Hackers are all B@#t@rds

Hi miracle,

I understand what you are saying...however...a computer is a person's property...just like his house or his car...therefore another person does NOT have a right of access to it without the OWNER"S PERMISSION.

I am not talking about worms or viruses ( which is a separate issue )...I am speaking specifically about property violations.

You might put a snake on my lawn ( worm ) and it might find it's way into my home or the house down the street...but...that's not the same as entering my property and changing the locks...is it?!

Now...you said what if it was to protect you? Well...then you knock on the door and if you are refused that's the right of the owner...you do not just circumvent the owner's wishes because you believe you are justified...because you aren't justified.

A computer is a piece of PROPERTY...as such it must be treated in the same way as any property.

Eg ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Egaladeist

Now...you said what if it was to protect you? Well...then you knock on the door and if you are refused that's the right of the owner...you do not just circumvent the owner's wishes because you believe you are justified...because you aren't justified.

A computer is a piece of PROPERTY...as such it must be treated in the same way as any property.

Eg ;)

---

I think we're just getting into semantics here, but it's worth discussing. In this case, a persons house is different from a computer. If Joe 6-Pack doesn't secure his home, that's his problem....if someone breaks in illegally, it only affects him, his family, and maybe a neighbor or two. On the other side, if someone doesn't secure his/her computer, it can affect an entire subnet, ISP, or ????

I guess the main points I'm trying to make are these:

-It is certainly illegal to break into someone's computer, but it is not always unethical

-It is just as unethical to break into someones system and do harm as it is for Joe 6-Pack to not take the responsibility of securing his own system

-The content of a hard drive IS property, though it is not in the same category as say, land or someone's home

Hi miracle,

That's where we differ in opinion...I believe there is no substantial difference as far as ownership goes...a computer is the owner's property...the data and contents are the owner's property...the property line is drawn at the connection at the internet...the internet is like a public park that everyone has access to...you still cannot enter the homes surrounding it.

It doesn't matter what justification you may feel a person has...I can justify buying an uzi and killing criminals saying I'm doing it for the public good...they present a security risk to my neighborhood...but that would be JUSTIFICATION IN ONE"S OWN MIND...not actual justification.

Sorry...you're not going to convince me it's OK to take or alter or use someone's property because YOU FEEL they're not being responsible enough.

If I feel you are not taking proper responsibility of your children, your car, your home, your shoes, your dog, or your watch...can I take them from you...or force you to accept my guidance?

That essentially is what you're suggesting...that if someone doesn't properly secure their computer that gives you the right to FORCE your guidance and changes upon them.

It doesn't wash! Unless the person is breaking the law you and no one else has the right to FORCE your judgments or your guidance upon them.

If these HACKERS were as ethical as you claim they are they would be trying to attack the criminals and using their talents in a productive way instead of trying to inflitrate Joe-Nobody's computer.

They would offer their services to the police, the FBI, and track down and shut down child porn sites and spammers and virus writers...but they aren't are they...that's why they're called Hacks...Hacker was NOT a term of endearment when it began and it still isn't.

You can try to justify entering Joe-Shmo's computer but that's just an excuse to be a HACK...if they really wanted justification they would be attacking the people causing the problems...because they're NOT...THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.

( exceptions apply...as always...I'm sure not all hackers are attacking Joe-Shmo...and I'm sure some are trying to attack the proper targets...but from what I've read on this site they do not comprise the majority...not by a long shot )

