Swimmer Posted September 12, 2005 CID Share Posted September 12, 2005 Check it out.. makes a lot of sense.. http://www.ranum.com/security/computer_security/editorials/dumb/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theGODl337 Posted September 12, 2005 CID Share Posted September 12, 2005 a lot of it is a pretty statement cant say i totally agree with the hackers part though the author makes it sound like all hackers are bad hackers get enough bad publicity as it is we dont need this arrogant ass (admittedly a intelligent ass but an ass all the same) adding to it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighawk211 Posted September 12, 2005 CID Share Posted September 12, 2005 I can't read all of that.. I don't have enough patience.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred Posted September 13, 2005 CID Share Posted September 13, 2005 swimmer that is good advise his approach to security is just in reverse to conventional wisdom, (i.e.) if it isn't broke it doesn't need to be fixed,on the other hand, he surely would put a lot of, zone alarms, McAfee, norton etc. etc. people out of business now wouldn't he, it would be so much better to build it right from the start than to "permit" all to enter your computer and deal with it once it is there Thanks Swimmer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theGODl337 Posted September 13, 2005 CID Share Posted September 13, 2005 there really is no building it right the first time people will always be able to find a way around/through whatever security there is the only actual secure computers are those not connected to internet in any way the best one can do is make to difficult to bother with especially when there are other not so well protected computers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay173 Posted September 13, 2005 CID Share Posted September 13, 2005 thats way off from reality, i bet they dont even know how to use the registery or what it would be like without those things Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
resopalrabotnick Posted September 13, 2005 CID Share Posted September 13, 2005 the author makes it sound like all hackers are bad hackers get enough bad publicity as it is well, all hackers are bad. even those that profess to be doing it to alert the world to security gaps. if i'm lying in my bed and some guy that just broke into my house wakes me up to tell me i didn't secure the window with a steel plate, hiss sorry ass is grass, and the court is gonna rule self defense. when are people going to realize that cybercrime is /not/ victimless. even those people not directly affected by it end up being victims by having to pay for and waste time on protective measures. all because some idiot out there thinks he is some kind of robin hood (who btw is also a common thief) that needs to harm people so he can get it up for his inflatable party doll. there really is no building it right the first time people will always be able to find a way around/through whatever security there is and if firewall programmers would take his approach and allow only known stuff to execute, it /would/ be a lot safer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theGODl337 Posted September 13, 2005 CID Share Posted September 13, 2005 well, all hackers are bad. even those that profess to be doing it to alert the world to security gaps. if i'm lying in my bed and some guy that just broke into my house wakes me up to tell me i didn't secure the window with a steel plate, hiss sorry ass is grass, and the court is gonna rule self defense. when are people going to realize that cybercrime is /not/ victimless. even those people not directly affected by it end up being victims by having to pay for and waste time on protective measures. all because some idiot out there thinks he is some kind of robin hood (who btw is also a common thief) that needs to harm people so he can get it up for his inflatable party doll. and if firewall programmers would take his approach and allow only known stuff to execute, it /would/ be a lot safer. :bs: dude... u know sh*t about hackers all u described is the media produced "evil hacker" stereotype not all hackers hack other peoples pc's the ones that try to improve others security generally dont hack without permsision (and cash) and even then not all hackers deal with security for example hardware hackers by the reality of how the world is, usually can only hack what they already own and software hackers are the guys who make all the open source and burning software out there so awesome your view of hackers is essentially based on the few bad apples yet all hackers get the flak and concerning the firewall: it would be safer but only for a little while someone will come along and find a way to get by that soon enough in conclusion: u make me sick asshole Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swimmer Posted September 13, 2005 Author CID Share Posted September 13, 2005 :bs: dude... u know sh*t about hackers all u described is the media produced "evil hacker" stereotype not all hackers hack other peoples pc's the ones that try to improve others security generally dont hack without permsision (and cash) and even then not all hackers deal with security for example hardware hackers by the reality of how the world is, usually can only hack what they already own and software hackers are the guys who make all the open source and burning software out there so awesome your view of hackers is essentially based on the few bad apples yet all hackers get the flak and concerning the firewall: it would be safer but only for a little while someone will come along and find a way to get by that soon enough in conclusion: u make me sick asshole Well for the most part no one see the other side of hackers.. kevin mitnick... once wanted by the FBI for breaking into huge companies like Sun, motorola, Nokia... is now on the security side of things.. Bad turned good.. runs a security firm that charges for hack attempts and what to do to prevent them.. http://www.mitnicksecurity.com/ not all hackers hack other peoples pc's true.. but if you are talking about hackers they why they are refering to them, black hat... they do.. they hack large corps.. and government.. but it still does happen.. and most of the time to get to those large corps or government servers and what not.. requires the use and hack of a few personal pc to cover their tracks.. u know sh*t about hackers It looks like you pulled that info from wikipedia on hackers.. Hacker is a term used to describe people proficient in computers, who employ a tactical, rather than strategic, approach to computer programming, administration, or security, as well as their culture (hacker culture). Unfortunately popular media and the general population abuse hacker to mean a black hat hacker, that is, a network security hacker who partakes in illegal activity or lacks in ethics. Those inside some programming communities have taken to calling these criminals "crackers". In computer programming, hacker means a programmer who hacks or reaches a goal by employing a series of modifications to exploit or extend existing code or resources. In computer security, hacker translates to a person able to exploit a system or gain unauthorized access through skill and tactics. This usually refers to a black hat hacker. In other technical fields, hacker is extended to mean a person who makes things work beyond perceived limits through their own technical skill, such as a hardware hacker, or reality hacker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
