Hackers Not Afraid of Being Caught 169
An anonymous reader wrote in to point us to an interview with Honeynet Founder Lance Spitzner where he says "Years ago it was hackers who were doing it for the bragging rights, now it's the criminals. The motivation has changed, hacking is now profitable and there's so much money to be made with very little risk to the actual hackers."
I smell a business opportunity. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet I don't think this profit will necessarily last forever -- even if laws change to make it easier to catch a hacker and even if the penalties are raised. The Internet is global, not local. With more third party countries gaining Internet access and more people willing to invest the time to learn to hack, I believe hackers will find their jobs outsourced as quickly as call centers and web developers have. So what?
The State will write laws to defend against hacking, but the reality is that the free market will provide better defense. There are laws against breaking and entering, but do they work? No, locks do. In situations where locks don't work, alarms work. In situations where alarms aren't enough, a Colt 45 used once usually fixes that situation. The law has almost no effect on crime other than raising the profit for those willing to take the risk. Hackers make a profit only means that anti-hackers have a new business opportunity -- and if you're good with security, you should make a windfall NOW before the law interferes with YOUR ability to secure your clients. Regulations against hacking might harm you more than they harm the "criminals."
Take advantage of this business opportunity today -- on either side of the "battle."
Re:I smell a business opportunity. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I smell a business opportunity. (Score:5, Insightful)
First of all the novelty of an alarm system is notification of the police, who job it is to *gasp* uphold the law.
This is untrue. The chances of the police responding in time to do anything is very slim. The main purpose is to alert the owner and other people nearby, thus increasing the risk of this particular robbery or crime. It is the job of the police to investigate crimes, but they have neither the manpower or the will to prevent crime.
There are plenty of processionals that can or profession demands the ability to pick locks, bypass alarm systems and assault a building in a manner that would make a gun have very little effect.
Relative to the general populace or to the criminal populace, this just isn't true. Locks are easy to pick, alarm systems can be bypassed, but very few criminals take the time to do either when there are easier targets.
Perhaps the knowledge that maybe losing a chunk of your life to jail may put some second thoughts into these people.
Threat of punishment is a motivational factor, but surprisingly, not a very significant one. Studies have shown people in general believe they can get away with crimes without being caught. The main motivation for not committing them is actually a moral one. People do not feel justified in robbery. One of the strongest correlations with robbery and violent crime worldwide is wealth disparity. In places where some people are very poor and others are very rich, despite the rich not necessarily working harder or being smarter than the poor, the rates of these crimes is higher. It is easy to justify robbery when you were born into debt while others were born into extreme wealth. And that is exactly what people do.
Re:I smell a business opportunity. (Score:5, Insightful)
Besides this, there are other important differences between breeching brick-and-mortar and breeching digital.
1. One-target-per-act - many-targets-per-act (hence "going after easy targets" emphasized)
2. Localized - internationalized (hence "hard to catch" factor)
Those two factors make huge difference.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You are right alarm systems are largely useless. However my point is that the deterring factor of an alarm system is the risk of getting caught. It may be rare that police respon
Re: (Score:2)
You are right alarm systems are largely useless. However my point is that the deterring factor of an alarm system is the risk of getting caught. It may be rare that police respond however, that small chance adds to the risk.
Alarm systems draw attention that might lead to them being punished. Alarm systems alert both the home/business owner and neighbors increasing the chances one of them will grab a shotgun and come after them. They aren't afraid the police will stop them in most cases.
Just because so
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Look at studies of proportions people in jail vs. social and racial groups, you'll see what the real picture is.
First, the number of people in jail is a different thing than the number of people who commit robberies and violent crimes. In fact, most people in jail are there for nonviolent drug offenses. Second, I'm speaking to motivations, which cannot be determined by looking at races unless you believe race plays a significant role in motivating people and can statistically show how. Third, the most po
Re:I smell a business opportunity. (Score:4, Insightful)
Alarm systems notify the police. The police come to the house. This process will almost certainly take far longer than the process of Break-and-Enter, Rape-and-Pillage, Then Haul Ass that the criminals in any given breaking and entering situation will be using. If you don't believe me, check the home invasion response times on the FBI's website. Nearly all calls (real live actual person calls, not automated alarm triggers!) take 5+ minutes, and a shocking amount have longer response times.