Eg ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by pakbehl
This sounds like an article written by some angry journalist who got a huge credit card bill because he gave it to the wrong unsecured porno site. I can certainly understand somebody's anger at being devastated and emotionally destructed, I've had my things stolen, I've had to deal with virii, but do I write an article that generalizes every single person who ever wrote a virus, sent spam, ran a scam, ripped off the life savings of little old ladies, and found every "parent's" online bank account and called them all "hackers". I will most certainly agree whole heartedly that anyone who would do these terrible things are incredible jerks and should be made to feel what they inflict on others, but I've said 19million times before and I'll say it again these people are not hackers, they are cyber criminals, or whatever kind of criminal you want to call them. I am so sick of constantly arguing with people over the definition of 'hacker'. There are massive groups of law-abiding, tax-paying, PTA attending, hard working, proffesional people in the world that consider themselves hackers and make it known to others that this does not imply that they do anything illegal whatsoever. Yet over and over the media blatantly and rudely demonizes "hackers" and attaches that word to the worst kind of cyber*****s there are.
He speaks up for people who feel the effects of identity theft and the like ever day
Well I and millions of others like me are standing up for peaceful hackers who have to deal with the outrageous terroristic connotations that *random explitive* journalists like him perpetuate without a second thought.

Just thought I'd complain...

---

Well, I like your style.

I have had the same arguement over the past 15 years that I've all but given up trying to educate people on the difference between a "hacker" and a cyber-criminal.

The original hacker was someone who simply wanted to learn everything they could about a particular computer system/operating system. For example Unix, Windows or DOS.

A cyber criminal, on the other hand, is someone who deleiberately damages, destroys, or steals from a computer network, PC or other information system that they have managed to gain access to.

Are people who write computer viruses (or is it virii) hackers or criminals? Well, it depends on what they wrote it for. If it was to learn how to counter them by learning how they are (or can be) made, then I would classify them as a hacker. If they do so to deliberately infect other systems or cause damage to those systems, then I consider them criminals. After all, I have written my share of computer viruses and have been fortunate that none have ever gotten into "the wild." But they were written in order to learn the different means and ways that they could be "built" so that I could develope means and ways of getting rid of them with little to no loss of data. Or they were written to learn how to recover from them if they DID manage to deliver their "payload" and wipe my data.

Are people who break into other systems hackers or criminals? Again it depends on their motivation: to learn - hacker; to damage or steal - criminal.

The tired old usage of Hacker = criminal is not only unfair to those people who originated the term, but unfair to those who look up to them and want to learn just like they did.

Hacking, phreaking, blue-boxing, etc... Why consider andrelegate those people to the unsavory label of criminal by misusing the term that applies to them; the title of "Hacker"?

Just my 2 cents. Anyone is free to disagree, but at least disagree based on experience and facts, not media hype.

Carenath (Archangel)

Hi carenath,

I refer you back to the post before yours...

Quote:

---

They would offer their services to the police, the FBI, and track down and shut down child porn sites and spammers and virus writers...but they aren't are they...that's why they're called Hacks...Hacker was NOT a term of endearment when it began and it still isn't.

You can try to justify entering Joe-Shmo's computer but that's just an excuse to be a HACK...if they really wanted justification they would be attacking the people causing the problems...because they're NOT...THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.

---

your reply..

Quote:

---

Are people who break into other systems hackers or criminals? Again it depends on their motivation: to learn - hacker; to damage or steal - criminal.

---

Let me clarify for the thick-headed : IF YOU ENTER SOMEONE'S ELSE'S COMPUTER WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION YOU"RE A CRIMINAL...PERIOD!

This has nothing to do with media hype...it's about PROPERTY RIGHTS.

Let me ask you a question...is the computer you are " learning ' from yours or someone else's?

If you're using someone's else's computer WITHOUT their PERMISSION you're a criminal...it's no wonder hackers get bad media attention when you justify using SOMEONE ELSE's computer as if you have a right to it...

YOU DON'T!!!!

It's NOT YOUR COMPUTER!!!

What is so freakin' difficult to understand about that? It's NOT your computer! You do not have any rights to property you don't own!

Do you OWN these computers you're ' learning ' from? Are they YOURS? Or are they someone else's?

Repeat after me : I DO NOT OWN THIS COMPUTER...THEREFORE..IT BELONGS TO SOMEONE ELSE...I DO NOT HAVE ANY RIGHTS TO USE ANOTHER'S PROPERTY...IT DOES NOT BELONG TO ME...if you repeat this often it just might start to sink in.

