NODE f5c18c42Re: Hackers, Crackers
fnerd@smds.com (FutureNerd Steve Witham)Mon, 23 Nov 92 14:40:40 PST
>Let's cut out this elitist "crackers" crap altogether.
>It's just a little bit too PlaySkool, a little bit too
>"_I'm_ not a third grader! I'm a _fourth grader_!" The people
>who put so much energy into advertising how they're different
>tend not to know what the fuck they're talking about, in
>my experience.
Well, I don't know about this guy, but there's something similar that
occurred to me during the hackers conference. Some of the people on this
list heard me express it badly, and I wanted to clarify.
We always used to distinguish hackers from crackers.
But cracking reveals the cracks in a way that nothing else does.
It makes them real, sometimes laughably or painfully so.
Electronic privacy is currently a joke. It's bad.
You need to know what kinds of attacks you're trying to defend against.
I used to think those arguments were rationalizations.
Now I'm glad there are people who know this stuff, who are actually doing it.
Some of "them" are on what I think of as the good side, and "we" need that
kind of knowledge, if only as an occasional splash of cold water, a spur
(to switch metaphorical, er, horses in mid, um, stream).
-fnerd
quote me
fnerd@smds.com (FutureNerd Steve Witham)
NODE 4215e1f4Hackers, Crackers We always used to distinguish hackers from crackers. But cracking reveals the cracks in a way that nothing else does. It makes them real, sometimes laughably or painfully so. Electronic privacy is currently a joke. It's bad. You need to know what kinds of attacks you're trying to defend against. I used to think those arguments were rationalizations. Now I'm glad there are people who know this stuff, who are actually doing it. Some of "them" are on what I think of as the good side, and "we" need that kind of knowledge, if only as an occasional splash of cold water, a spur (to switch metaphorical, er, horses in mid, um, stream).
tribble@xanadu.com (E. Dean Tribble)Tue, 24 Nov 92 19:03:37 PST
And if I shoot you or poison you, I will have vividly revealed to you
your pathetic lack of physical defenses. Will I have done you a
service? How about if I just break your windows or doors?
That rationalization for crackers is based on the idea that perfect
security is feasible. Once you view this from an economic
perspective, then the only things the crackers do is raise the
cost of getting to a level of security such that operation can
continue uninterrupted.
BTW: I happen to believe that within a trusted infrastructure,
perfect security is possible. Even so, consider the cost of changing
operating systems, retraining all staff, reproducing familiar
applications on a new substrate. Even if perfect security is
possible, the use of it is still bounded by economic and social
concerns.
dean
BTW: feel free to forward to extropians.