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 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?
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.
If these researchers want to take the wrong side in this fight, let them.
Why does everything always have to be a "them against us" when it comes to these types of debates. I am in no way affiliated to any government organization, and I definitely do not like government intrusion in my private life. However, government security is as much in my interest as in theirs. Afterall, if they do legally obtain some of my private information for whatever reason, I'd sleep a lot better knowing that at least it will be safe from some 12 year old Chinese hacker.
Or perhaps it will take an asteroid hurdling towards Earth for you to side with "the feds" and work together on a solution?
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
It's time the entire populace stand up and tell the federal government to go fuck itself.
Polls show that most people think Snowden was a criminal, and that the NSA is keeping us safe. Excluding and isolating your opponents is often a good strategy when you are winning. But privacy advocates are not winning. They are losing. In this battle for hearts and minds, engagement may be a better strategy.
If these researchers want to take the wrong side in this fight, let them.
They are not taking a side. They are disagreeing on means, not ends.
Because the first step in solving any dilemma is to grab the nearest sharp knife and cut off our noses despite our faces.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
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!
Wouldn't it be difficult to even have a nose to cut off, if you didn't have a face?
Or perhaps it will take an asteroid hurdling towards Earth for you to side with "the feds" and work together on a solution?
It is rather difficult to trust a group of people with a long history of lies, abuses, manipulation, and little or no accountability. This is one of those hard facts that doesn't just go away. It takes a long time and a lot of effort to restore broken trust, especially when it has been repeatedly broken with little or no consequence to the perpetrators.
Right now our government doesn't seem interested in regaining the trust and confidence of the citizens. They'd rather watch every move and outright spy on the people, becoming more and more intrusive, in order to justify this paranoia of theirs that more of their misdeeds might become known. It never seems to occur to them to look in the mirror if they want to find the source of the problem. They don't seem to think that maybe, just maybe, actual respect for the lives, privacy, and freedom of the citizens they're supposed to be serving is a better solution.
If some doomsday asteroid were coming our way, these people would likely retreat to some kind of well-stocked underground "continuity of government" bunker than lift a finger to help us.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
I'd sleep a lot better knowing that at least it will be safe from some 12 year old Chinese hacker.
It's not a 12 y/o Chinese hacker that most US citizens need to fear. It is the unrestrained overreaching of the US government as they push aside our privacy, our rights, our Constitution and our history.
Polls show that most people think Snowden was a criminal, and that the NSA is keeping us safe.
It's all too easy to manipulate polling results. There are plenty of subtle ways of doing it. I would rather think something like that is going on and apply all the usual "qui bono?" scrutiny to who conducted the polls and who paid for it and what the methodology was. I would rather think that because if so many Americans really are that naive, then the nation is forfeit and it's only a matter of time before it becomes a totalitarian state of some kind.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
The reason its us against them is because they have repeatedly broken the law, in spirit if not in fact, by their current activities. The only possible reason for them to be doing so is to gather more and more power to those who enable them. The purpose of such power is always to control, to enforce their will upon those who would otherwise prefer to live a life of freedom instead of a life of enslavement.
Those concepts aside, it becomes more of an us against them atmosphere when hackers, people who skirt legalities to do what they do in a lot of circumstances, are in the same room with law enforcement who are known to be gathering information on ALL communications in the US. Keep in mind that those communications may be discussing illegal activities whose purpose is to research weaknesses in security methods. While this could technically be illegal their purpose is to educate and repair problems - and the unfortunate wording and enforcement of the law makes their activities illegal. So bearing all of that in mind, 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?
Afterall, if they do legally obtain some of my private information for whatever reason, I'd sleep a lot better knowing that at least it will be safe from some 12 year old Chinese hacker.
I'd trust a random 12 year-old Chinese hacker before I'd trust an organization that's currently torturing and keeping people locked up illegally.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
So can a divorce.
Life is not for the lazy.
It is rather difficult to trust a group of people with a long history of lies, abuses, manipulation, and little or no accountability.
That also explains why I don't trust much coming out of the "hacker" community, either. :)
See what happens when you make sweeping generalizations about a community based on the wrongdoings of some members of that community?
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.
don't care?
The vast majority of Americans likely don't understand what legal repurcussions and violations are being propagated against them in the name of 'fighting terrorism' and 'security'.