Eg ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Egaladeist
Hi miracle,

..........

If I feel you are not taking proper responsibility of your children, your car, your home, your shoes, your dog, or your watch...can I take them from you...or force you to accept my guidance?

That essentially is what you're suggesting...that if someone doesn't properly secure their computer that gives you the right to FORCE your guidance and changes upon them.

It doesn't wash! Unless the person is breaking the law you and no one else has the right to FORCE your judgments or your guidance upon them.

Eg ;)

---

Eg

While I have to agree - in principle - to your statement above, in actual fact your arguement is somewhat flawed.

The states and federal government on a regular basis DO tell you what you can do with your own personal property, family, pets, etc...

Look at all of the cases involving Children and Youth (or whatever your particular branch of family services are called). They tell people every day how to raise their children, how to handle problems that their children give, etc... and most of them have never even HAD kids.


As far as your comment re: utilizing our talents in support of the local LEA or whatever... Well, just try going to your local FBI agency and telling them you found a Child porn site and thought they would like to know. I can almost gaurentee that the FISRT person they will look at - and confiscate the system of - is you. :)

Hi carenath,

Yes...the government interferes...and we accept that, in cases of abuse or neglect or criminal action...and they do make mistakes ( on purpose and by accident ), and they should be dealt with accordingly.

And yes...they do say whether or not you'll be allowed a permit for this or that...etc...I do not in every case agree with them either...but that is not the subject here...I said that in context to what was said before.

And I agree that the FBI, etc...might consider you a criminal for bringing something to their attention...it happens.

But where I do not agree is in the total lack of regard hackers seem to have for property rights.

It's very simple...if the computer is in your home it is yours...if it's NOT in your home but someone else's then it's NOT yours.

You have no more right to access a computer in someone else's home than you have a right to their sterio...it's a just because I can senerio...is it OK for me to cut a hole into the wall and tap my neighbor's electricity...just because I can?

Eg ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Egaladeist
Hi carenath,


Let me clarify for the thick-headed : IF YOU ENTER SOMEONE'S ELSE'S COMPUTER WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION YOU"RE A CRIMINAL...PERIOD!

This has nothing to do with media hype...it's about PROPERTY RIGHTS.

Let me ask you a question...is the computer you are " learning ' from yours or someone else's?

---

Actually the entire network I hack into belongs to me, and yes, I DO see your point. But please remember, originally, the internet and the systems attached were "fair game" because that was how it originally came about. Sure, MILNET was off limits, but originally the rest was open territory.

Quote:

---

If you're using someone's else's computer WITHOUT their PERMISSION you're a criminal...it's no wonder hackers get bad media attention when you justify using SOMEONE ELSE's computer as if you have a right to it...

YOU DON'T!!!!

It's NOT YOUR COMPUTER!!!

---

Of course. I am not saying it is right, but per my previuos post the government tells us all the time how we may or maynot use our computers all the time. They are even trying to tell adults that they can no longer look at porn (if that is your thing), that you cannot allow children to learn about the human body (because they MIGHT find a porn site rather than a medical or health site) and that they can (and often time DO) read our mail or access our computers WITHOUT ever having to tell us when they are doing so. So, who is the criminal there?

Quote:

---

Do you OWN these computers you're ' learning ' from? Are they YOURS? Or are they someone else's?

Eg ;)

---

Please see my answer above (grin)

Carenath (archangel)

Hi carenath,

See my post above...you got in another one before I did...dial-up. ;)

If that's the case then in my opinion your a security professional like others here...if you are using your own network and/or permission to use...

I would not personally consider you a hacker.

Eg ;)

Perhaps a new name needs to be coined...Internet Specialist?

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Egaladeist
Hi carenath,

See my post above...you got in another one before I did...dial-up. ;)

If that's the case then in my opinion your a security professional like others here...if you are using your own network and/or permission to use...

I would not personally consider you a hacker.

Eg ;)

Perhaps a new name needs to be coined...Internet Specialist?

