Cognitive Dissidents

Make your mind up..

"I'm not sure calling these guys "hackers" is correct - as far as I am concerned it looks like their only motive was crime"

followed by

"These people are criminal hackers - true blackhats - who by their own admission wanted"

and

"I can't say I am going to lose any sleep over this decision - online theft is crime, and criminal "hackers" deserve to be caught"

Bottom line and to over simplify this as I know you like it so much :) ..... Hacking is unauthorised entry to a computer system which is "criminal" and "illegal". So yes they are hackers and yes they are criminal....

Another quote

"not hackers who explore networks, nor script kiddies"

Umm you would put script kiddies above these ?

Come on "Enquiring minds want to know ..."

I think you miss the point - the whole debate about the use of the word "hackers" to describe both criminal "hackers" and "script kiddie hackers" has been running for years - and won't get resolved very soon

I once had a nastygram from someone high up in the FOSS movement who objected to me writing about "hackers" who broke into systems rather than "hackers" who made nifty stuff.

Either way their motivation was purely criminal rather than motivated by exploration - so although I might go as far as calling them "criminal hackers" or "blackhat hackers" - it is only to differentiate between them and the hackers who like to play with no criminal intentions

Apart from picking holes in the post - do you have anything constructive to say?

Like do you think they are criminals (rather than hackers) who just happened to use a computer - and did they deserve the sentence they got?

How would you handle the whole categorisation of "media hackers", "Real Hackers" and "Criminal Hackers"?

Come on J - Enquring minds want to know ...

Oh yes - and hacking is NOT defined as "unauthorised access to a computer system" - just the criminal hacking part. With the right mindset you can "hack" (crack system security) all day without breaking the law - but you can also "hack" (explore and learn about computers) - and neither of these are illegal - yet.

How would you handle the whole categorisation of "media hackers", "Real Hackers" and "Criminal Hackers"?

//

I would handle it just like that, they are categories and they are different but they are all "hackers"

Do you mean constructive or supportive ? I can only offer an apology if you felt i picked holes in the post.. You have a blog but also an audience of more than a handful I just wanted some debate and some view of the other side of the coin really...

Hacking is a crime and you seem to be over glorifying it a little.

" it is only to differentiate between them and the hackers who like to play with no criminal intentions"

Can the above exist in that hacking is a criminal act ?

Or does this come down to "Robin Hood" and he was ok because he robbed from the rich? Hackers do indeed rob... you could say from the likes of Gary that he wanted to explore ? Does he come into that category rather than the criminal hacker ?

Wasn't his goal to obtain data (i.e theft). How is that less criminal and socially acceptable than taking money ?

I understand what you mean and there is a difference yes..but not to the person on the receiving end... the company with the website changed, information stolen, data copied.

Look I'm a hacker - but I refuse to break the law while hacking. It isn't needed - whether you just want to play with stuff or "hack" ("crack") into systems.

Basically I don't like dealing with the police so I take steps to ensure I don't have to very often - i.e. I don't break the law.

Yet I consider myself a "Hacker" (original sense) but not a "hacker" (media sense) , I'm not a "criminal hacker" (motivated by crime) or a "script kiddie" - all of these are a little different.

Also - I don't "glorify" hackers - I let the media and the PR spin doctors of the Security, anti-virus, spyware and firewall companies do that.

They reinforce the "hacker myth" effectively enough to be recruiting agents for the "hacking scene" - their constant PR barrage attracts people who think "hacking" (i.e. breaking into systems), is "cool" thus providing the perpetual-motion machine that guarantees new threats, more FUD and bigger sales.

You say you understand the difference - but then you talk about the person "on the recieving end" whose "website" has been "changed", "information stolen" or "data copied" - and again you are going back to the notion of a "hacker" solely as someone who breaks into systems.

You seem to be stuck with the notion that ALL HACKING IS ILLEGAL - it isn't.

I can honestly say that most of the Hackers I meet - e.g. at London 2600 or Hacker Conferences - are not really that interested in breaking the law by illegaly hacking into systems - they are too busy building clever stuff that makes me go "wow".

I, and other people like me, can sit and Hack all day and not break a single law.

Well I say that now - but the recent modifications of UK Computer Misuse laws means that many of the tools that I use as an IT professional could soon become illegal - then I could get prosecuted for using a "hacking tool" to secure a system - how crazy is that?

As one of the Hackers I interviewed for "Hackers' Tales" said: "The line I will not cross is the one that leads me into a prison cell"

I recommend that approach to everyone who comes to me and says "how do I get started in hacking/compsec" - not only does it guarantee your liberty, but also a chance of making a living doing what you love.

Thanks for your comment - it looked like a pure "troll" at first and nearly got deleted - but your comments make it quite obvious that I am not explaining myself well enough