Teen Hacks US Intelligence Chief's Personal Accounts (vice.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Teen Hacks US Intelligence Chief's Personal Accounts (vice.com)

Posted by Soulskill on Wednesday January 13, 2016 @02:03AM from the poking-the-bear dept.

An anonymous reader writes: The U.S. Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, has now joined the CIA's John Brennan in having his personal online accounts hacked. A teenage hacker known as 'Cracka' has claimed responsibility for the hack, reporting that he had infiltrated Clapper's home telephone, online accounts and his personal email, as well as his wife's Yahoo account. Cracka had managed to change the settings on Clapper's Verizon Fios account so that any calls to his home number were redirected to the Free Palestine Movement group in California.

132 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

On the one hand ... by gstoddart · 2016-01-13 02:08 · Score: 5, Insightful

On one hand, kudos for being ballsy and doing this.
On the other hand, if you go messing around with the Director of National Intelligence ... well, you should expect some pretty heavy consequences.
And I'm sure they'll find all sorts of trumped up charges to make your life miserable.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
1. Re:On the one hand ... by Shoten · 2016-01-13 02:15 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  On one hand, kudos for being ballsy and doing this.
  On the other hand, if you go messing around with the Director of National Intelligence ... well, you should expect some pretty heavy consequences.
  And I'm sure they'll find all sorts of trumped up charges to make your life miserable.
  Yeah, no kidding...
  "I R SO L33T! I GOT TEH CIA MAD AT ME!"
  Yeah, he's a real fucking genius.
  
  --
  
  For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
2. Re:On the one hand ... by Thanshin · 2016-01-13 02:19 · Score: 1
  
  And I'm sure they'll find all sorts of trumped up charges to make your life miserable.
  Where the trumped charge could be "victim of a hit and run" and "miserable" could mean "short".
3. Re: On the one hand ... by tysonedwards · 2016-01-13 02:20 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Is it a trumped up charge to compromise the security of a third party's computer systems, let alone update billing records, let alone causing increased realized financial expense to said party? Even if they strictly followed the letter of the law, wire fraud and illegitimate use of a computer system, if not felony hacking.
  
  --
  Thirty four characters live here.
4. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:27 · Score: 0, Offtopic
  
  Btw, before Tasers were called tasers they were called cattleprods. Just sayin.
5. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:27 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, it's lovely this 1% world we live in. If this kid had hacked me, he would have gotten a slap on the wrist. But hack an Important Person and everything is somehow different.
6. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:34 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  Is it a trumped up charge to compromise the security of a third party's computer systems, let alone update billing records, let alone causing increased realized financial expense to said party? Even if they strictly followed the letter of the law, wire fraud and illegitimate use of a computer system, if not felony hacking.
  The US has laws on the books covering misuse and unauththorised use of computer systems. "Cracka" is a cracker not a hacker. Hackers do not engage in malicious activity but explore systems to learn about them. I hope the CIA, DHS, FBI, NSA, FCC, and DOJ bury "Cracka" boy under a mountain of misdemeanor and felony charges.
7. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:36 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Ts ts, slashdotters and their totalitarian fantasies...
8. Re: On the one hand ... by gstoddart · 2016-01-13 02:40 · Score: 1
  
  That's the low hanging fruit that's easy to apply. Those would probably happen if you did it to almost anybody.
  Now, how many laws (secret or otherwise) start to apply when you start touching things for which they can invoke "national security"?
  Suddenly a LOT of resources get thrown at finding you, and people start talking about some next-level shit in terms of consequences.
  I feel bad for this kid, because his life as he understands it is about to become pretty messed up.
  Just how many federal agencies have an interest in this?
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
9. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:44 · Score: 0
  
  Btw, before Tasers were called tasers they were called cattleprods. Just sayin.
  ....and only the sickest of f*cks would hold them on a cow any longer than a fraction of a second or two, or use them multiple times in quick succession, or kill an animal with them.
  1000/1 seconds is a fraction of a second.
10. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:48 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  This qualifies him as an "enemy combatant" for an all-expenses-paid trip to gitmo! And maybe even some "enhanced interrogation".
11. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:49 · Score: 0
  
  or offer him a job? he clearly has the technical skills and the moral subset required for intelligence work. plus its easier for them to pay him a shit wage when the other option is jail. after all they have to be conscious with that large unknown amount of cash congress gives them every year.
12. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:55 · Score: 0
  
  Trumped up charges? They'll charge him for what he did.
  
  When did Slashdot become a conspiracy blog?
13. Re: On the one hand ... by gstoddart · 2016-01-13 02:55 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "Cracka" is a cracker not a hacker. Hackers do not engage in malicious activity but explore systems to learn about them.
  BULLSHIT!
  You kids who have retroactively decided to re-define hacker and cracker are so full of shit it isn't funny.
  Historically there is no such distinction, and "hacker" was the only word for about three decades or so. A hacker may or may not have done anything malicious. Cracker is a word which came along much later. In fact, it came along in the late 90s and suddenly people started claiming there was a semantic distinction.
  For anybody who was around before that, there simply is no distinction, and claiming it has always been so is a lie.
  "l337 h4x0rs" were who hacked your system, no matter if they just looked around, or burned it to the ground.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
14. Re: On the one hand ... by Ash-Fox · 2016-01-13 03:02 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  For anybody who was around before that, there simply is no distinction, and claiming it has always been so is a lie.
  When I was browsing dial up BBSes back 1994, I remember the distinction being made, so this has been going on for a long time.
  Out of curiousity, how far ago (like what year, minimum) does the distinction need to be to not be considered a retroactive decision to re-define hacker?
  
