Hackers Against LoU Cyberwarfare 33
netweasel sent us
a press release that's posted on 2600
where various Hacker groups (including Cult of the Dead cow
and l0pht) condem LoU's recent "Decleration of War" against
Iraq. This is quite interesting- digital warfare will obviously
be a factor in the future (for that matter, its probably a factor
already- more than we care to admit) and this is just the
start.
US Gov't (Score:1)
Very true. But also true, never underestimate the power of governmental propaganda designed to channel more tax dollars into the defense industry.
---
Seems to me like... (Score:1)
Heh, I especially like the part on HNN where it says "This was the first time in history that so many hacking groups had come together for a common cause. It is the first time that such a large project had been undertaken by so many. The spirit of cooperation and working together was phenomenal." Cooperation to make a press release? Whoopee. l0pht should stick to writing security advisories and working on several interesting projects they have on their site.
Oh, and I find it very interesting that nobody's said anything about cDc's stupid windows trojan. "We strongly oppose any attempt to use the power of hacking to threaten or destroy the information infrastructure of any country, for any reason." I guess it's bad to go against a country, but one's free to attack every Windows user on the 'net. Oh yeah, thanks for those bomb videos, cDc.
LI, formerly LoU isn't a group about destruction.
Cracker or Hacker? (Score:1)
Hackers vs. Crackers (Score:1)
However, we need a name for people who show no intelligence/skill, but spend their time with cyber-vandilization. Cracker has been proposed time and time again, but is not a good solution. It is *more*, not less, confusing than calling them hackers.
A Cracker is:
1) a racist term for a white person
2) a crunchy food. Ritz, saltines, and graham are examples.
3) a skillfull assembly programmer who removes copy protection schemes from shareware and demo software. United Cracking Force and Phrozen Crew are examples of cracker groups.
So cracker is already quite taken - there isn't room for a fourth definition.
I can't think of a perfect solution to this, but I personally usually refer to them as "hax0rs" which distinguishes them from "hackers" sufficiently, at least IMHO, since I doubt many hackers would call themselves "hax0rs." This also has the advantage that many 31337 hax0r d00ds actually don't mind being called "hax0rs" so it has a better chance of catching on than cracker does.
It's already an issue (Score:1)
Cracker or Hacker? (Score:1)
Cracker or Hacker? (Score:1)
Many
Noone will ever admit to being a cracker without being a hacker tho', although such people exist they are met with derision from all sides (warez puppies, code kiddies, etc).
Thus most crackers who want to talk about themselves in public call themselves hackers. Everyone knows their also crackers but they want to convey the idea that they are hackers who use their skill for the betterment of mankind despite the fact that their world improvement tactics are sometimes illegal.
No slight intended against hackers, crackers, warez puppies, or code kiddies.
Cracker or Hacker? (Score:1)
Cracker or Hacker? (Score:1)
---
I find this mind-boggling. Since when is something not worth pressing because it's hard, or because people refuse to listen? The biggest offenders of this are the same people who spread FUD about linux, mostly because they are uneducated, and choose to stay that way. Should we suddenly give up correcting them just because they don't seem to get it?
Cracker or Hacker? (Score:1)
What about OXblood Ruffin? (Score:1)
(quoted from the file, all emphases are mine)
Human Rights in China are naturally a Chinese problem requiring a Chinese solution. Xioa Qiang is part of that solution and so are Lin Hai and Wang Youcai. Hacktivists can support their agendas by getting informed, giving some time, and staying involved until the problem is solved. It won't happen overnight. But hackers have a lot of stamina for harsh bug fixes when they believe in the program. That's what I thought when I contacted Lemon Li.
***
The last time I got in touch with the Hong Kong Blondes Chief Technical Officer it was mostly to bid her au revoir and God-speed. And to ask her to drop 5000 copies of Back Orifice -- the cDc's network administration tool for Windows -- into China. I wasn't exactly sure what I was going to use them for but the opportunity for deployment was too delicious to pass up. According to Microsoft, Back Orifice is no threat to the marks, rather, the users of their operating system. But in our experience they are just whistling into the abyss. Having this application dropped onto your hard drive is like giving your PIN number, your house keys and your lover's nude photos to a stranger, only worse. My sincere wish is that the Win9x OS install base in China includes legions of Communist Party officials, corrupt bureaucrats and nasty high school vice-principals. I'm sure that we'll find out soon enough.
Part of the fun is not really knowing what will happen. When Sir Dystic first programmed Back Orifice and released it at Defcon last summer no one could have predicted its impact. To date approximately three hundred thousand copies of the program have been downloaded from the CULT OF THE DEAD COW Web site. And given the state of trading and copying that goes on the Net, we're probably looking at a number closer to one million copies in total. Zowie. Right after the release there was nothing so pathetic as the phalanx of PR flacks stumbling out of Redmond pooh-poohing Back Orifice. It was one stinking performance. At first Back Orifice was no threat. Then there was something to it but Windows users had nothing to fear. Then it was something else. They never had a clue how to contain the damage. Bill Gates probably didn't have enough money to get good help after blowing his whole PR budget on reinventing himself as Ozzie Nelson on his way to an anti-trust suit. Still, it was amusing.
To be honest, Back Orifice was not developed to take on Beijing. It was developed to show that Microsoft security sucked. But we couldn't be happier that the Reds and Redmond have cosied up so nicely. And the more that Back Orifice is deployed, the more use it will be. There are a number of plug-ins for the program in development that will expand upon its already robust abilities. And there's the Windows NT version waiting in the wings. But why tell all now? It would be more fun to wait for the Chinese make an official complaint to Washington. Or to watch them close down Microsoft Research, Beijing for being a party to their demise. Not that we're complaining, but it does seem astounding that China would put so much faith in Microsoft to help them develop their computing infrastructure. You'd think a little more attention to security issues would ... hmm, I'd better keep it to myself.
Not to slag on OXblood, he's my favorite writer in cDc. But there's a touch of inconsistency between the cDc's condemnation of cyberwarfare and this file.
J.
All right, I'll buy that. (Score:1)
Destruction of networks = bad. Use of networks to gain information to further a just cause = good.
J.
Desert Storm (Score:1)
Far be it from me to say or believe that "the government always knows best" but when it comes to running a war-type action I don't think self-appointed substitute departments of State or Defense are in our best interests. They could possibly interfere with the DoD computer warfare efforts, putting U.S. military personnel at greater risk than they would have been otherwise. They could also influence western governments into thinking that any of their citizens capable of that sort of thing should be subjected to some "prior restraint". Would you like to have your internet connection suspended every time we get upset with Iraq, or have government agents sitting down at your ISP tracking everything you do on line? This sort of "free lance", "loose cannon" approach invites just that.
If you want to crack a country's net, (Score:1)
Don't take it down. Take down its censorship capacity. For example, China presumably is using
some of its routers to control content coming in to the People's Republic. Change it. If you manage to crack a router, see what IP addresses it's set to reject. Alter them. Find the entry for say, Amnesty International, replace their IP address with, say, my lame machine (which I use for programming practice, so it serves pages that nobody would really miss). Find whatever file they
use for keywords to block. Change the spellings.
(I'm Israeli, and now that Syria's email access is growing, I have a vested interest in learning how to do this myself.
Interesting.. (Score:1)
Foxbat
Am I the only one that thinks this is funny? (Score:1)
Iraq doesn't even an Internet connection (Score:1)
Hackers vs. Crackers (Score:1)
The problem is that groups like LoU continue to perform/threaten to perform acts of complete stupidity, undermining efforts by more "legitimate" groups (l0pht, cDc, and the like).
Just my half cent.