DOJ Fights Hackers with Brainwashing

OKolzig37 writes "I won't even bother to comment on this one: Justice Department begins antihacking campaign. Oh brother. " Now kindergarten classes (the campaign is targeted to kids 12 and under, obviously an extreme threat to national security) will be visited by McGruff the Crime Dog, Smokey the Bear, and Mitnick, the Anti-Hacking Gerbil. Maybe someone should tell the DOJ that the reason for our current national prosperity is a generation of kids that grew up...hacking. The original press release is online also.

Comments

Error in your logic (BIG one)

[Chris Johnson]

If cracking is a crime at all (much less a very serious one), then a computer is property which can be trespassed on. The data I have on it is my property. I have no real problem with this as long as it is consistent.
However, if this is the case, then if I have a PC with Linux and Microsoft's OS install formats my disk, I can sue them and win because they destroyed my property. If I'm on Windows and I install Quicktime or MS Media Player, and it grabs control of all my image files, I can sue because it is disrupting my property in ways I didn't ask for or desire. In short, if cracking is a crime at all, then the computer industry are criminals, because so much of what they do invades your computer's 'space' and changes stuff around as if they owned it- sometimes causing data loss and other types of damage.
There's no way around this- even if the current situation isn't this clearcut, the trend toward smart updates and remote-disable copy protection completely goes into the same areas crackers go. In a situation where Microsoft wants to be able to block and withhold your computer use when _they_ think you've done something wrong, where is the difference? It obliterates the concept of computer data as property- and if computers are not property but a public resource you don't actually own, then there is no argument that crackers shouldn't be allowed to access them.
If computer data is property, then the computer industry is working very hard to make it effectively not be property anymore.
Isn't that the root of the problem?

Re:Hacking/Cracking semantics

[Politas]

There are times when I fear that there is no point trying to re-educate the world. "Hacking" is now so firmly established in the minds of the general populace as meaning cracking, that maybe we need to just give up and decide on a new name for monkeying around with computers. It's sad, but linguistic inertia can be very difficult to overcome.

Wrong kind of prevention

[barlowg]

Once again, stupidity rears its ugly head in the form of a "prevention program". Let me be clear, I do not condone cracking, (hacking on the other hand has given me a stable operating system) but I understand why kids do it. Boredom. Most teenagers are not challenged, and many are looking for a challenge. Cracking is perfect, because all they need is a computer and an internet connection. Cracking provides a sense of accomplishment that is hard for teenage "geeks" to find elsewhere. Preaching to them will only waste money.

I have a possible solution, however. If these same kids had the opportunity to take computer science classes early on, they could find the challenge they needed in producing good software. Computer science education in high schools is terrible; it should be offered at multiple levels and even begun in middle school. With the infusion of technology into the workplace, schools would be able to justify the change as useful. Hopefully someone will catch on that this would be a good thing, though with the current status of education, who knows.
--
Gregory J. Barlow
fight bloat. use blackbox.

Prosperity due to *hackers*, not *crackers*

[Raul Acevedo]

Ok, I thought this whole cracker vs. hacker thing was all straightened out by now by at least the more enlightened in the slashdot community. Hackers, not necessarily crackers, are the ones responsible for the current prosperity in the computer world. Hackers are those who love and investigate technology for its own sake; crackers are a narrow subset of hackers who have malicious intent. It is *hackers* that have truly advanced computers; crackers have merely made them more annoying and dangerous to use by the average person.

Yes, I realize crackers do advance the state of the art in security. But that is only one aspect of computers---albeit a critical one---and cracker's methods can and frequently are highly questionable, when other methods of achieving security are perhaps as effective or more so. This actually opens up an intereseting debate: which is actually better for security, open source methodology for peer review or crackers forcing corporations to take security seriously? Can crackers use their skills in better ways that are not destructive? This question of course refers to crackers that actually want to advance security, not the purely malicious idiots that are only interested in destruction. (Political crackers are another category altogether.)

Regardless, criticizing the DOJ's move as anti-hacking is extremely misguided. The DOJ's move is anti-*cracking*, not anti-hacking. Our current prosperity is indeed in large part due to a generation of kids hacking... but not cracking.