  --
  Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
15. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 03:06 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, it's lovely this 1% world we live in. If this kid had hacked me, he would have gotten a slap on the wrist. But hack an Important Person and everything is somehow different.
  I've got a news flash for you buddy, the world has always been that way. Every culture. Every civilization. Even prior to Civilization, when people lived in small groups. I'm not sure why you're so shocked about it.
16. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 03:15 · Score: 0
  
  ....and only the sickest of f*cks would hold them on a cow any longer than a fraction of a second or two, or use them multiple times in quick succession, or kill an animal with them.
  Thank God for PETA. Now if we could invent something like PETA for humans we'll be safe.
17. Re: On the one hand ... by Gr8Apes · 2016-01-13 03:17 · Score: 1
  
  For anybody who was around before that, there simply is no distinction, and claiming it has always been so is a lie.
  When I was browsing dial up BBSes back 1994, I remember the distinction being made, so this has been going on for a long time.
  Out of curiousity, how far ago (like what year, minimum) does the distinction need to be to not be considered a retroactive decision to re-define hacker?
  I second this, recalling around the time of the early 90s when malicious activity was stated as people cracking software, and crackers, while hackers were people that built things.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
18. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 03:36 · Score: 0
  
  Hackers engage in illegal and malicious activity all the time. The distinction is between white hat hackers and black hat hackers (and sometimes gray hat hackers). A cracker is usually someone in the "warez" scene who "cracks" software, i.e. removes DRM. But none of these words have unique and universally agreed-upon definitions.
19. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 03:41 · Score: 0
  
  He'll probably fucking hang himself and then become yet another Internet hero like Schwartz.
20. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 03:54 · Score: 0
  
  Why? The CIA is pretty shit when it comes to technology. This kid could stay hidden and they'll never know who he is.
21. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 04:15 · Score: 0
  
  To be fair, Schwartz was a far bigger Internet hero while he was alive and making stuff
22. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 04:18 · Score: 0
  
  Us kids? Careful there sonny.
  The term 'hacker' was originally used to describe a programmer who continued to 'hack' away at functional code that he or she did not yet believe to be perfect. As such the original term had nothing to do with its definitions today. The way you choose to define it is no more valid than the other.
23. Re: On the one hand ... by thegarbz · 2016-01-13 04:18 · Score: 1
  
  That was only a subset of malicious activity. Cracking software had a very specific meaning back then too, and that didn't involve breaking into someone's email account or getting a virus on a computer and deleting the MBR off the boot drive. In fact when I think back to the 90s I've always remembered "hackers" to be the ones who infiltrated, and "crackers" to be the type to modify software for reasons only considered malicious by the publisher.
24. Re: On the one hand ... by Ash-Fox · 2016-01-13 04:35 · Score: 1
  
  I remember on the BBSes in 1994 there were clear distinctions between a cracker, which would invade computer systems, or release cracked software and a hacker, which was more of someone hacking together something in often an ingenius way.
  Back to my original question.
  In what year does the distinction need to exist to not be considered a retroactive decision to re-define hacker?
  
  --
  Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
25. Re: On the one hand ... by Anne+Thwacks · 2016-01-13 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  You are the one full of shit. Hacker/hack is a term that originally meant what it still does in the phrase "people who do the hack work". It has always meant people with the knowledge of how things really work, whether in computing, the press, or anywhere else.
  Now get off my lawn.
  
  --
  Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
26. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 04:55 · Score: 0
  
  Actually, I would expect more humour, introspection and greatness from a Director of National Intelligence. It's not like you get such a title handed to you just by being pals with someone, hopefully. If not, it's a sign of someone not deserving the position.
27. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 05:05 · Score: 0
  
  Historically there is no such distinction, and "hacker" was the only word for about three decades or so. A hacker may or may not have done anything malicious. Cracker is a word which came along much later. In fact, it came along in the late 90s and suddenly people started claiming there was a semantic distinction.
  
  I encountered cracker in the 80s. They cracked games and with the poor distribution situation for games back then, the majority of games were not exported to non-English countries officially. With mail order being seriously overpriced and with a high amount of hoaxes (pay and hear nothing), the cracked versions became widespread in non-English speaking countries. The era with openly and widespread copying of cracked games ended when new games were officially imported and you could actually buy the games in the local game store. It also ended the view on crackers as some kind of linux gurus and they gradually became bad guys. With the internet, they ended up being downright harmful and very disliked.
  I can't help to wonder why some people don't want the distinction between cracker and hacker. The only thing they can gain by doing that is to make legal programmers sound like they are doing something illegal in the eyes of the public. It's like the only goal is to annoy other people and I can't help but to compare this to trolling.
  Regardless of what we argue about here, crackers will be called hackers for all eternity because that is what the journalists call them. It's like the black boxes in planes. They are actually orange, but at some point a journalist wanted to make it sound more dramatic. Just when I thought it couldn't get any lower, I read in the newspaper that Putty is an application designed to gain illegal access to other computers and that having it installed is proof of criminal intent. With the wonderful often used car analogies, I would say it would be like "cars can be used to run people over and ownership of a car is proof of criminal intent".
  I have run into problems due to others mixing up terms for legal and illegal online activity. I had the task of setting up a computer to do (whatever, can't remember) and I downloaded some GPL software and made it work. I was then told I wasn't allowed to do that because downloading is illegal. No concern regarding license, it's just illegal. I viewed the material handed out in school, which was the source of this misunderstanding and it really said all downloads are illegal. One paragraph said that you aren't allowed to download without the owners permission. Next paragraph says the internet is full of false claims of such permissions, meaning if you read such a claim online, you can't trust it and has to assume it to be false. Based on this, I can conclude that buying a game on steam is illegal, any linux distribution is illegal, but buying a burned DVD full of games from some guy selling them out of a car trunk is legal, because it isn't a download. I started a proper education of what to do and not do online, yet I can't help wondering about all the other kids who just trust that guide. It was made by the ministry of education, meaning it is presumably quite widespread. Presumably they just want students not to do bad stuff while using a school IP and they care for money/lawsuit rather than education accuracy.
28. Re: On the one hand ... by h4ck7h3p14n37 · 2016-01-13 05:10 · Score: 1
  