The truly sad part is they end up supporting it out of social pressure, lest they be thought of by their peers as I patriotic. It's a self-fulfilling cycle of idiocy.
Completely agree with this, except I don't think there's a lot of social pressure. I think they are mostly just happy not to think about it too much. It's terrifying to think how little a splash something like Watergate would have today.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
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.
And yet last year everyone who attended DEF CON already knew the NSA was spying, they just didn't have any proof of it. There were ok with having feds last year though. So the only thing that really changed is that this spying is now front page news.
For the NSA, there is no "Anonymous Coward"...
When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
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.
Yes there is. They call them "Analysts".
We ALL knew they were spying. What has changed is that they are no longer even bothering to hide it.
Good-bye
There was proof even before. About the only thing that was revealed by Snowden was the exact names of the companies that were helping the NSA (and a few more similar details).
I don't know why suddenly it's become such a big issue when it wasn't before. Maybe everyone was distracted by gay marriage or abortion or banks or spying on the press or something. The number of scandals going on is rather ridiculous.
I'd still rather have it be a big issue than not.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
That's because of two, connected things. The first is that most privacy advocates sound and act like raving paranoid nutjobs (and for the most part they are). The second is that this has lead them to scream "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" so many times that nobody listens to them anymore.
The there is a third thing, one the nutjobs don't grasp and don't seem to even realize the existence of: most people don't care. Nor have have the nutjobs been able to frame a cogent, coherent case for people to care.
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.
There was proof even before. About the only thing that was revealed by Snowden was the exact names of the companies that were helping the NSA (and a few more similar details). I don't know why suddenly it's become such a big issue when it wasn't before. Maybe everyone was distracted by gay marriage or abortion or banks or spying on the press or something. The number of scandals going on is rather ridiculous. I'd still rather have it be a big issue than not.
It's a big issue now because mainstream, average people either didn't know about it, or were in denial about it and preferred to ignore those who tried to bring this to their attention. Or they branded them with labels like "tin-foil hatter" or "conspiracy nut" and the like. It's the standard procedure for how small-minded people treat those who have clearer vision than themselves (they can't just disagree, or be skeptical, they have to denigrate).
Now they can't do that anymore so it's finally getting the attention it deserves.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Here's one example. There was a leaker in 2005, too, who was also charged with espionage. Remember Thomas Drake?.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
this is starting to tread onto the batshit insane territory now! seriously? make your own roads? make your own bridges using "basic geometry and a few wood/metal shop classes"? and lets not even get started about the military protection that you think only consists of guns and "a few home-rigged explosives"?
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
I see, so you don't believe in the National Transportation and Safety Board...them are the guys that keep airline, train, bus, and auto companies from cutting corners to keep your ass safe. Now, about the Social Security Administration, let's get rid of them because Grandma can come and live with you, right? You have no need for safe workplace, there goes OSHA. And your air and water have no business being clean, let's get rid of the EPA. The list is very long....
Your problem is that you have no sense of perspective.
Here's one example. There was a leaker in 2005, too, who was also charged with espionage. Remember Thomas Drake?.
I certainly don't, and I had been paying attention back then. In 8 years we probably won't remember Snowden's name either. The US populace is even less well informed (or willfully ignorant), so you can bet that around 2020 there will be another leaker telling us shocking things about how the NSA has a running log of everybody's Google Glass feed.
You can build things without degrees. I'm pretty sure that the Greeks who built the 2800+ year old caravan bridge didn't have engineering degrees, and that has survived continuous use from the time of Homer to commuter buses.
I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
How many Ancient Greek bridges did not survive?
Classic dismissal. "Oh, polls can be manipulated" but zero effort is made to show or prove any of this. A proper poll includes the question text so one can do this analysis. Thing is, if you had done this, you would see the OP was wrong.
Q-Poll: "Do you regard Edward Snowden -- the national security consultant who released information to the media about the phone scanning program -- as more of a traitor, or more of a whistle-blower?" 34% say traitor, 55% say whistleblower, 11% unsure (6/28-7/8)
ABC Poll: "The NSA surveillance program was classified as secret, and was made public by a former government contractor named Edward Snowden. Do you support or oppose Snowden being charged with a crime for disclosing the NSA surveillance program?" 43% support, 48% oppose, 9% unsure (6/12-6/16)
pollingreport.com