Actually, there is one more interesting point to consider. All of us Gen X geek kid types, at the time, how many of us were really cracking anyway? Personal computers weren't really networked; did viruses even exist? I was definitely a young hacker, but now that I think about it, could I have been a cracker even if I wanted to? Until being exposed to the Internet at MIT in 1987, I don't think I could have been, or even really known what that was.
----------

Political advertising paid for with taxes

[Imperator]

The whole "War on Drugs", DARE, "Just Say No", and government-funded propaganda aimed at youth sickens me. Essentially, it's the two major parties cooperating to fund bipartisan (no, Americans, "bipartisan" does not mean universal) political advertising. The drug war is just a political and propaganda tool that the government uses to further the enslavement of the middle class and the dehumanization of the lower class. It's part of the political platform of those two parties, and as such shouldn't be funded with government money.

All heat and no fire ...

[LL]

After browsing the hundred-odd replies, I'm struck by the fact that most people are not happy (one way or another) but nobody has suggested any viable alternative. Now, given the usual libertarian attitude (at least if that is what OpenSource is suppose to be in empowering individuals), if you were a parent, what would you physically do? I'd like to toss in an idea (which unfortunately fell through for lack of funding ... so what's new with local government :-( ) that I once discussed with a community liason with a police parent partnership group.

{Put on flame-retardent overalls}

The concept was to install a number of "playpen" computers that kids could use to "break in". Similar in principle to providing rollerblade rinks to avoid them killing themselves on the roads. Would select a mix of OSs like Linux, FreeBSD, TrustedIRIX in order of increasing difficulty and tools for hunting down security holes and the philosophy of true hackerdom. The goal is to immerse them into the cultural landscape by providing reading material of role models and what traits the hacker community admired (talent, knowledge, modesty?) Then encourage kids to form groups/tribes to alternatively protect and to penetrate as far as possible undetected (home/away game) whilst the machines were still in a relatively controlled environment (ie in the community centre overlooked by someone responsible). That way they could learn skills (can we say forensic computing here!) and understand the role of a civil society at the same time (the only cyberlaws are what you can technologically enforce yourself!). Remember the only difference between a locksmith and a burgler is intent. By turning their energy into a competitive attitude towards computer mastery rather than notoriety, positive traits can in theory be reinforced.

{Flame suit off}

While the idea hasn't found any gung-ho mainstream champions to get it off the ground as yet, instead of whinging about the ineffectiveness of governments (which afterall is collectively suppose to represent your desires no matter how klutzy the implementation) perhaps /.ers can think of other potential feasible solutions and have an idea bake-off. As the old saying goes, if you're not part of the solution, then you're the problem.

LL

Re:ethics

[Jburkholder]

Hmm, and whose ethics and definition of right and wrong are to be taught? Yours? The government's? Decided by consensus of a blue-panel committee of leading politicians, buisness leaders and private citizent appointed by the president of the United States? No thank you.

I, as a parent of school-age children want to retain the choice to do this myself, or send my kids to a church where the ethics and sense of right and wrong are close enought to my standards.

Oh, boy, more tax dollars for brainwashing....

[sparty]

Not that any of the other government programs seem to be all that successful, but this is just another example of the feds overstepping their bounds. A few reasons (many of which have already been brought up):

1. The federal government should not be forcing programs upon local school districts.
2. The federal government should not be telling people what is right and wrong. Getting action from a subordinate on the job is OK, but learning how computers work isn't. Hmm. Sounds like a very productive country.
3. This is the same government that has sponsored drug sales through the CIA while imprisoning people who just use similar drugs in the U.S.
4. This is the same government that brought you such wonderfully successful programs as: Prohibition. The WoSD. Etc.

There are more, but those are the only ones I can enumerate. I guess we can only hope that this program is as effective as DARE. At least in the town where I live, the DARE officer collects pot pipes and shows 'em off when he goes to school to discuss the evil of drugs. And he takes frequent breaks to go outside and smoke tobacco. Great example.

I think the good results of the DARE program are the bumper stickers:

• DARE...to keep cops off doughnuts
• DARE...to think for yourself.

So what's the slogan for the new program going to be? "BAAAHHHHHH...Microsoft good, shellcode bad"? "CARE...to leave the case on"? (CARE: Computer Abuse Resistance Education or Completely Absurd and Ridiculous anti-Education)

(The reason I bring up the DARE comparisons is the similarity in programs. Basically, it's just another form of brainwashing that we, the taxpayers, get to finance.)

Ok, now I'm really pissed..

[Kitsune Sushi]

This could be low signal/noise.. I just woke up and am now in a rather unhappy mood thanks to this latest idiocy.. You've been warned. :)

But an ITAA official said that, upon investigation, a surprising number of cases involve child hackers.

Ok, how many of us actually know /children/ who qualify for the term hacker? Or even cracker? I think the grand majority of these would be termed "script kiddies". And if these idiots can't even figure out the correct terminology, it's really no wonder they're so defenseless. =P

The campaign, which debuts in January, will initially target children 12 and under, aiming to teach them proper online behavior and to instill a healthy disdain for hacking.