  Cracker is a word which came along much later. In fact, it came along in the late 90s and suddenly people started claiming there was a semantic distinction.
  The 90's?! Try the 80's, maybe even earlier.
  A cracker was someone who defeated software copy protection. You'd get cracked games on floppy disks and they'd typically have something added to the startup screen saying "Cracked by CaptainKidd".
29. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 05:13 · Score: 0
  
  For anybody who was around before that, there simply is no distinction, and claiming it has always been so is a lie.
  When I was browsing dial up BBSes back 1994, I remember the distinction being made, so this has been going on for a long time.
  Out of curiousity, how far ago (like what year, minimum) does the distinction need to be to not be considered a retroactive decision to re-define hacker?
  I second this, recalling around the time of the early 90s when malicious activity was stated as people cracking software, and crackers, while hackers were people that built things.
  1994? Get Off My Lawn!!!
  Back in the day around 1987 when 80% of connections were 300 baud. There were no firewalls. There was no DCMA and several sites had no passwords. No such thing as a computer virus. You could connect to government servers, schools and various businesses. If there was a password, the majority used "secret" or "god" or "love" as the password.
  It wasn't considered a "crime" to poke around (hack around), and explore. Until more sensitive information was available and got used for malicios purposes.
  I remember software company FTP servers were wide open with anonymous logins that had all their retail software available for download for "free".
  We were all hackers until the definition got hijacked.
30. Re:On the one hand ... by Coren22 · 2016-01-13 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  PETA who murders more animals than any other animal shelter?
  Thank god for those animal killers.
  
  --
  APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
31. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 05:29 · Score: 0
  
  No such thing?
32. Re: On the one hand ... by gstoddart · 2016-01-13 05:36 · Score: 1
  
  Sure, you cracked licenses but you hacked into systems.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
33. Re: On the one hand ... by kevmeister · 2016-01-13 05:36 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  As someone who WAS there, working with the security community dealing with the Morris work in 1988 and the WANK worm shortly after and as the author of the first detailed analysis of WANK (Worms Against Nuclear Killers) while at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, I was there when the term "cracker" was born. I can credit folks like Russell Brand (not THAT Russell Brand) with the creation of the term.
  This was before the commercial Internet, before TCP/IP, and in a day when no one thought twice about having an open "guest" account on a system because computer security was not an issue. People who played around with computer code and modified system kernels, as opposed to those designing or writing them, were referred to as "hackers". We were professionals who did custom modifications to software and wrote tools to analyze them. At the time I had licensed access to the source code for a variety of systems of that day including AT&T Unix, RSX-11M, IAS, and VMS. Things like custom system calls, an un-delete command, code to allow a co-processor (FPS AP-120B) to directly access a computer's file system. These were what I was paid to do and I, like many I worked with.I called myself a hacker. I hacked code.
  When the first transmittable worms, viruses, and trojans appeared, the people who wrote them were also "hackers", but those of us who hacked code legitimately didn't much care to be lumped in with the bad guys, so the term "cracker" was devised. It never really caught on. To most people, hackers are bad guys. It's unfortunate, but the horse has left the barn, and is now dead and continues to be beaten to a rotten pulp.
  To this day, in the developer community the term "hacker" retains its original meaning, It's someone who hacks code, often to fix or work around limitations or bugs or to add new functionality. They still hold "hackathons" to work as a group on resolving very complex issues in open source projects and understand what "hacker" means in that context and just live with the fact that the general public has a slightly different idea of whet the word means.
  
  --
  Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
34. Re: On the one hand ... by thoromyr · 2016-01-13 05:41 · Score: 1
  
  so... you agree with gstoddart that the term and distinction occurred in the 90s? You do realize that your "1994" data point does not disagree with his assertion?
  BTW: life existed before you were born, people (including your parents) had sex. Yes, it was a new discovery for them too. Every generation thinks it is unique, special, and the first to discover everything. Honestly, since you seem to have been self aware twenty years ago I'm a little surprised you haven't figured this all out yet.
  No, bringing in sex isn't off topic, it is central to much of what each generation thinks is new and discovered by them and rejects out of hand that their forebears could have known about despite the obvious fact that they did. The existence of hacking for decades before the 90s is another symptom of the same phenomena.
35. Re: On the one hand ... by thoromyr · 2016-01-13 05:48 · Score: 1
  
  By old usage, "cracking" was about breaking copy protection. In the 80s I can only recall it being used to refer game piracy. I don't recall the term "hacker" being used for game piracy at all. The terms "crack" and "cracker" are still primarily applied to game piracy.
  Of course, breaking into someone's accounts is not the same as pirating a game. Attempts to retroactively define "evil hacker" as "cracker" are just that, retroactive. And not particularly successful. Yeah, someone who likes to "hack" might also be involved in game piracy. There is room for overlap.
  However, the truth is both words are new to the English vocabulary and even words that are well established can have fuzzy meaning or change over time. "moot point" vs "mute point"; "beg the question" vs "raise the question"; "gay" vs "joyous"; "wood" vs "crazy" vs "boner".
  So it isn't really surprising that people have different ideas about what newly coined words "mean" or that someone trying to make sense of things and keep their language orderly tries to insist on their personal convention being the rule. What I particularly object to, however, is the insistence that past usage was something that it rather was not.
36. Re:On the one hand ... by thoromyr · 2016-01-13 05:50 · Score: 1
  
  why post AC? If I hadn't already posted I'd have modded this up. Of course, that naturally leads into a discussion about the gravity of the punishment for those charges...
37. Re: On the one hand ... by topologist · 2016-01-13 06:18 · Score: 1
  