Also, just so you're aware of this next time you rely on the police to protect you/your rights:
It has been upheld three times (to my knowledge, there may have been more, more recent cases that uphold this as well) that a police department and its officers and employees are not responsible for providing for the personal protection or safety of any private citizen's health, life, welfare, or property and that none of these have any obligation to place themselves at any risk to protect any of those. A friend of mine who was a SWAT member on the Indianapolis PD for 20+ years (and spent the last 2 as an entry leader) has mentioned that doing a response to a home invasion call by the book according to many agencies and departments involves showing up and then checking your watch. You sit in the car for 5 minutes. THEN, you go see what's going on. The departments don't want their officers going in where there might still be criminals. So, yeah, the police probably won't be anything like as helpful to you in the defense of your life and property (and the lives and property of your loved ones) as a firearm that you have some skill with. A gun rarely has "very little effect" unless you're storing it improperly for defense (i.e., not near you/on you, not loaded, locked; most of your hunting weapons which stay locked in the safe wouldn't help, but the pistol you carry on a daily basis and the 12-gauge you keep loaded behind the bed would) or are completely unskilled in its use or unwilling to use it as intended (i.e., to fire upon in an attempt to incapacitate an intruder/threat).
Again, this has been a public service announcement for the instruction of all people interested in their own welfare.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I take it you don't live in major city with high crime...
This morning I walked out to see a car window smashed. Hey at least it wasn't mine, but it has happened to me before. The problem is that you can better protect yourself with the free market than police.
I have an alarm on my house as well because if someone did break in without it, the poli
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, the free market does provide the Colt 45, but society has collectively decided that there are better ways of controlling the assholes than shooting them all the time. Get used to it.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a crime unless it's against the law, by definition. If breaking and entering wasn't a crime, then you the home owner would be the criminal if you shot someone entering your hom
Re: (Score:2)
In Detroit, they'll steal the bricks off a building and sell them! More likely to get in a building it's as simple as stealing a car and driving it through the wall. I saw on tv a guy that had driven a stolen car through the wall of a liqueur store and was stuck inside, so he just got drunk waiting for the police to arrive.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
locks are necessary. Without locks, you can't charge someone with "breaking and entering" - a much more serious crime than "tresspassing".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I smell a business opportunity. (Score:4, Insightful)
The laws making hacking illegal only add more gold to the pot.
It does, because the potential cost is now higher.
There are laws against breaking and entering, but do they work?
Actually, they do, but only if they are rigorously enforced. Locks serve mainly to delay an intrusion, thus increasing the chance of getting caught. Alarms serve to notify owners and police, which then can catch the intruder.
This is where the problem lies. People do not have the time or training to protect their property 24 x 7 and maintaining a private security force is expensive, so they have "contracted" authorities to provide the physical deterrent. There is a fundamental need for order to be maintained, and this is a core function of government.
Regulations against hacking might harm you more than they harm the "criminals."
I agree with you on this, but only because these regulations may be made by people who don't understand the issue or by people who misuse law as a weapon. Both are cases of bad government.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Is this really news to anyone? IRC botnets have been around for years and have been used for stealing for profit equally as long. Common sense tells you that you don't fear something that cannot induce consequences. Case in point, how are you going to press a guy in the middle of the congo for scamming you? U.S. domestic law?
How about we talk about how this has already been taken to the next level by hiring professional programmers who now offer encryption
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I smell a business opportunity. (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone who thinks anarchocapitalism is a good idea should move to Somalia. The governmental vacuum is basically filled by loosely organized and bad-tempered gangs of mercenaries, although cell phone service is apparently cheap and plentiful. I would prefer the law, thanks.
Re:I smell a business opportunity. (Score:5, Insightful)
Somalia has laws. What they don't have is ORDER. Laws do not create order. Enforcement of laws does.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Is this offtopic? Who knows, but I'll probably get modded offtopic anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
or leave, leaving the market to thieves and vultures. The result being that products cost more, and are of lessor quality than in markets with civility where thieves are a nuisance, rather than a major market force.
Most people have a distorted view of Adam Smith. His theories had some basic assumptions, ones often tossed aside during these types of discussions.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I take it, then, you'd like to live in the Kingdom of Id and live under their version of the Golden Rule; "He who has the gold makes the rules."
Re: (Score:2)
Do look at the situation in Somalia (at least a year ago, before the islamists started returning order to the country), with the gunmen-for-hire as a major part of any business, especially anything somehow involving transportation through countryside.
I still would prefer a low quality law-order of a corrupt government than such anarcho-capitalism.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I smell a business opportunity. (Score:5, Insightful)
You claim that tighter laws and enforcement against computer criminals will encourage computer crime by driving down the supply of willing "workers". While this may jive with your anarcho-capitalist theory, it just ain't true.
