Slashdot Mirror
"Hackers" crack more Fed sites
pluteus_larva writes "Speaking of the media and government's war on hackers, CNN is reporting that "hackers" (why can't *anyone* get this right?) are attacking Federal Web sites. " The press is covering this in a variety of areas. In related news, CobaltQ sent us the story about how "non-sanctioned" Chinese crackers have taken aim at NATO sites since the Chinese embassy bombing.
Wired News Service posted a few lines last week about "crackers" shutting down fbi.gov with a DOS attack, and I almost fell out of my chair laughing. Cracker will *never* be used as a term to describe a malicious hacker in the popular media.
As noted by many other posters in this discussion, "cracker" is a racial slur. It has been in use for far longer than computers and networks have been around. I cite a Webster's from 1963 I just happen to have lying around:
Cracker:
1. a bragging liar
2. something that makes a cracking or snapping noise
3. NUTCRACKER
4. a dry think crisp bakery product made of flour and water
5. POOR WHITE: -- usually used disparagingly
6. the equipment in which cracking is carried out
Besides it's other meanings, cracker is just a lame term. When I saw that Wired article, I wondered what kinds of arguements went on in the newsroom when the editor and reporter disagreed over the term... or when at a staff meeting they decided to standardize upon usage.
I sincerely hope this arguement gets buried today, and that our esteemed colleagues at Slashdot ignore future temptation to start it up again by so blatantly including the arguement in the news brief.
The Hacker _vs_ Cracker debate is a dead horse. Someone please bury the damn thing.
/. story from a few weeks ago mentioned, the CIA is considered taking action against Yugoslavia by taking down their networks. I'm not talking about futuristic cyber-wars where we all plug into a computer and do battle Tron-style, I just think it's *the* weakest link in most nation's security schemes.
The real problem here is how woefully unprepared most governments are when it comes to computer security. They just don't get it. When a few kids can make the federal government look stupid, what do you think some professionals could do?
As a
And considering pretty soon everything from your TV to your toaster will have an IP address, it's going to get worse. Forget about a security system to guard the doors and windows, what if someone just gains access to your home network, turns off the alarm, and unlocks the door from his laptop while he's sitting in your driveway with a moving van?
--Mid
I have to say that is one of the most facinating things I've read on slashdot for a while.
Unfortunately, however, I checked it out. My dictionary says the term "jerry built" (or "jury built") goes back to 1860s.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
--tom
I don't remember Katz claiming to be a hacker. I haven't seen Malda's code or coding style, so I can't evaluate it. ESR is a fine hacker (even though he's not quite as idealistic as, say, RMS). I don't think that you understand what the "hacker tradition" is. It goes back far beyond the early 80's, all the way back to the 60's or so, and it has nothing to do with breaking into computers.
(Sigh) The usage of Hacker vs. Cracker tells more about the writer and his or her readership than about the person being described. I use "cracker"
when writing for a geek audience, but I always use "hacker" when writing for a mass medium whose readers or viewers think "crackers" are people in the South who have Confederate flags in the back windows of their pickup trucks.
Why are you whining about this tired old argument?
You might have had a point if this was 1983, we had just seen the movie Wargames and wanted to prove how much a geek you were.
But this is 1999, the term Hacker has been used to refer to those who break into other computer systems at least since 1983 that I can remember.
The battle was long lost, it's time you just get a grip.
people got the wrong idea from my post... i guess i should have stated my thoughts better. maybe i should have stated: i respect someone who breaks in and doesnt destroy data then gives a message to the sysadmin of the security loop-hole a million times more than someone who breaks in to destroy and steal. granted they are both unethical and wrong, but at least you are getting something positive out of the first of the two.
:)
if you came to my house and used a paperclip to come into my back door when i was at work, and left a note of everything you did when i was gone so that i could fix the problem when i came home i would probabally be a little scared that someone broke in, but at least i know that i should fix my door. and big deal if you saw my underwear drawer when you were browsing around my house, as long as you dont tell people that i wear pink underwear im fine with it.
> ERROR: IEXPLORE caused an invalid page fault in module MSCONV97.DLL at 0137:01212d19. Stack dumped:
bzzzt! Wrong! I find the computer trespassing/home trespassing analogy to be very valid. A person's house is out in the open, on a street with other houses, and readily accessible in that it can be found, seen, walked around, and attempted to be entered. In effect, a house is on a "global network" just as a networked computer is. And laws against trespassing and breaking and entering aren't voided if the homeowner opts to NOT get adequate security. He might be dumb to leave his doors open, but that's no legal carte blanche for an intruder to walk in. "If you don't want people walking in your house, you lock your damn doors" ahem, but the crime is not in failing to lock doors, the onus of the crime is on the guy who walks in without permission. People decided they had the right to have their private property be undisturbed, hence laws against trespassing.