  +1 (no mod points). As cogent and informative a summary of the "hacker/cracker" distinction as I've ever seen. The jargon file http://www.catb.org/jargon/htm... dates it to the early '80s:
  
  One who breaks security on a system. Coined ca. 1985 by hackers in defense against journalistic misuse of hacker (q.v., sense 8). An earlier attempt to establish worm in this sense around 1981--82 on Usenet was largely a failure.
  
  which would seem earlier than the parent's recollection, but it had probably been floating around in the collective engineering unconsciousness for some time. Of course, the etymology can probably be traced back to non-electronic crime, such as burglary (safe cracking/safe crackers).
38. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 06:22 · Score: 0
  
  He will NOT be charged with anything.... he will be HIRED.
39. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 06:26 · Score: 0
  
  Cracker came along WELL before the late 90s. I also was familiar with it in the 80s. Hacker was a term for "one who hacks it til it works" having nothing to do with malicious computer activity and dates back at least to 60s MIT. In the mid 90s media cluelessly reported on a misnomer of hacker because hacker sounds better. Then cue cyberchase and the term was forever re-defined. I'm not sure how some clueless idiot changes history one day on slashdot and gets modded +5 insightful. Apparently there are a lot of clueless kids who aren't aware of anything before the late 90s. This reminds me of why I jumped ship for Hacker News and phys.org and only come here occasionally to be disappointed every time.
40. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 06:43 · Score: 0
  
  Cracker is a word which came along much later. In fact, it came along in the late 90s and suddenly people started claiming there was a semantic distinction.
  I applaud the attempt - this is how language works. The meaning of words is assigned by the speaking population at large.
  In this case, though, the butthurt nerds lost. Cracker means a white guy or something you eat with cheese, nothing else.
41. Re: On the one hand ... by Toshito · 2016-01-13 07:25 · Score: 1
  
  And a cracker not only removed protections, but often had to also port the games to NTSC since a lot of games and demos in the 80's where not imported to the US/Canada and those were in PAL.
  Porting usually meant optimizing the game to fit in the NTSC timing which was shorter than PAL (less scan lines, so less time to execute code before next screen).
  And I remember that in those times Hacker meant someone trying to penetrate computers/networks, Cracker meant someone bypassing/removing protections from software, and Phrackers where those who hacked the phone lines.
  
  --
  Try it! Library of Babel
42. Re: On the one hand ... by Ash-Fox · 2016-01-13 07:31 · Score: 1
  
  so... you agree with gstoddart that the term and distinction occurred in the 90s?
  
  I don't disagree or agree, I just know what I witnessed in 1994 and the failure to provide a sufficient year makes it hard to do any sort of research.
  
  Every generation thinks it is unique, special, and the first to discover everything.
  That's nice and all, but that assumption doesn't apply to me. I personally think my generation are unimpressive compared to previous generations where it seems we weren't consumers and had knowledge and capability to service electronics on our own, build engines etc. (I discovered this from a fair few people I met in amateur radio).
  
  Honestly, since you seem to have been self aware twenty years ago I'm a little surprised you haven't figured this all out yet.
  I was around tennish at the time and I was writing demoscene stuff in m68k assembler that I was sharing on BBSes and mailing away on fidonet. I have a lot of memories (many of which are still with me in electronic form). I don't think I understood the politics that was going on at the time, I just liked doing 'cool stuff' with technology.
  
  The existence of hacking for decades before the 90s is another symptom of the same
  
  Decades? So, if I find distinctions in some amateur radio literature dating back to 1950s, is that enough?
  You guys really suck at being clear on a simple question I have asked twice and now I am having to confirm a vague answer from you. For people with experience and knowledge, you're really bad at using it effectively.
  
  --
  Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
43. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 08:48 · Score: 0
  
  In the 80s we used the term cracker for those who went into a (previously hacked or not) game's code with a hex editor and changed around some text - games in those days had a lot of scrolling text. This opposed to the hackers who would actually do something useful like adding trainer modes, infinite lives/money, or making a cratridge game available on tape or disk. That was in my limited Commodore 64 scene anyway. The term has certainly been in use since before the 90s, although its meaning will probably have changed over the years. Like many computer related jargon I suspect it was a term used in the military or engineering for a long time prior.
44. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 08:50 · Score: 0
  
  87... 300 baud modem... kids.... in 82 I was on a nice 300 baud modem, 1200 by 86, and a smokin 2.4K by 87... and that was from home. Had a much better link at the uni.
45. Re: On the one hand ... by Gr8Apes · 2016-01-13 08:53 · Score: 1
  
  There were no firewalls. There was no DCMA and several sites had no passwords. No such thing as a computer virus. You could connect to government servers, schools and various businesses.
  I can attest that there were no firewalls on some surprising networks as late as 1998, where entire organizations computers were directly connected to the internet, no firewalls, and in some cases no security at all.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
46. Re: On the one hand ... by ganjadude · 2016-01-13 08:59 · Score: 1
  
  agreed, 94 was around the first time i heard cracker as a more precise use.
  
  hackers were sick of being called bad guys so they dubbed bad hackers crackers
  
  --
  have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
47. Re: On the one hand ... by thegarbz · 2016-01-13 09:10 · Score: 1
  
  Well time only started 1st Jan 1970 at 00:00:00 so let's go with that :-)
48. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 09:49 · Score: 0
  
  Snowden leaks confirm that many of the "totalitarian fantasies" were correct, except that dissidents are destroyed by being movement-restricted, discredited or otherwise drowned out - to intern/torture/assassinate your citizens would take away the illusion of freedom.
  OTOH, Guantanamo, because sometimes a truly chilling effect is called for, and David Kelly, because on the rarest occasions your destabilisation plan from Iraq to ISIS must not be derailed.
49. Re:On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 11:33 · Score: 0
  
  These guys should really change their name "Intelligence", really what a joke.
50. Re: On the one hand ... by HiThere · 2016-01-13 11:51 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, that battle has been lost. And there wasn't even malice involved, just headline writers in search of something that would really grab people, and a movie producer who probably had no idea what either a bit or a byte was.
  For a similar event, the other day I happened to discover that one of my friends had no idea that vixen meant "female fox". It's useless to try to recover the older meaning.
  For that matter, when is the last time you knew of hacker used to mean someone who built crude furniture with an axe?
  