---

Well, I don't know. Sounds like a good of name as any. But remember, too, I STARTED as an original hacker, i.e. breaking into systems and such. Not to do any damage, but to learn. Does this mean I STILL do this? Of course not. That was then and this is now. What I could "get away with" back then would label me a criminal (and at one point almost did) now. So I set my own network up that allows me to attempt any sort of, crack, "hack" or whathaveyou that I wish. Do I allow others to utilize my network for the same purpose? Yes.... and no. It would depend on their reasons for asking for access (what they hope to learn, why they want to learn it), their overall experience, and whether they could provide verifiable references that could give me an indication of just who they are (in a general sense) and what their ethics are.

Do "Hackers" have ethics? Sure.... the original guys like me do. But again, that was when it was okay to hack into the computers of the various educational institutions that started the internet. Our only "limit" (restriction) was to leave MILNET alone.

Carenath

Hi carenath,

Quote:

---

Do I allow others to utilize my network for the same purpose? Yes.... and no. It would depend on their reasons for asking for access (what they hope to learn, why they want to learn it), their overall experience, and whether they could provide verifiable references that could give me an indication of just who they are (in a general sense) and what their ethics are.

---

I agree...and exactly my point...they are your computers so you should have the right to decide who uses them.

peace,

Eg ;)

Quote:

---

If that's the case then in my opinion your a security professional like others here...if you are using your own network and/or permission to use...

---

Im not a professional at anything and I beleave using a computer should be called that and nothing more. After using a computer I for one don't feel that I've become anything.

Seriously guys :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Im not a professional at anything and I beleave using a computer should be called that and nothing more. After using a computer I for one don't feel that I've become anything.

---

What when you will become one?. You hold the responsibility to your computer and should
make sure it does not harm others or act as a point to harm others ( nobody cares if it harms you).

well. there are diffrent types of hackers. ethical, white hat, red hat, deals with linux/unix. etc. theres terrorist hackers and even the U.S. Goverment hacks.. the entire country does. the world does it in one way or another.

Quote:

---

What when you will become one? You hold the responsibility to your computer and should make sure it does not harm others or act as a point to harm others ( nobody cares if it harms you

---

I really don't understand your question & frankly I don't see what the rest of your post has to do with what I've just typed.

Quit it with the FUD.
Hacker != Cracker

Quote:

---

Quit it with the FUD.
Hacker != Cracker

---

Im going to quote myself just because im lazy...

Quote:

---

Look at anyone who just enjoys computers and leaves it at that... this as opposed to anyone who uses the H-word either in the so called "ethical" sense or not you'll notice the difference between the two right way. A "hacker" is someone who has...

A: Turned on their computer in the hopes and dreams of "being something" and/or "being known for something".

B: Set themselves apart from any random Joe on the internet by appointing themselves and people around them "hackers" and maybe even other various words of self importance despite how limited they actually are as far as computers go.

Oh and my favorite at the moment C: Gets defensive and angry when you sum it up in a way they feel some how hurts their image.

---

IMHO, the word "hacker" clearly has no positive connotations as far as computers go and this thread is proof. Don't hand me your crap just because you're view of things is entirely based around what you've read in that hacker-faq thingie. You can keep trying to define some word but I have a couple of words to define the people who constantly use it...

Self important - God forbid you admit your not above the average user. Using a computer doesn't "make you into anything special".

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by My SuperMan Ego
Im going to quote myself just because im lazy...

IMHO, the word "hacker" clearly has no positive connotations as far as computers go and this thread is proof. Don't hand me your crap just because you're view of things is entirely based around what you've read in that hacker-faq thingie. You can keep trying to define some word but I have a couple of words to define the people who constantly use it...

Self important - God forbid you admit your just average user. Using a computer doesn't "make you into anything special".

---

So, I guess welcome back is in order. Are you gonna play nice this time?

You guys know what the swaistika stands for? What it stood before prior to the 1930's? Popular culture has a lot of influence on the icons and symbols we live by...one's choice to adhere to, or discard the values associated with those symbols is purely personal, as long as you recognize that the symbol you value in one light may not be seen the same way by those who see it in another light.

