Slashdot Mirror
Hackers Bring Ethics To Las Vegas (backchannel.com)
Steven Levy, who has been extensively covering the world of hackers for decades (fun fact: the first time he wrote about it, the word "hacker" didn't really mean much), is sharing the changing perception about hacker conferences, and hackers themselves. In a newsletter, Backchannel's Levy writes about Black Hat conference: What I find most striking in the coverage of these events is that they are no longer seen as outlaw gatherings, but rather conclaves that form a valuable portion of the digital security mosaic. This is a big change from the long period, beginning in the late 1980s, during which the term "hacker" became synonymous with malfeasants, punks, and criminals. The glorious originals -- people who invented just about everything great we do on computers, including the internet -- were outraged at the denigration of a word that was once a badge of honor. [...]
The hackers who attend those conferences are true to that ethic. There's a core morality to both events, built on privacy, equal access to systems, and personal freedom. There's indignation at poorly built systems. There's contempt at those who see computers and the internet as means of controlling people instead of seeing them as tools of liberation.
So who gets to decide what a hacker is in 2016? The question comes up constantly because the term retains some fuzziness. I'll put aside the unquestioned hacker status of coders and designers who innovate on products and private infrastructure. Blissfully, it's now OK for Silicon Valley geeks to proudly declare themselves hackers, the best example of which is Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg's naming of his corporate philosophy as "The Hacker Way." But I'm wondering about those people who take the law into their own hands, sometimes not even taking care to limit collateral damage of innocent people. While true hackers generally don't wreak actual destruction, there are some who invade or even tamper with systems for what they consider moral purposes. Some call it hacktivism. Does that mean they are still hackers? That's tough to answer. Hacking into a system doesn't make you a hacker. Using a computer to steal a credit card or a Bitcoin doesn't do it, either. If you work for China and hack into Google; if you work for Russia and hack into the DNC; or if you work for the United States of America and plant a software time bomb in a nuclear centrifuge in Iran -- you are not necessarily a hacker.
The hackers who attend those conferences are true to that ethic. There's a core morality to both events, built on privacy, equal access to systems, and personal freedom. There's indignation at poorly built systems. There's contempt at those who see computers and the internet as means of controlling people instead of seeing them as tools of liberation.
So who gets to decide what a hacker is in 2016? The question comes up constantly because the term retains some fuzziness. I'll put aside the unquestioned hacker status of coders and designers who innovate on products and private infrastructure. Blissfully, it's now OK for Silicon Valley geeks to proudly declare themselves hackers, the best example of which is Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg's naming of his corporate philosophy as "The Hacker Way." But I'm wondering about those people who take the law into their own hands, sometimes not even taking care to limit collateral damage of innocent people. While true hackers generally don't wreak actual destruction, there are some who invade or even tamper with systems for what they consider moral purposes. Some call it hacktivism. Does that mean they are still hackers? That's tough to answer. Hacking into a system doesn't make you a hacker. Using a computer to steal a credit card or a Bitcoin doesn't do it, either. If you work for China and hack into Google; if you work for Russia and hack into the DNC; or if you work for the United States of America and plant a software time bomb in a nuclear centrifuge in Iran -- you are not necessarily a hacker.
Already done it.
Just like everyone else. Unethical humans bring unethics to unethical place. FTFY.
Actual word would be malefactors, given that no act of malfeasance has been specified.
Black Hat really isn't about hackers at all, anymore. It's become overtaken by corporate functions, and lots of the talks given are little more than thinly veiled sales pitches. It's a networking event, at most.
Defcon on the other hand, which takes place immediately following (in a different hotel in Vegas), is very much about hacking, security, and has grown into so much more. In addition to the usual talks, panels, and parties, there's all sorts of hands on things to do. It's a lot of fun, and it costs roughly a tenth of what Black Hat or any similar corporate conferences do. About the only negative thing I have to say about it is that it's terribly crowded (but for good reasons).
I get the feel this article was written by someone who's never actually BEEN in Vegas during these conferences. It's not at all uncommon to encounter skimming hardware on ATMs and fake cell sites that try to exploit and brick your phone. The likelihood of seeing either of those any other week anywhere in Vegas is near-zero.