  --
  
  I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
51. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 12:22 · Score: 0
  
  I second this.
  Cracker cracks software, to remove protection.
  Hacker hacks anything, to change function.
52. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 12:24 · Score: 0
  
  Example.
  Cracker makes a crack.exe, it'd remove protection
  Hacker makes a hack.exe, it probably does other things than crack or you'd call it a crack.
53. Re: On the one hand ... by easyTree · 2016-01-13 19:32 · Score: 1
  
  Does someone who oversaw illegal action affecting everyone in your country and lied about it under oath in his capacity if Director of National intelligence still receive the protection of the law he so casually tossed aside?
  
  --
  Requiem for the American Dream
54. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-14 03:49 · Score: 0
  
  In the early 90's I was embaressingly part of the "l337 h4x0rs" crowd. In "our" circles back then, "Hacker" was one who broke into systems through novel methods (or at least novel implementations). A "Cracker" was one who used brute force / others toolsets they did not understand to gain entry. Almost interchangable with the term "script kiddie".
  Hackers could be malicious or not, intent was mostly irrelavent to the definition and realistically either causes significant losses to those compromised (which I did not truely understand at the time). This is why white/grey/black hat terms were used to differentiate motives/authorizations.
  To us at the time, "Hacker" was a badge of honor, as we felt superior in our abilities to Crackers to analyze protocols, software, configurations, etc to discover/exploit systems (and so such in an untraceable way through a web of previously compromised systems). This was often manual, or using custom written scripts/tools to find 0 days, misconfigurations or poor implementations. We used it to differentiate between the kid who was running someone elses toolset, scanning random networks looking for default configs, or brute forcing username/password entries to Telnet/SSH connections. That didn't take any skill or knowledge, and "gave us a bad name" (and yes I understand that unauthorized breaching of systems in itself should give a bad name, but we're talking within the same community).
  I'm not stating this is the original usage, clearly there are a thousand examples of earlier usage. And I'm no authority as the being the first published forensic examiner of and early worm, etc. But I thought my experience directly in the culture both terms often get used for at a specific time might be interesting to some....especially since I don't see it referenced in the other responses!
  I think the common thread in most usage of the terms is that "Hacking" is actually a fairly generic term which "Cracker" then evolves from. "Hackers" refers to the in depth knowledge of, and application of said knowledge to modify externally designed/built systems, mostly obtained from experimentation and investigation. Cracker tends to then develop from whatever group uses the Hacker identifier, as a negative identifier for those casting a negative or inferior shadow on them.
55. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-14 06:48 · Score: 0
  
  Your math is wrong. You mean 1/1000.
56. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-14 07:00 · Score: 0
  
  "Hacking" is simply creative improvisation and it is not unique to computers nor does it necessarily have to do with anything illegal or immoral.
  The old TV show McGyver was about a "hacker" who always got out of sticky situations by utilizing widgets in ways that they were not intended to be used - such as using a lightbulb filament to pick the lock of a door in order to escape.
57. Re: On the one hand ... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-15 18:09 · Score: 0
  
  No he was trying to be a smartass...
Just the FBI again by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:08 · Score: 0

It's just the FBI again trying to have a cyber-peen contest.
Clapper's Back Door by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:15 · Score: 0

See, if we had tougher encryption not filled with deliberate vulnerabilities, this could not have happened.
Doesn't it feel liberating and empowering to have your private life dissected by strangers with unfriendly motives, for the sake of someone's national security? Well, maybe not *your* national security, but someone somewhere certainly.
What, it doesn't? Oh that must just mean you have "something to hide", and are therefore a hacker terrorist criminal chinese muslim spy fraud guy.
Right? That's how you say it works, right?
1. Re:Clapper's Back Door by cheater512 · 2016-01-13 08:00 · Score: 1
  
  Actually his password was probably just 'password123'.
Note by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:17 · Score: 0

If a kid can do it, you can bet both cheeks that an "enemy" nation-state can (and probably did) do it without detection. You should thank the kid for being so obvious about it, give him a job, and let him off the hook (unless he seriously did damage, in which case make him pay for the damages for the first few years of his new job).
1. Re:Note by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:30 · Score: 0
  
  The only fix: We need to take away everyone's computers before this kind of thing happens again!
2. Re:Note by jafiwam · 2016-01-13 02:34 · Score: 1
  
  If a kid can do it, you can bet both cheeks that an "enemy" nation-state can (and probably did) do it without detection. You should thank the kid for being so obvious about it, give him a job, and let him off the hook (unless he seriously did damage, in which case make him pay for the damages for the first few years of his new job).
  Just imagine if it were a whole server of "personal" email with possibly classified information on it. That would certainly be a crime on both sides now wouldn't it?
3. Re:Note by turbidostato · 2016-01-13 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  "Just imagine if it were a whole server of "personal" email with possibly classified information on it. That would certainly be a crime on both sides now wouldn't it?"
  The article says "a teenager". Depending on how "teen" he is (i.e. 13 y.o.) then, no, it wouldn't be a crime since the boy would be criminally unimputable. If between 14 and 18 then it would be a misdemeanor at most, not a felony.
4. Re:Note by pregister · 2016-01-13 02:51 · Score: 1
  
  You missed the reference to the Clinton email "scandal".
5. Re:Note by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:58 · Score: 0
  
  Wouldn't that depend on whether it was "possibly" classified, or "actually" classified? In the former case I don't see how it's illegal. Millions of people have email servers that aren't managed by the US military.
6. Re:Note by CastrTroy · 2016-01-13 05:28 · Score: 1
  
  According to wikipedia the age he would be considered criminally unimputable would vary by state, but he oldest age for any state is 11. He could certainly be charged as long as he is a teen. Most states set the age at seven.
  