As for arguing about this word and it's use...c'mon. We've been there and done that many times before. Isn't there anything VALUABLE to discuss these days?

Quote:

---

As for arguing about this word and it's use...c'mon. We've been there and done that many times before. Isn't there anything VALUABLE to discuss these days?

---

It is never too late or unvalauable to discuss basics and ethics.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by zencoder
So, I guess welcome back is in order. Are you gonna play nice this time?

You guys know what the swaistika stands for? What it stood before prior to the 1930's? Popular culture has a lot of influence on the icons and symbols we live by...one's choice to adhere to, or discard the values associated with those symbols is purely personal, as long as you recognize that the symbol you value in one light may not be seen the same way by those who see it in another light.

As for arguing about this word and it's use...c'mon. We've been there and done that many times before. Isn't there anything VALUABLE to discuss these days?

---

Hey zen, is "My Superman ego " our old "special" friend?

Cheers:

OK, like Zen~ I think that this subject has been somewhat "overworked" of late :)

However, as we have a number of students as visitors and members, I thought that this paper on the subject might be useful:

http://courses.cs.vt.edu/~cs3604/lib...n.Hacking.html

It is more history/etymology than ethics and morality.

Most people asked to write a paper on "hacking" would go technical/ethical/moral..............if you incorporate a bit of this stuff, your paper should stand out above the rest ;)

That is called "examination technique" not "cheating"

:D

Hi zencoder,

I actually just posted the OP because I thought it was interesting...then...8 replies later I decided to stick my neck in :D...

there are three things I noticed about this thread...

1. most of the replies came from newbies...

2. the internet seems to lack the clear understanding and value of property rights...

and...

3. 60 posts and 1775 veiws later...more than three times the veiws of any other thread started lately...this topic obviously is no where near the point of lack of interest...even if it has been overdone

Eg ;)

Hey EG~ I think that it was your "catchy title" that did it :D

Seriously though, I think that the subject is of interest to our student readers because it is a favourite for essays/discussions/papers.

That is why I stuck that link in ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by warl0ck7
It is never too late or unvalauable to discuss basics and ethics.

---

I agree completely! Here here!!! (or is it Hear hear?)

Can we please DO THAT instead of attacking people and complaining about whether a word is used properly or not by the massmedia/technophile subculture/suburban AOL community?

Do I consider myself a hacker? Does it matter? Do I think hackers are good, bad, ugly, indifferent, or <insert your word of choice here>? DOES IT REALLY MATTER?

C'mon people. Use a little common sense, and try to recognize what context the poster is using the word in. I use 'hacker' all the time, both the positive and the negative connotations. In spoken communication, I can usually tell if my meaning has been misinterpreted. It's basic friggin' human interaction.

Get over yourselves. You are hardly as important or influential as you think you are. Hell, I have to tell myself this same thing every day.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by DjM
Hey zen, is "My Superman ego " our old "special" friend?

---

I dunno, but it sure seems that way.

Hi nihil,

I agree...this seems like a topic most geared toward newbies/students...as per the posts...I tried my best to steer the direction of the conversation toward property rights but they would steer it back toward hacking :D ...
the never-ending struggle between age and youth :D

Eg ;)

'hacker' is a word I really try not to use anymore. There is just too much baggage with the word and too many assumptions made by other people when you do use it. It's meaning is not clear enough anymore.

If anyone says they are a hacker to me, my first thoughts are of skiddies. It's just how the word is tainted in my mind.

Maybe we should start using words like ninja and samurai instead of hackers :rolleyes:

codewarrior?
network zen master?
packet craftsman? (ooh, I like this one)
Security Warrior is already taken by O'Reilly...

Hackers are not all bad.... but there are some idiots out there.

As someone investing in a future in 'computer security' I have found it invaluable to actually learn how the whole hacking process works - this allows me to better understand what im protecting.

