourage others to do the same. I know we're supposed to focus on promoting good comments but having this kind of flame at the top of the comments really kills the discussion.
Slashdot needs the casual reader/commenter and they get turned off by seeing this same stuff over and over...
Thank you Dave Raggett
Anyone consider DEFCON just might not want the hassle of an official government presence b/c of the trouble it might stir up with attendees???
Jeez, if any of you dorks ever threw a party, you'd know the big variable is who will show up and what they will do.
Having an **official** presence from these gov't IT types would definitely tax security...just look at the comments on this thread. If I was organizing this, I definitely consider the same, given that it's a...you know...'hacker' convention and all.
It's like making sure two people who just broke up don't both show up to your party...avoids commotion...
The NSA and the like **will still be there** of course! Just not in an 'official' capacity.
If I was a gov't IT guy I'd be going just for the fun of it on my own time.
Thank you Dave Raggett
And Kevin Johnson can go sodomize himself. These assholes are ass raping our privacy, and Kevin Johnson launches a RESPECT THE BUTT RAPISTS campaign. What a whining fucking little turd.
Warrantless, no knock dynamic entry. Drones. Unconstitutional Dragnet Surveillance. Militarized Police shooing dogs. What is the end game? Where does this all go? I hesitate to make comparisons to Socialist Germany or Stalin Russia, as the mob has been conditioned to shoot down these comparison with one word 'Godwin' or other such throw away cliches. Ha Ha. Such clever little parrots you made.
You are unaccountable. You have 'secrets laws' in 'secret courts'. What kinda of bullshit is that? Does this seem OK to you? Not to me.
Frankly, 'THEY' scare the shit out of us. I see the comments here, 'there is no such thing as an AC to the NSA'. That is Intimidation. That is how 'THEY' play. Another is calling the atendents at DEF CON 'borderline'. That is the demonization and the minimization tactic. Another say the NSA'ers are 'Adults', implying the DEF CON'ers are children. Does that sound like somebody that wants to play fair, to be a friend, an equal, a partner?
And Dam Right the IT community and security community, and guys just trying to make a honest buck are pissed off. Not only are you tools of an oppressive, evil police state, you are destroying livelihoods and the internet itself.
When the final solution is finally implemented, where do you think it goes?
Take a look at yourself, Mr, Mrs Ms. NSA. Shake the bullshit and the brainwashing out of your head. Get out of your little bubble, your micro-culture. WHAT DO YOU THINK YOU ARE DOING? BE HONEST!
And you with unlimited funds, manpower, immunity and secrecy. Pretty dam tough and scary aren't ya.
The Men and Women at DEF CON are making a statement. Tiny, vulnerable, weak, frail, easily killed INDIVIDUALS, standing up to the big Goliath of a Monster,. You can ruin their lives for kicks. Yet there they stand. Risking it all. And you all hiding behind your screens, multiple identities, You terrorize them with all the resources of the most powerful nation ever to inhabit the earth. A security apparatus tens or thousands of times more invasive, more powerful than anything that has ever come before. None of that rings any warning bells?
And the broken bones comment. Is there any proof? Names, dates, links? Did this ever happen? Or is this more libel?
The DEF CON'ers' don't care that Mr. and Mrs. Joe Normal don't know or don't care. They are taking their stand to protect their little corner of life. That is what Real Men do. They don't have drones or automatic weapons or unlimited funding or immunity. They do not have mainstream media access. They are not waiting for it to be cool or for Oprah or Madonna or Gaga or Prince Harry or Bob Geldoff. And they do it anyway. They are not joiners. They are leaders. Three Cheers for DEF CON!
Do you understand? Do you get it? Do you grasp the scope of what is going on? Do you realized the stakes? Do you see your part in this? Are you not ashamed of yourselves?
WHAT ARE YOU MRS. AND MR. NSA? What are you?
yeah after "you" sold all your 0days and after you created them backbone router based root kits you finally wanna clear your conscience?
from spot the fed to "we are all feds now". please die in hell -you know who you are.
Thou art naive, my brother. The government relies on secrecy (among other things) for its security. God has given every individual the inalienable right to privacy (personal secrecy) for his/her personal security. By divulging thy private information to strangers, thou art laying thyself bare to attack and abuse. Knowlegde is power. Power corrupts. The more knowledge governments have of their citizens, the more power they have over them. The more power they have over them, the more likely they are to abuse their citizens. Governments are instituted by God to ensure law and order, but when governments dare to take away the individual's God-given rights (like privacy), they themselves become criminal. When individuals give up their God-given rights in exchange for protection by men, they forfeit God's own protection of them. In fact, they become God's enemy.
Profiling? Let's just spy on Arabs and Asian? It's works for the police doesn't it? Blacks and Hispanics are the criminals, so concentrating on them is how America should reduce crime right? You see, the assumption is that there is some flag or indicator that allows organizations like the police or the NSA to identify potential criminals before they become a threat. News flash...there isn't. At least not often enough to save people from an individual intent on causing massive harm. All I have seen is outrage about the NSA practices, but what I haven't seen, even in the most offhanded opinion, is an option for how to be just as effective without the perceived violation of personal privacy.
It's true, not all hackers aren't exactly angels and are only looking out for their own self interest.
Are the speeches from the keynote speakers broadcast by any chance?
So now we know who is kissing the Fed's ass.
General Alexander is the current Director of the NSA, not the "former NSA head."
lol!
n/t
DefCon has merely advised the Feds that it is probably not the best time for them to attend, and that they would prefer that they not be in attendance due to the likelihood of malicious attacks upon any suspected Feds. Not that they may not attend, but at least then DefCon has made it quite clear that they are perfectly aware of the risks and don't want to see it get ugly.
DefCon is being prudent, not exclusionary. They know there will be Feds, and they know that now that DefCon has covered their arses by identifying a likely hazard and giving a fair notification to those who ignore their warnings. It's like a parking lot that reminds you not to leave valuables in your car. People do it anyway, but it's hard at that point to blame the parking lot.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
The researchers are doing the right thing, IMO. There are millions of people in this country with secret and top secret security clearances, and it was a mere handful at PRISM who actually spied on us. To say all the other millions were complicit in all this is heinous. I'm embarrassed to be part of communities like /., which I thought were sufficiently intelligent, but are nonetheless making broad-sweeping accusations. Not only are there millions with security clearance, there are millions of more 'feds' who don't have security clearance.
The things people should be angry at:
PRISM
The PATRIOT Act
Congress
The Senate
The President
The continued bastardization of the constitution
etc.
Don't you think PRISM and shit is worth kicking them out of the con? then you're fucking tards
This is the right decision, and anybody at Def Con that would pull out of the event, is actually a government pawn anyway, and we don't want them there.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
"The community is digesting things that the Feds have had a decade to understand and come to terms with," said Moss, who is known as The Dark Tangent in hacking circles. "A little bit of time and distance can be a healthy thing, especially when emotions are running high."
He said the move was designed to defuse tension.
"We are not going on a witch hunt or checking IDs and kicking people out," he said.
- http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/11/us-hackers-feds-idUSBRE96A08120130711
So no. Not "not allowing", just suggesting some breathing room between two traditionally hostile communities. Get your wording right.
....I didn't want to share my GameBoy RedBox with them anyways.....