resopalrabotnick Posted September 13, 2005 CID Share Posted September 13, 2005 while i too would prefer that hacker was a term assocoated with the noun hack: a very efficient and well written piece of code, making the hacker the creator of such, sadlt the common usage, and the one i have adapted to (being sick and tired of explaining the aforementioned in the face of media use of the now common one) is the now common one that hacker is a noun referring to the bottom feeding scum on the net. the common criminal, the script kiddie and the like. anyone idolizing hackers as the great robin hoods of our time needs to loose the pink fluffy shades. they aren't robin hoods. they are simply hoods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netmasta Posted September 13, 2005 CID Share Posted September 13, 2005 I've heard that "hackers" look for problems but don't do anything illeagal while "crackers" are the bad guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amc11890 Posted September 13, 2005 CID Share Posted September 13, 2005 im too lazy to read all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theGODl337 Posted September 13, 2005 CID Share Posted September 13, 2005 i cant say i agree with the FEW hackers that do bad things (even though most of the time its no more than virtual vandalism) but most hackers improve things and most "black hats" are nothing but virtual pranksters not maliciously evil criminals after all most people have pulled a few illegal pranks in their youth such people deserve punishment but not hard time in prison or other drastic measures "It looks like you pulled that info from wikipedia on hackers.. " swimmer my knowledge of hackers and hacking is actually based on personal experience and socializing with friends and acquaintances who are hackers as well i am a red hat, hardware hacker with some knowledge on encryption my hacks are all hardware based and affect no one but me I've heard that "hackers" look for problems but don't do anything illegal while "crackers" are the bad guys. hack is a broad term for pretty much any kind of change to software, hardware, encryption, etc. that was not part of the hacked pieces' intentional use crack is specific to encryption and sometimes security in general Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
resopalrabotnick Posted September 14, 2005 CID Share Posted September 14, 2005 i cant say i agree with the FEW hackers that do bad things (even though most of the time its no more than virtual vandalism) so you think i shouldn't be punished with hard time if i paint your house DayGlo Pink. that would /only/ be vandalism. on which note, contact your local transit authority and ask them how much they pay a year to repair vandalism, which you seem to find so harmless, i.e. redecorated stations, rail cars, buses and the like. and most "black hats" are nothing but virtual pranksters not maliciously evil criminals after all most people have pulled a few illegal pranks in their youth such people deserve punishment but not hard time in prison or other drastic measures well, slashing the tires on your car would be considered a prank. and that is the equivalent to someone screwing up someones website or their comp. they need to invest time and money to remedy the problem. if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it is a duck. crime is crime, no matter how it's perpetrated. and to every crime there is a victim, no matter how far removed the perpetrator is removed from it. my point is not the semantics of what to call the criminals, my point is that any malicious act in the 'virtual' world (that term being BS in itself since every act on the web affects the 'real' world) should be punished the same way a malicious act in the 'real' world should be. but since so many say that all information is free, i guess i'll go and liberate myself a nice plasma tv so i can watch my free information in HD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred Posted September 14, 2005 CID Share Posted September 14, 2005 well this discussion has really gotten out of hand how has a topic line gone from a statement to someone that has been with this site a long time to being an asshole? personally I don't like those kind of inferences and I think you my dear sir (GOD) as you call yourself needs to apologies to the whole community for that very insulting comment and if your can't refrain from those kind of comments you need excuse yourself from our site. Respectfully Submitted FRED Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTB Posted September 14, 2005 CID Share Posted September 14, 2005 Interesting dicussion about internet crimes.I have to agree with resopalrabotnick here though. The author of that article has a good point, but could've presented it in a slightly less antisocial way. It's somewhat of a pity that Microsoft won't ever listen to people like him. But then again, does Microsoft listen to anyone at all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theGODl337 Posted September 14, 2005 CID Share Posted September 14, 2005 so you think i shouldn't be punished with hard time if i paint your house DayGlo Pink. that would /only/ be vandalism. on which note, contact your local transit authority and ask them how much they pay a year to repair vandalism, which you seem to find so harmless, i.e. redecorated stations, rail cars, buses and the like. well, slashing the tires on your car would be considered a prank. and that is the equivalent to someone screwing up someones website or their comp. they need to invest time and money to remedy the problem. if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it is a duck. crime is crime, no matter how it's perpetrated. and to every crime there is a victim, no matter how far removed the perpetrator is removed from it. my point is not the semantics of what to call the criminals, my point is that any malicious act in the 'virtual' world (that term being BS in itself since every act on the web affects the 'real' world) should be punished the same way a malicious act in the 'real' world should be. but since so many say that all information is free, i guess i'll go and liberate myself a nice plasma tv so i can watch my free information in HD. im not saying they shouldnt be punished i just think that the punishment should fit the crime instead of hard time give em the bill, a few nights in jail, and community service not a couple years in "pound me up the ass" prison and you are still missing the point most hackers dont do that sh*t only a few yet all hackers get the blame and stigma well this discussion has really gotten out of hand how has a topic line gone from a statement to someone that has been with this site a long time to being an asshole? personally I don't like those kind of inferences and I think you my dear sir (GOD) as you call yourself needs to apologies to the whole community for that very insulting comment and if your can't refrain from those kind of comments you need excuse yourself from our site. Respectfully Submitted FRED my calling someone an asshole was done in a half jokingly manner not to be taken too seriously as u have done and my calling someone an asshole is no more offense than some of the other things that have been posted by others "that needs to harm people so he can get it up for his inflatable party doll." is an example and if calling someone an asshole is so bad then y do i see so excuse me if i respectfully decline your offer to leave the site for now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted September 14, 2005 CID Share Posted September 14, 2005 that is dumb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
resopalrabotnick Posted September 14, 2005 CID Share Posted September 14, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTB Posted September 16, 2005 CID Share Posted September 16, 2005 that is dumb Explain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.