Ethics my ass. The general opinion of the locals is that if the Paris casino burned down during Defcon with all the exit doors mysteriously barred, nothing of value would be lost.
Unfortunately applying them is a different matter ;-)
love is just extroverted narcissism
People who piss and moan about ethics are overcompensating for their lack of ethics or lack of accomplishments. If your greatest accomplishments in life are you haven't hurt anyone, haven't broken any laws, or haven't done anything questionable: You probably haven't done much of anything noteworthy.
Credit: KMFDM Dogma
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKhKBNS1fPc
No sane criminal openly goes to criminal conventions, hacker cons are just casual fridays for college students and people who work 9-5.
You will never see how I made millions with ransomware, because you would be arrested.
We are never going to reclaim "hacker", the masses views it as being synonymous with criminals, but it's gotten to the point where most tech people already view it as synonymous with douche bag. The only people who still fight it are those who are old enough to remember the "glory days" and desperately try and cling to them and kids just entering the scene who want to show off how smart they are by being pedantic.
That's the problem with a living language, it evolves, meanings change.
Iran is run by a group of people that have repeatedly said they should kill every Jew on the planet. There is nothing unethical about stopping or hindering that.
"..if you work for Russia and hack into the DNC -- you are not necessarily a hacker."
You're right. Not a hacker. In this case you would probably be considered a terrorist.
Since DHS is considered classifying elections as critical infrastructure, there's probably more truth here than we care to believe.
DefCon was just Black Hat for the guys who hadn't reached the big leagues yet, then kind of spiraled into a hipster ghoul of its former self.
I can't remember the events before it that indicated it was heading that way, but the Dmitri(y?) Skylarov incident, followed by some pulled lectures after that were proof it had lost its way as a true hacker's convention. Most of the people going there are suit and tie 'penetration specialists' now, or n00bs and groupies trying to pretend they are l33t. The real guys that are left aren't stupid enough to show up at conventions and risk getting flagged or profiled anymore.
As my last 2 cents: Only go to those conventions if you've got nothing to hide. If you do, then either go in a sufficiently advanced disguise that nobody will be able to identify you visually, via x-ray, or biometrically as yourself. And if you can't, then stick to the internet with delayed/intermittent response proxies to throw off traffic analysis, and enjoy socializing with your p2p 'darknet' buddies, who are becoming smaller and smaller fractions of the demographics with every new generation. Seriously, go look at tor and i2p node numbers, figure out how many invitation only hidden sites there are on each, then calculate that out as a percentage of the 80s-90s era hacker scene, and figure it out as a portion of the modern internet scene and seperately as the fraction of privacy aware hacker/activitist netizens. There aren't a lot left in the WHOLE WIDE WORLD, and the numbers seem to be stagnant or dwindling by the day as countries crack down on encryption. The tipping point will be soon, but for all those in First World countries, we are quickly becoming Internet Third World shitholes backed by repressive progressive regimes.
But now everybody just points at everybody else :)
There is, because they have only said it, they committed no crimes, Jews live in Iran and have good lives.
We all wish a demographic of some kind would die off, but we prefer it happens by godly interventions, preferable like they never existed.
Nice bullshit. Iran actively funds terrorism, like the Palestinians.
Palestine is no more synonymous with terrorism than being anti-Israel is synonymous with antisemitism.
Do you also work for the FBI manishs?
What I find most striking in the coverage of these events is that they are no longer seen as outlaw gatherings
That is the problem with Defcon now. It's starting to feel more like work.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Learning from the media and movie industries I have become a successful hacker. Here are some tips.
1) wear a hoodie
2) work in poorly lit room
3) change your terminal font colour to green.
if they really wanted to bring ethics to Vegas they would need to burn the entire place down
> proudly declare themselves hackers, the best example of which is Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg's naming of his corporate philosophy as "The Hacker Way."
br.
Zuckerberg isn't a hacker. He is a rich jewish kid with an extremely popular big-brother style website.