For example, taking a 'CEH' course (certified ethical hacker) will make you better equiped to protect your network. There are many different names to distinguish advanced computer users: Black hat hacker, White hat hacker.... cracker... cyber criminal - whatever, im not disputing the different deffinitions here.

Please dont tar all hackers with the same brush, though I have my own network to break into, when I started out I have no other option but to play woth other peoples boxes.... of course I never damaged of defaced, nor did I steal information.

The media over plays stories and has made this scare culture... they make us think anyone with a backpack or a big coat is probably a terrorist. Dont let the actions of the few effect the views of the many.

Hi ash897,

It only takes one to destroy the reputation of many...

one bad apple destroys the whole barrel...

a man will always be remembered for his mistakes...

make one mistake and all the good you have done is quickly forgotten...

( insert your cliche' here )

the term ' hacker ' is a lost word...like the word god...it has sooooo many attached meanings and definitions that it has become rendered useless to define anything accurately.

Eg ;)

Hey, I've got a title we could adopt: Sneaker! *LOL* Ah Dan Akroyd, where would we be without you?

IMDB Entry for "Sneakers (1992)"

*NOTE: To those who might not realize it, I'm NOT serious about this suggestion, just thought I'd throw it in there to further stir the pot :firedevil

Quote:

---

As someone investing in a future in 'computer security' I have found it invaluable to actually learn how the whole hacking process works - this allows me to better understand what im protecting.

For example, taking a 'CEH' course (certified ethical hacker) will make you better equiped to protect your network.

---

I really don't understand the concept behind paying a few hundred bucks just for the 101 portion of most cons and stuff here in Atlanta. In the end what does any of of this have to do with auditing and prevention?

Quote:

---

There are many different names to distinguish advanced computer users

---

Im sure most people wouldn't be dumb enought to say that they are advanced in anything at all. ****, talk about a SuperMan Ego! Why do you give an exception to people who go around calling themselves and others the H-word? Frankly if I ask you to name a couple of things which make these people seem exceptionally smart or even interesting... it would take you quite awhile to come up with something wouldn't it?

On the internet it is not hard to find

Quote:

---

People who know everything about nothing.

---

Got in late on this thread.

This Article was written by Kelly Martin of SecurityFocus
emails:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

I'd say either she's smart and she's trying to provoke us, or she's very very stupid. Either way, let's see how she likes it when I come out with my five-part series of penetrating articles Entitled; "security journalists are all child molestors."

>X-P bitch.

Hackers and people who commit computer crimes are about as alike as carpet salesmen and drug dealers. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other, there are hackers who commit computer crimes, just like I'm sure there are carpet salesmen who sling crack in their spare time, but to generalize one as the other is a sign of unforgivable ignorance, especially on the part of someone who is under the pretense of having a scrap of journalistic integrity. I hope someone who reads that article buys a thousand strapons with your credit card and rapes you to death with them, you impotent retard.

x acidreign x,

Quote:

---

but to generalize one as the other is a sign of unforgivable ignorance, especially on the part of someone who is under the pretense of having a scrap of journalistic integrity. I hope someone who reads that article buys a thousand strapons with your credit card and rapes you to death with them, you impotent retard.

---

For one thing...the term ' hacker ' is now a generalized term...to the general public...those who consider themselves the ' hacker ' elite ( the good guys ) may want to disregard this fact but it's a fact nonetheless...you can call it ' unforgivable ignorance ' but that's the ' hackers ' fault for letting their term fall to the wayside and allowing it to be used in the same sentence with criminal crackers...
I read the article...and I posted it because it was an editor from Security Focus and not some joe-whomever who has a problem with hackers...and I don't consider myself a retard...and I'm certainly not impotent...( I realize you probably meant that last remark to Kelly Martin ).

Eg ;)

Trust me... for most of the so called "criminals" or whatnot, the entire thing is totally tongue-in-cheek anyway. You don't really see other people trying to ride the hacker this and that trip niether... or atleast not anyone particularly smart.