  In the United States, the age varies between states, being as low as six years in South Carolina and seven years in 35 states; 11 years is the minimum age for federal crimes.
  
  --
  
  Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
The kid's got a bright future... by hyades1 · 2016-01-13 02:18 · Score: 2

...once they let him out of whatever Third World hellhole US intelligence is currently using to warehouse inconvenient people.

--
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
1. Re:The kid's got a bright future... by sociocapitalist · 2016-01-13 03:38 · Score: 1
  
  ...once they let him out of whatever Third World hellhole US intelligence is currently using to warehouse inconvenient people.
  Nah they'll just hire him.
  
  --
  blindly antisocialist = antisocial
2. Re:The kid's got a bright future... by ColdWetDog · 2016-01-13 04:05 · Score: 1
  
  That's what he said.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
3. Re:The kid's got a bright future... by hyades1 · 2016-01-13 08:19 · Score: 1
  
  You raise and excellent point. ;-)
  
  --
  I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
4. Re:The kid's got a bright future... by fred911 · 2016-01-13 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  "Nah they'll just hire him."
  No, they won't. He'll go away. If he's lucky it will be to some unnamed cage where he'll be offered no constitutional protection or due process. If not, he'll have a fatal "accident" and we'll never hear anything more about it.
  
  --
  09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
5. Re:The kid's got a bright future... by david_thornley · 2016-01-13 10:40 · Score: 1
  
  This isn't the first time something like this has happened. How many people breaking into the accounts of high government officials have been disappeared?
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Incompetence by LichtSpektren · 2016-01-13 02:19 · Score: 2

Our heads of national intelligence and security are easily compromised by remote hackers/social engineers. Sounds like a fairly big problem. Then again, our nation didn't complain too much when it was discovered that the Secretary of the Treasury either cheated on, or couldn't figure out, his taxes, so I guess this shouldn't be much of a shocker.
1. Re:Incompetence by internerdj · 2016-01-13 02:29 · Score: 2
  
  How far up the management chain do you have to go in your organization before no one knows any of the technical details of what you do?
2. Re:Incompetence by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:29 · Score: 0
  
  The old adage "promoted to your level of incompetence" just took on a whole new meaning for me.
3. Re:Incompetence by gstoddart · 2016-01-13 03:12 · Score: 2
  
  My experience? Two levels of org chart at most, often only one.
  The transition from "understanding technical details" to "kinda sorta understands the concept" is fairly abrupt.
  I once had a manager who had coded in JCL for about 6-8 months before he moved into management ... and that had been 15 years prior. He was mostly a sales guy who could give a demo, but didn't really understand things any more.
  At the C-level? They mostly know how to take the union of all possible buzzwords available to them and use them freely without actually knowing they're lying.
  Take the average MBA who works in tech? And they pretty much know nothing technical at all.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
4. Re:Incompetence by DarkOx · 2016-01-13 05:36 · Score: 1
  
  Well in fairness to Turbo Timmy -
  Outside of those individuals who are able to file 1040EZ or have a relatively simple 1040A situation; nobody knows how to file their taxes. The best even the professionals can do is make a good faith effort to follow the rules working with best available definitions that are often vague and subject to contest or dispute.
  You then hope in the following order:
  0) You don't get audited
  1) Your answers to the auditors questions will convince them you were not trying to pull anything that you might be correct in your interpretation, best not waste anymore time with you.
  2) You are wrong but the IRS does not think you were trying pull something, and will let you just pay up and make the thing go away.
  3) The penalties are small
  4) The prison sentence is short.
  Our Tax code sucks.
  
  --
  Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
It must be said... by hyades1 · 2016-01-13 02:25 · Score: 5, Funny

This has all the earmarks of a Clapper-hacker Cracka Caper.

--
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
1. Re:It must be said... by torqer · 2016-01-13 02:48 · Score: 1
  
  Dr Suess in 2016...
2. Re:It must be said... by Anubis+IV · 2016-01-13 03:45 · Score: 2
  
  Obligatory link for anyone too young to get it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
3. Re:It must be said... by Chris+Mattern · 2016-01-13 05:06 · Score: 1
  
  How soon they forget. Actually, it's Johnny Carson and Jack Webb.
4. Re:It must be said... by hyades1 · 2016-01-13 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly what I was thinking of. My mother bought me the "Best of Carson" VHS tapes so I could see him at the top of his game. That was part of them.
  Thanks for bringing back some good memories.
  
  --
  I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
there are two potential outcomes. by nimbius · 2016-01-13 02:26 · Score: 4, Interesting

outcome 1: Administration has as good laugh, invites teen to the whitehouse and a tour of the CIA. STEM and CS agendas are lauded and the teens intuition and cleverness are chamioned as a sterling mark of american ingenuity and creativity. peace in the middle east is championed as a fundamental necessity of the 21st century
outcome 2: the teen spends half a decade in juvenile incarceration and another few years in a correcitonal facility after age 18. his parents find gainful employment hard to come by. as a convicted felon the teen loses access to PEL grants and scholarships required to attend college. everything from fast food to janitorial work refuses to hire a felon, and public assistance programs from section 8 housing to food benefits categorically deny him.