Ok, so.. Not only do they have to impose their flawed definition of the term "hacker" upon the public at large, now they have to twist it in the mind of small children? Shouldn't there be some kind of law that prohibits the government from /lying/ to small children on a massive scale? Argh.. I can't even think properly on this.. It's too fscking stupid.. Grr.

I mean, there are already enough clueless idiots out in the world who, upon being asked for the definition of the word hacker, get it.. enh!! dead wrong! But now whenever a person who went through the educational system during a time when this brainwashing campaign was in effect is exposed to the term "hacker", they might denounce the "offender" who brought it up as some kind of "drug dealer", and refuse to listen to their "subversive" or (religious children may choose to insert any religious word that attaches a strong stigma to the "subversive" or "hell-bound" individual) explanation of what the word really means? Or something equally ludicrous? Talk about.. stupid..

The association wants to "help weed out some of the less meaningful system violations by curious children so that law enforcement can focus on the true criminals," says ITAA President Harris Miller.

Sorry, but if some random script kiddies can bust into your system, you probably /deserved/ it. Perhaps someone more competent should be hired to replace you if you work the government or a company and find yourself in this situation? =P

Miller says the campaign could be expanded to educate kids about other aspects of proper Internet etiquette, such as warning them against sending spam - for kids, the modern-day equivalent of prank telephone calls - or visiting Web sites with adult content. The main focus of the campaign, however, will be to "send the message that hacking isn't cute, clever or funny."

No, hacking is clever and /sexy/.. And everything about that paragraph would be funny if it wasn't so sad.. And so.. stupid..

In addition to the funding from Justice, the ITAA also plans to pass the hat among its own membership, a who's-who list of the high-tech industry that includes Microsoft (MSFT), America Online (AOL) and IBM (IBM). The association will also seek funds from foundations and possibly from private individuals.

Oh joy.. another way for MS and AOL to spread evil across the land..

The first sentence was just awful.. "The Justice Department wants to save children before they turn into hackers." Um.. sure. The world could always use a few less programmers that actually have a passion for what they're doing.. Or not. Oh wait, they already discourage the production of more good programmers in school.. By teaching them Pascal. Better than Basic, I suppose, but not by a whole lot. You know, until I learned about C, I always thought programming sucked. Whoever had the bright idea to teach Pascal in recent years instead of C in high school needs to.. Well, nevermind. Let's just say something not very pretty..

Prosperity due to crackers?

[sheldon]

I'm not sure I agree that the current United States computer prosperity is entirely due to crackers.

Crackers are certainly very interesting as they come in many shapes and sizes, but do they provide any real value to the computer industry?

When was the last time you were up at 3am working on some interesting problem and said "Man, I could really use a cracker about now"?

Now I realize that Keebler's would very much like you to believe that they rule the world by holding the reigns on the saltine monopoly.

But come on... let's get real here.

The real powers are Hostess and Coca-Cola. As long as they have hold of the distribution of Twinkies and Coke, they control the main source of energy behind the entire Internet revolution.

And I notice that the DOJ is doing nothing about this!!!!

Time to show my colors

[ajs]

Ok, it's time to come out of the closet. When I was a lad, I was a "cracker". Oh, not a good one, or even a terribly motivated one (my exploits in college mostly involved doing geurilla sys-admin when the real admins were away, and people needed to get work done). But that's not the point. I was one of the evil few who you should fear and despise.

Here's the scary part: in my daily work as a senior software engineer (oooh! a title, I get a title!) and all-around UNIX-monkey I use every scrap of knowledge that I gained back then. I *need* to know what kind of exploits people will look for in my software. I *need* to be able to put myself into the mind of the cracker. In previous jobs I've had to deal with active intrusions. No one else had a clue what to expect, and I had to spoon-feed them all.

I'm not saying that you should give every kid a "breaking in 101" class, but those who show the insight, skill and motivation to subvert security should be helped to find the "good path". Their skills should be respected. If you just turn a cold eye to them and tell them that what they are doing is evil, they will end up working against you. If you nurture their talent and push them to accept responsibility for their capabilities, they will be valuable members of the community.

As a closing thought, the most important lesson that I learned was when someone that I felt great respect for told me that he knew what I had been doing all along, and he didn't bother to stop me. But, when he took action was when I started telling others how to do it. I could have ended up writing exploit programs for script-kiddies, but that one conversation ended the possibility as firmly as a bullet. Say the right thing at the right time, and you can change someone's world.