All these kids on t3h l337 h4xaR jazz... I'll generalize them as morons. And why would that be ignorant when thats exactly the type of thing they attempt to set themselves apart as.

I think media blows everything out of propotion, so did they the term 'hacker'.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Egaladeist
x acidreign x,

For one thing...the term ' hacker ' is now a generalized term...to the general public...those who consider themselves the ' hacker ' elite ( the good guys ) may want to disregard this fact but it's a fact nonetheless...you can call it ' unforgivable ignorance ' but that's the ' hackers ' fault for letting their term fall to the wayside and allowing it to be used in the same sentence with criminal crackers...
I read the article...and I posted it because it was an editor from Security Focus and not some joe-whomever who has a problem with hackers...and I don't consider myself a retard...and I'm certainly not impotent...( I realize you probably meant that last remark to Kelly Martin ).

Eg ;)

---

none of the insulting language in my post was for you, Eg, it was all for her, I was responding to the article, not your post about it.

The fact that the term "hacker" has entered the public discourse as being synonymous with computer criminal is not an excuse for her misuse of it. She is a professional who should know better than to further a misconception like that. Why is it an unforgivable politically incorrect foible to use the term "preist" to describe all child molestors even though the only preists who make the news ARE child molestors. It's considered a "cheap shot" to say that all preists are child molestors, even as a joke. but it's perfectly alright to do the EXACT same thing to hackers. To single hackers out as being criminals simply because so many computer criminals are given a title they don't deserve and touted as hackers in the media is no different. Hackers are simply extremely skilled computer users. Some of the more elitist of us use the term specifically for the security feild, but generally, the accepted definition is "computer expert". How does this have anything to do with crime? This is no different than referring to armed robbers as olympic marksmen. I'm not going to say that no olympic marksman has ever committed an armed robbery, and it's certain that all armed robbers are not olympic marksmen. But to sully the name of an admirable and difficult to attain title like that by equating it with petty crime is sick. Not all hackers are computer criminals and not all computer criminals are hackers.

Imagine a news story that went like this:

Quote:

---

"CHAPEL HILL — When Sheila Bryan learned a preist had moved in next door, she painted a red-letter message on a white towel and tacked it to her garage: “Keep Coker Hills Rapist Free.”

In response, James Michael Walters has circulated through the neighborhood association a written explanation on how he came to be a preist.

Walters, 35, was convicted of second-degree rape of a girl in 1993 in Robeson County.

He originally was charged with first-degree statutory rape of a child under the age of 13. In the statement Walters released last week, he said he never raped the girl but merely fondled her with her consent when she was 13."

---

This is an actual news story from a newspaper website with the words "registered sex offender" replaced with "preist", now imagine how quick they would FIRE the mother****er who wrote it.

Hi x acidreign x,

Quote:

---

She is a professional who should know better than to further a misconception like that

---

I agree 100% that she is only perpetuating the sterio-type...and as a professional should show some professional courtesy.
If more securirty professionals and internet news media started to clearly define the borders between a Hacker and it's criminal counter-part, then the public would begin to see more clearly where that line is drawn and their perceptions would change accordingly.

Until such time...my definition that there is no clear definition or distinction only shows that that line is becoming more faded every day.

Eg ;)

Just curious x acidreign x did you actually read the article[1] ? it's quite interesting ..B.T.W. Kelly Martin is a he not a she ....

[1] Crime ? What crime ?

On one side you have a group of people who see nothing wrong with breaking into systems and calling themselves "hackers" , while on the other side the good side you have a group of people who spent a good amount of time selling you snake oil ... difference being ???

Like he says people spend a good deal amount of time breaking the system on both sides when they should be spending more time improving it .... That's why I believe he used the word "hacker" cause well it's real meaning has just being lost and well who cares really ???

I do think that the title "Hackers are all bastards" is really misleading ... He does mention the word but I do not think that he was trying to say that all hackers are bastards ...

Quote:

---

any shy or docile human being can become the world's nastiest bastard of a hacker

---

I think that's enough rambling ....