The entire point of the article was that hacking is prevalent because there isn't serious enforcement of the law. The author points out that criminals use insecure methods of communication, not even bothering to conceal themselves, because they're confident that the law won't touch them. If the governments in eastern europe cracked down on internet crime, and actively investigated and arrested computer criminals, many of the current participants would be scared out of the game, no longer confident that they're above the law. There is a threshold of risk beyond which very few people are willing to go, even for a huge reward, and this is even more true of a job that requires in-depth training and is inaccessible to the vast majority of people.
There are plenty of good reasons to oppose cyber-crime crackdowns, and I for one do, but the argument you're making in this case is naive to both the technical and economic realities of international computer crime.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you serious?
There are certain things in life that are bad/harmful, but teach us a lesson (such as kids touching a
Re:I smell a business opportunity. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Give them new authority (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm surprised we haven't started seeing vigilantes tracking down hackers and spammers. When governments can't handle things, the mob takes over.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And, just how do propose to do that?
The Internet is an agreement to exchange digital information with previously agreed-upon protocols. Nothing more, nothing less. ANY node on the Internet is abstractly equal to any other. It's the World of Ends [worldofends.com] that gives the Internet it
Re: (Score:2)
I really don't know what you are talking about.
Seriously though, hackers are just misguided. Spammers however....
Re: (Score:2)
Ain't that the truth. The Mob probably own most of the criminal hackers!
Re: (Score:2)
Hackers can think whatever they want. The real problem right now is that the governments of the countries they live in don't care and don't do anything about it. Perhaps that's understandable since many of those countries have enough non-tech issues to deal with already. But I think that if that's the case, they just shouldn't be allowed on the internet yet.
s/countries/communities/
there are plenty of jurisdictions in civilized places where the government is more concerned with traffic and violent crimes. Should all these communities be banned from the internet? Of course not, just because a few people abuse a right or a priviilige doesn't mean the whole community should be banned. Even in lawless communities, the internet has positive uses that far outway the negatives
Re: (Score:2)
No, I didn't say people should be banned. I said counties should be banned if they don't meet certain requirements. Basically, if they don't have a policy for enforcing certain rules and authority, they should be banned. Its like anything else, for a nation to be admitted to the UN, they have to meet
HACK the PLANET (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Been there, done that. [introversion.co.uk]
Uplink is to cracking, what GTA is to car theft. Enough escapism to be fun, enough realism to make you very nervous when you're in the middle of a mission. The game came out in 2001, and was set in 2010. Judging from the headlines on Slashdot, we're about halfway there.
Oh for crap's sake.. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd expect the OMG SCARY word "hacker" to be misused like this in Hollywood films and mainstream news, but not on Slashdot of all places.
Re:Oh for crap's sake.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh for crap's sake.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
They can have it if they give us people correctly using the terms.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you REALLY give a shit why a criminal does something?
If I kill you, does it matter that I:
A) Just felt a deep-seated need to kill SOMETHING
B) Found out you shagged my wife and decided to remove both your heads with Mr.
C) Needed drug money and killing you was faster than arguing you into handing over your wallet
D) Decided to kill you because of your race/nationality/creed/sexual orientation/social-s
Words change (Score:5, Insightful)
That's how we ended up with so many languages. As a species we have a sort of a "Babel tower" mechanism built in. Get two communities isolated for long enough, and even starting from the same language you end up with two new languages or dialects. Each of the two changed words independently, and eventually you end up with the whole language of each not even resembling the language of the other. (Don't believe me? English and Greek both evolved from the same Indo-European roots.)
People hear some cool new word, or a new way to use an existing word, or some wisecrack and latch to it. And if it gets enough followers, there you go, you have a new word or a new meaning for a word.
Some cool kid uses, say, "twink" in a MMO once for someone buffed or equipped beyond the means of a normal player that level. Some people hear it, like it, and start using it too. Repeat a few iterations, and next thing you know it becomes the new primary meaning of that word in relation to MMOs.
And so it was with "hacker" too. Except this time it was also boosted by a whole generation of clueless journalists, who promptly bombarded everyone with their new meaning. Everyone has had it hammered into their heads that "hacker" doesn't mean the old-style "guy who really likes computers and doing amazingly hard/low-level stuff", but, yes, basically "high tech criminal".