The analogy is a very good one. I live in a secured appartment complex with locks on all the exterior doors, plus locks on the doors to each apartment. A simular situation is in effect with my computer. Each account can be considered a door, and passwords can be considered locks. I have passwords(locks) on all accounts(doors) that need login privilages, and dissabled all other accounts(doors). If somebody breaks into my computer they are treaspassing, just as they would be if they broke into my appartment.
A service like named or httpd can be considered to be like a bank lobby. If you stay within the bank lobby doing only normal transactions, then you're welcome. On the other hand, if you force your way back behind the counter to the employees only section and start rummaging through the files, then your are trespassing.
As I recall back in my "Atari400 / BBS 300bps modem" days. A hacker was someone who hacked into systems via the modem. There even was a TV show about some kids that hacked. Anyone remember the movie War Games?
When did "hacker"'s meaning change to Kernal hacker OSS hacker? Did I miss something?
magnet
ps. not tryint to start a flame war or anything, just a need to be educated.
You know what strikes me?
They think they can accomplish good. I mean they are utterly convinced of it. The average adult wouldn't think for a moment that they have the power to affect any sort of change on the government's part, Franchise or no. Yet, every time one of these kiddies lets it be known that they have obtained access, they are dictating the priorities of some very high level IS professionals.
As an aside, I used to do IS for a high school, so I know how the FBI feels. Of course, I was a co-op student. These guys are highly paid professionals (one would hope). Somehow I imagine it's different for them.
Regardless, my point is imagine what would happen if all these people thought that they were able to affect a good result for all of society. Imagine, for instance, that all of these people believed that they were able to eliminate political problems like campaign financing scandal. They would have to use different tools, and different methods, but if they already had the belief that they could do it, they would have acheived the most important part already.
But that won't happen. Why? Because as is so often the case, the people with the drive and skill, do not have the vision to see what they are really capable of.
They live in fear of being found out by the FBI. So they attack the FBI. It gives them comfort. It's selfish. No one else cares. Society as a whole doesn't give a rat's ass about kiddies living in fear of retribution. Society is what says that the retribution should exist, for christs sake.
So they lose the respect of the people that see what they do, because for all the skill and drive, they are selfish, and they are of no benefit to us.
If only we could bottle that drive, that belief that there is something that can be done against the greatest of foes, regardless of your individual power.
That's the reason I'm intrigued with the Open Source movement. What is different between the Open Source people and script kiddies? Vision. Where did it come from? And how could we bottle it and give it to them?
Just a thought.
Gothland
It's a pity that these crackers fail to understand the stereotype their actions reinforce.
Yes, they are angry with good reason.
Yes, they are unjustifiably persecuted.
But the answer is education, not retaliation. The answer has never been retaliation, even against a fearful, callous government.
Forget about the government. Teach the people.
"hackers" (why can't *anyone* get this right?)
And they spelled Komputer and Computer... and I say my way is right and everyone else is wrong.
Face it, just becuase a small vocal and annoying minority try to use a word in a certain way, doesn't make that the "correct" meaning of the word. Go find a battle you haven't already lost.
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
i tell you one thing, i have alot of respect for people who break into places and dont destroy anything or steal anything. now when people start vandalizing data, that is where i draw the line. after all i bet that the sysadmins of the compromised facilities are working their rear-ends off right now trying to fix the security loop holes and that makes me happy because security around this country should be heightened anyways. especially if some 13 year old computer geek who only has 2 years of computer experience can break into some very important computer somewhere.
> ERROR: IEXPLORE caused an invalid page fault in module MSCONV97.DLL at 0137:01212d19. Stack dumped:
"Today, Linus Torvalds, respected computer effer and Kimberly, gave a short speech...."
(shrug) Heck, why not?
Save the whales. Feed the hungry. Free the mallocs.
Most people haven't read the official Jargon File definitions of hacker and/or cracker. This means that the more common word will be used the vast majority of the time, even though it is wrong. (consider that "irregardless" is not a word, for example.)
In my experience (starting in the late '70's), breaking into a system was often referred to "hacking" because the easiest metaphor to explain what a person was doing was that of someone using a machete to chop (hack) a new path through a jungle (security) into a central location (the targeted system). "Cracking" was related to breaking through security codes, etc., and was often referred to as being similar to cutting one's way through the walls with a "hack" saw.
Outside of computer circles, one does not "hack" something together. A person might "jury rig", "cobble", or "string" something together to see if it works, but the "hacking" part of the process is usually where something's getting dismantled in order to be reused in the new gadget. In this sense, I "hack" your code to get at the usable pieces. But am I really "hacking" when I put them back together?
I guess what I am driving at is that the "hacker's culture" is not a a "slash and destroy" mentality. It's much more an inventor's culture -- take things apart and put them together in useful new ways.
This is (IMHO) the single most important distinction which we need to convey to mainstream public and media.
------------
...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
That'll teach me to use English words I've heard but not seen in print... (and BTW, I am a native (American) English speaker. ...sigh...)
...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
These so-called break-ins are actually fakes created by the government so they can a) get increased support for crackdowns on "evil hackers" and b) increase attention and therefore funding for their own "cyberwar" plans.
--