--
Good people go to bed earlier.
1. Re:there are two potential outcomes. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:48 · Score: 1
  
  PEL grants
  It's not an acronym. It's "Pell" and was named after the Congressman who came up with the idea.
2. Re:there are two potential outcomes. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 03:15 · Score: 0
  
  Guess he didn't go to bed early
3. Re:there are two potential outcomes. by fredrated · 2016-01-13 03:33 · Score: 1
  
  Outcome 1: the hacker is white. Outcome 2: the hacker is black.
4. Re:there are two potential outcomes. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 04:10 · Score: 0
  
  Surely you're joking? It's obviously outcome 2 in both cases.
5. Re:there are two potential outcomes. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 04:21 · Score: 0
  
  3 scenario: Teen is threatened with federal prison post release from juvie if he doesn't assist the FBI.
6. Re:there are two potential outcomes. by trybywrench · 2016-01-13 04:44 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  outcome 3: the CIA locks him in a room and throws away the room
  
  --
  I came to the datacenter drunk with a fake ID, don't you want to be just like me?
7. Re:there are two potential outcomes. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-14 04:14 · Score: 0
  
  What if the "room" floats long enough for the kid to escape? S/he might be clever.
  
  Ha ha, just kidding, they're on the dock watching with margaritas.
Do people live their careers? by JargonScott · 2016-01-13 02:30 · Score: 1

I know there's the proximity issue of his job title to the issue, but really do people expect everyone to "live" their job? Sometimes a mechanic's car is shitty. Sometimes a doctor has poor health habits. Sometimes directors of national intelligence has a family and none of them work too hard for home IT security.

--
Nuke Gay Whales for Jesus.
1. Re:Do people live their careers? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:38 · Score: 0
  
  Its called Irony and it sells inches.
2. Re:Do people live their careers? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 03:41 · Score: 0
  
  do people expect everyone to "live" their job? Sometimes a mechanic's car is shitty.
  That reminds me: I know quite a few divorced marriage counselors.
3. Re:Do people live their careers? by Whorhay · 2016-01-13 04:28 · Score: 1
  
  Having worked in the government there is a lot of work put into informing people about the dangers and risks of poor information security on a constant basis. The higher up the food chain you get the more critical it is that you understand those dangers and mitigate them as much as possible. When you get to the point that you are a national leader of a federal agency like he is all that personal stuff should be locked down incredibly tight. At that level you can safely assume that other nation states will be trying to pry into the details of your life. If some punk kid can manage this what kind of access do you think other nation states must have.
Worlds dumbest script kiddie by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:32 · Score: 0

Worlds dumbest script kiddie
Darwin award winner.
Clap on! Clap Off! by xxxJonBoyxxx · 2016-01-13 02:36 · Score: 1

Clap on! Clap Off! Clap on! Some-guy-who-got-his-email-hacked-like-a-noob!
1. Re: Clap on! Clap Off! by easyTree · 2016-01-13 19:39 · Score: 1
  
  Did you perpetrate this hack?
  No Sir,... not wittingly.
  
  --
  Requiem for the American Dream
2. Re: Clap on! Clap Off! by easyTree · 2016-01-13 19:40 · Score: 1
  
  Do not go to jail, go to promotion.
  
  --
  Requiem for the American Dream
lol, are you kidding? by CaptnCrud · 2016-01-13 02:51 · Score: 2

They will probably offer him/her a job.
Re:That's bad. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:53 · Score: 0

do you stomp before or after you suck its dick?
It was just the Chiefs Metadata.... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 02:56 · Score: 0

It was just the Chiefs Metadata..... Clapper was suspected of aiding the enemy and his accounts were added to the Citizens Bulk Collection program managed by Anonymous.
Same thing as what the NSA does, but pivoted to watch the watchers.
I don't recall seeing any of his info being posted... it was only consumed in a citizens search thus quite legal.
Remember guys, spying is totally fine and legal these days. Citizens decided to start doing it to expose corruption. Fair is fair.
And well deserved by HalAtWork · 2016-01-13 03:01 · Score: 1

True because the director of national intelligence is of a higher breed than everyone else who has their personal details compromised every day. That's why you should expect heavy consequences for targeting that particular individual amongst all us plebs.

--
Twinstiq, game news
1. Re:And well deserved by Gr8Apes · 2016-01-13 03:19 · Score: 2
  
  However hasn't Clapper said if you have nothing to hide, then you shouldn't mind your data being "public"? I'd say this might be a nice reminder that "public" may not be what you want all your data be, no matter how innocent you are.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
So...this kid hacked Yahoo? by Gryle · 2016-01-13 03:02 · Score: 2

Aside from his target being James Clapper, I'm not really sure what the fuss is. From my reading of the article, Cracka managed to re-route residential phone numbers and got into some Yahoo accounts. Granted, this isn't the greatest PR for the DNI and this kid is certainly more technically skilled than I am, but it's not like he compromised a classified system somewhere. Perhaps someone else with more technical expertise can explain to me what I'm missing?