As early as the end of the 90's I've had the surprise to hear even computer engineers using it that way. Yes, literally. I was for example at some training back then and the guy teaching goes, "anyone knows what a 'hacker' is?" Me: "Someone who really loves computers and programming?" Him: "Nope, a criminal breaking into other people's computers." Go figure.
So, way I figure it, we might as well let go. That battle is lost, and we don't even have the means to fight it. For every time you tell someone "no, no, no, 'hacker' was never supposed to mean 'criminal'", they'll promptly have a dozen TV show hosts, pseudo-tech journos, etc, hammering the opposite right back into them. That word is lost. By now it's not just "mis-used", it simply _is_ the new meaning of the word.
Give up, move on, find another one.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but these are not just any words, they are technical jargon words. Part of the reason such jargon exists is to more clearly define how certain words and concepts relate. "Harddisk" does not refer to CD-ROMs, even though a CD-ROM is hard and a disc. "Computer" is not the same as "PC"; there are lots of computers that aren't PCs. Similarly, there are lots of hackers who aren't criminals.
Unfortunately, the mainstream press has adopted the w
Re: (Score:2)
Very insightful and true... if you're a techie. For the rest of the population, though, it's just another word, subject to the same rules and changes as the rest of the language.
Re: (Score:2)
I bet, though, that most occupations have jargon words that have very specific meanings inside that occupation, but are much more loosely defined, if at all, outside that occupation. I hope that people will understand that taking a word from a jargon and entering into mainstream language with a different meaning does not aid und
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And yeah, it's happened to other professions too. English is also not my mother tongue, and I don't live in an English-speaking country either, but I think I can come up with a few examples off the top of my head.
E.g., "butcher" is a very honourable profession normally (at least unless you ask a vegan;),
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In vector physics, "acceleration" has a very different meaning from the general use of the word.
Specialized mathematicians have different meanings for various words like "product" (because you can be talking about several different types of arguments, such as scalar, vector, matrix, etc).
Generally, when you're talking to a specialist, th
Re: (Score:2)
If we're talking about how "hacker" changed meanings, my (uninformed) guess is, basically:
1. Because we nerds are a breed that other people don't understand.
Your average nerd (and it's pretty much one of the standard symptoms of Asperger's Syndrome too) has a narrow focus of interest, which he pursues in depth and just for the heck of it. Someone c
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Another example, the word jihad technically means a personal struggle against spiritual obsticles but, at least in the West, has come to mean a violent struggle.
My understanding is that it actually means both. The "Greater Jihad" is the non-violent, internal struggle for personal righteousness, and the "Lesser Jihad" is the violent struggle against oppressors of the faithful.
Yes and no (Score:2)
Same, if you will, as "communion" may simply
Re: (Score:2)
But the version I've heard has it the English getting it from the Norse, during the Viking invasions, along with a bunch of other words. Either way, even in your example, it changed from ting=council in the old times to ting=thing in less old times. So I'd guess at least for Swedish that change of meaning holds true.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Hacker is used by 99% (and I'm being generous) of people to describe a computer criminal. Is a synonym of computer criminal, according to most sources, including the Britannica (I can feel your hateful eyes on me now).
Words are just con
Re: (Score:2)
An unfortunate analogy, but it may be worthwhile to note that being called a pedophile is to be branded a dangerous criminal, despite the fact that the meaning of the term isn't synonymous with child rapist and, thought crimes aside, is as neutral as being considered an audiophile, bibliophile or an Anglophile.
Or am I talking semantics?
In the good ole days... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:In the good ole days... (Score:4, Funny)
It's harder today, what with intrusion detection systems and ceramic baseball bats that will smash a boom box in nothing flat if you're caught.
Re: (Score:2)
The new mercenaries (Score:4, Interesting)
Hackers are the 21st Century equivalent of the mercenary. Pay them enough money and they will do what you want. As long as someone somewhere feels the need to crack a database or extract sensitive information from some business/person, there will hackers ready to answer the call. Crack down on them, and all you do is reduce their number, weeding out the weak ones, and leaving a highly competitive and lucrative market for the strong ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Let me know how much use 'control of the Net' is when someone's curbing your ass.
For all of people's views of superiority, when it comes down to it, any two bit criminal can rub out just about anyone on a whim. (exception: people with their own large security force.)
Steep Learning Curve (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I know that we've already lost the war... (Score:4, Interesting)
It's kind of like the distinction between a slut and a whore. Sluts do it because they enjoy it, whores do it for financial gain.
LK
More like.... (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Mmmmmmm..... Sluts.
Re: (Score:2)
So...
A hacker : slut broke into a pornographic database.
Hmmm. This story just gets better and better.
Re: (Score:2)
The hacker puts it back together after taking it apart to see what's inside.
The cracker takes any valuable parts and leaves a mess for someone else to clean up.
It's all about risk-reward (Score:3, Interesting)
Example: say you offer me $100,000 to commit a crime which may carry a 10-year prison term. To me, such an opportunity is not worth the risk. Even at a low-wage job, I can earn $20,000 a year, $200,000 in a decade. Why would I sacrafice $200,000 of earning power (minimum) for a potential $100,000, to say nothing of legal fees, destroyed reputation and the horror of pound-me-in-the-ass Federal prison?
Back in the day, when I was a minor and thought I was invincible, I occasionally slipped between the gray and black, and did a few things that were not exactly kosher. However, my motive was not money, but rather the thrill of "showing them how smart I was". Had I been thinking clearly, or been subject to adult-level criminal law enforcement, I would have stuck to the benign aspects of hacking.
That said, would I ever "hack" illegally again? Yes- but only on the condition that I left my potential prison sentance with enough cash to retire early.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When it comes to (criminal) hacking, or any other illegal activity, the smart perp will consider the risk-reward of his behavior. Unless the potential payoff of a crime is significant, it simply does not make good economic sense to do it.
This is a common perspective, but there is another motivation that comes into play. Most people are bound mostly by moral reasons to not commit crimes. What is interesting with computer crimes is they could easily have been a predicted consequence of globalization. Crim
Re: (Score:2)
As far as moral jusification goes, I argue that there is plenty of wealth disparity right here in the US to "justify" any criminal behavior a person might engage in. Especially if said criminal is already of an entitlement mentality.
Re: (Score:2)
As far as moral jusification goes, I argue that there is plenty of wealth disparity right here in the US to "justify" any criminal behavior a person might engage in.
You're missing the point. Greater wealth disparity correlates with increased rates of robbery and many other crimes. It's not a case of "is there enough wealth disparity?" It is a case of wealth disparity being an order of magnitude greater and thus predictably crime rates with regard to that disparity are higher. This is statistics and quant
Re: (Score:2)
Greater wealth disparity correlates with increased rates of robbery and many other crimes.
The United States does indeed have a high crime rate [wikipedia.org] and large wealth disparity [google.com], which fits the above theory. However, I also came across another factoid which suprised me:
Having a resident population of just over 500, and millions of tourists every year, Vatican City has the highest crime rate per capita of any nation on earth, with penal offences at 133.6% in 2002. [wikipedia.org]
Of course, if I understand you correctly, y
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, if I understand you correctly, your point was that International wealth disparity is even greater than that within the US, and therefore, increased globalization results in increased (property) crime. It "makes perfect sense" to me, but I'm having trouble finding the stats to back it up.
Let me clear up a few points. I'm not talking about crime rates. I'm specifically talking about theft and violent crimes. Make drinking beer a crime in Ireland and try to enforce it and it will have the highest
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So it's OK to trade-off time and respect (self and others') for the cash payoff in the end? I don't quite get this retirement plan.
Re: (Score:2)
Everything else is semantics.
Feds & Prosecuters don't care (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm safe... (Score:2)
Hacking costs BILLIONS (Score:2, Insightful)
Security. The FEAR of getting your server hacked pretty much doubles the development cycle, and is around 70% of the patches and fixes is
Re: (Score:2)
Every time they put up an online petition, their site gets cracked and replaced with goatse.
Wow.... (Score:2)
Risks? (Score:3, Interesting)
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2006/11/boarding
Re: (Score:2)
Indentity Theft (Score:2)
It's low risk, technically simple but you hurt a very specific person who you have to learn a lot about.
It's a bit scary how easy it would be to make money though identity theft.
But considering Slashdot's heavy Linux "Give back" ethical system and hoping it's somewhat indicitive of creative techies everywhere hopefully we'll find a s
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A true hacker desires KNOWLEDGE. Not power, not finances, KNOWLEDGE. That is the hacker's reward.
Not retarded WinNuke attacks (showing my age slightly), not stealing identities, not peeking at your hard drive...knowledge. The knowledge of how things work, why they work, what DOESN'T work, and what can be done to make them work BETTER.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly, freaked me the fuck out.
The lady(yes, lady) who did it still has access.
From what I've heard, of course.