--
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
1. Re:So...this kid hacked Yahoo? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 03:52 · Score: 0
  
  Honestly unless I'm missing something important a lot of this looks like a standard social engineering attack... not a "hack" per say. But it's hard to tell with FTA not really talking about any of that.
2. Re:So...this kid hacked Yahoo? by ColdWetDog · 2016-01-13 04:10 · Score: 1
  
  Well you would think that his technical staff would have, perhaps, maybe, gone over to his house once and made sure things were a wee bit hardened. It doesn't take a whole lot to compromise anybody and as countless spear phishing episodes have shown, once you crack the wall it's relatively easy to break it down entirely.
  Of course, this all depends on TFA having some resemblance to the truth. The entire thing could have been made up, be a false flag, be a honeypot. Who knows?
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
3. Re:So...this kid hacked Yahoo? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 04:33 · Score: 0
  
  It sounds like he used poorly defined security questions to reset account passwords and log in.
4. Re:So...this kid hacked Yahoo? by Registered+Coward+v2 · 2016-01-13 04:49 · Score: 1
  
  Well you would think that his technical staff would have, perhaps, maybe, gone over to his house once and made sure things were a wee bit hardened. It doesn't take a whole lot to compromise anybody and as countless spear phishing episodes have shown, once you crack the wall it's relatively easy to break it down entirely.
  All this guy has done is get into some personal accounts. Embarrassing, sure, but not all that spectacular other than the target. I'm pretty sure the DNI has a secure setup for official use in his house. As long as he doesn't use personal emails for official business there is no risk of compromising classified material. Meanwhile, the teen has attracted date attention of agencies that have the ability to find him if they decide to; and buildings to house him before, during, and after a trial if he is convicted.
  
  --
  I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
5. Re:So...this kid hacked Yahoo? by Okian+Warrior · 2016-01-13 05:01 · Score: 1
  
  Interestingly, the John Brennan hacking had nothing to do with Brennan or any sort of security breach.
  Essentially, the hackers did a social hack on AOL (John Brennan's ISP) .
  Brennan had nothing to do with it, had used good security practices, and only his personal stuff was made public.
  I'm not sure what the fuss is about either. Yeah, personal E-mails and some slightly private information might be made public, and there's some political hay to be made from doxing the high-priority target, but it's really not their fault at all.
  (Unlike a certain Secretary of State, who had an aide E-mail summaries of classified documents to an outside server.)
6. Re:So...this kid hacked Yahoo? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 06:13 · Score: 0
  
  I once bought a house in Falls Church, VA from a CIA employee. He said he tried to get the agency to do something, but I got a free safe (for the secure phone which I didn't get) and a free phone line. In those days I used the free phone line to dial up to the Internet with my trusty 9600 modem. After 2-3 years of that a Verizon truck showed up on a Sunday (as if any "Verizon" crew works on a Sunday) and fiddled with the wires on a pole outside. Months later I heard conversations on the free line which had magically been assigned to some business. End of free line.
7. Re:So...this kid hacked Yahoo? by Whorhay · 2016-01-13 07:11 · Score: 1
  
  The danger isn't that some hacker would/could find some kind of nuclear launch codes or some equivalent. The danger is that if some basement dwelling teenage hacker can accomplish this, what does it say about our high level leaders vulnerability to more nefarious people and states. And you don't have to find the keys to the kingdom, or even anything that would ordinarily be classified. In Vietnam VC spies would simply observe when large formations of air craft took off, and what direction they where heading, that was enough to compromise operational security largely reducing the effectiveness of such missions.
He does this at a young age... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 03:15 · Score: 0

Wasted talent, perhaps?
Anybody else think so?
Alternate Take by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 03:52 · Score: 0

"News" story: Teen Hacks Intelligence Chief's Accounts.
Politicians: See, we need better cyber protection. Don't worry, we'll protect you!
Good luck in prison, kid! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 04:07 · Score: 0

You're going to need it.
You are wrong. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 04:34 · Score: 0

I just looked up "hacker" in the dictionary:
4 : a person who illegally gains access to and sometimes tampers with information in a computer system
So, you are wrong.
It's the DNI... no one in DC cares by Koreantoast · 2016-01-13 04:53 · Score: 1

Silly hackers... don't they know that the DNI is considered a dead end job in Washington DC, particularly in the intelligence community? Their position is basically just a title with no real budget, assets or control over the actual intelligence agencies in the United States (a la CIA, NSA, DIA, etc.) who think that the DNI role is really theirs in practice. Heck, if anything, the DNI is probably happy to get some actual press.
Lame by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 05:11 · Score: 0

So he hacked the guy's home phone and his wife's yahoo, and that's impressive?
that like someone licking a soiled condom stolen from rihanna's trash and claiming glory as if he had fucked her. Wooooooo
1. Re: Lame by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 06:21 · Score: 0
  
  What? Obviously it wasn't that easy or it would have happen already. Don't hate on this kid because he can do things you can't.
2. Re: Lame by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-13 08:53 · Score: 0
  
  What? Obviously it wasn't that easy or it would have happen already. Don't hate on this kid because he can do things you can't.
  That's vandalism, not heroism.
Unwittingly by tavita · 2016-01-13 06:42 · Score: 1

Said hacker did not hack the accounts. Not wittingly.
Attacking people's family is collective punishment by dsmatthews9379 · 2016-01-13 10:24 · Score: 1

I realise these are just kids, so without an ounce of wisdom, but how can they be smart enough to do this yet so stupid that they do not see that hurting other people just because they are related to a person you are politically opposed too is the sort of evil shit we condemn North Korea for? If you claim to act out of principle you need to keep in mind that ethical humans don't go after people at home, unless they are single, because family are off limits. If you knowingly break that rule then you are nothing but a sociopath, and your claimed cause or motive is irrelevant.
no bullsit on you by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-14 06:48 · Score: 0

Your wrong. The word cracker was around in the 80's. Hackers hack systems for the GOOD of the client.
I'm a hacker and have been for over 20 years. I get paid to find security holes in systems and in networks. I report my finds to the owners of the networks and the systems and help close those holes to make their security better. I help protect YOUR DATA! in their systems. Got money in the bank? Well I'm hacking to protect your money. I don't profit from the data I take. I keep my mouth shut about what I find except when talking with the client who owns the network I am working on.
If it wasn't for me and others like me your bank account and any other online site that processes credit cards would be cracked and your money stolen. Hackers work to protect your silly ass.
Everything I do is completely legal. I use my powers for good.
Could'n have happend to a better person by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-14 07:01 · Score: 0

James Clapper is a lying piece of shit.