Interview: Grill John Vranesevich of AntiOnline 382
Before you start posting questions for John, you may want to learn a little more about him. First check his Web site, AntiOnline. Then take a look at this story about him in The New York Times (free registration required). And, for a sample of the kind of animosity John has stirred up among some members of the "inner circle "hacker/cracker and computer security crowd, you might want to check this site, too.
We expect this interview to be full of fire. Fine. We have our flameshields set to "high." But realize that the questions we forward to to JP Tuesday afternoon are subject to our usual screening process; we're only going to send him the 10 - 15 questions deemed most interesting and/or relevant by Slashdot moderators and editors, so please try to be as level-headed as possible.
John's answers will appear Friday.
Question #1 (Score:2)
hmmm... (Score:2)
wireless technology (Score:2)
This disappoints me (Score:3)
-Mike
attrition.org (Score:4)
Having read many accounts of your interactions with the staff of attrition.org, it seems to me that your claims against them are generally unproven and rash. Their rebuttals are always filled with detailed fact and systematic, step by step analysis of the topic at hand. Please clarify why you feel that attrition.org is such a dangerous force, yet you have neer been able to present HARD EVIDENCE to that point.
--
I live in the ocean
OK (Score:2)
-and-
How do you see your role in the future?
Capital went where? (Score:1)
Attrition and other sources have reported on you a great deal, and my question has to do with their reports.
Specifically; where the hell did your venture capital go, and how much did you *really* get? I have seen you claim in email to have recieved numbers ranging from $75,000 to $300,000 to continue AntiOnline's operation, and have seen NUMEROUS reports that AntiOnline has NO MONEY. So, where'd the money go, and how much was it honestly? You can answer honestly, right?
Slashdot no longer supported. Morons (Score:2)
little hyper text link to AO. I will no longer
read the site. You are helping one of the most
worthless sites on the Net. Run by someone who
many would classify as a criminal. A narc, and
a liar. Someone who puts up a worthless site,
has allegdly PAID people to hack things just
to get more hicks. Someone who is in bed with Carolyn Meinel, and a person who doesn't know
his ass from a hole in the ground. What a worthless piece of shit.
Are you really as dumb as you look? (Score:1)
If you need to point-and-click to administer a machine,
Re:This disappoints me (Score:1)
here's one. (Score:2)
Completely and utterly digusting (Score:1)
And then you don't even have the nerve to site the number one source of valid information about John. www.attrition.org
Total nonsense. Can't you guys find someone who does constructive/productive work in the industry, rather than a proven liar?
Interview Ken Williams instead, at least he's honest.
Again, i repeat. Blecch.
Explanation of Packet Storm (Score:5)
-Davidu
More information about the packetstorm situation (Score:1)
--
AntiOnline (Score:2)
thanks
-nme!
Contributions (Score:2)
Did you put on your asbestos vest deliberately? (Score:1)
How real is your fear of reprisals? I mean, everything from fearing a wannabe scriptkiddie waiting in your alleyway with a stolen
Re:Slashdot no longer supported. Morons (Score:4)
However, I think it's in Slashdot's _readers'_ best interest to utterly ignore this article if they think he's a fraud. Look into his past yourself (and don't necessarily take either him or his biggest detractors at face value) and determine if you think he needs more free publicity or not.
The best thing those of us who _are_ detractors can do is:
1. Don't ask questions under this article
2. Don't moderate any questions in this article up
Re:Slashdot no longer supported. Morons (Score:1)
I'm sure the slashdot community will miss you
<
An honest suggestion... (Score:3)
Don't send this guy a dang thing. Everything I have seen from both his side and those of his detractors has painted him as a sham and a joke. I really don't give a sh*t what he thinks, I know his opinions are biased and baseless. Don't taint what have been quality interviews with this tripe.
Dvorak Partnership? (Score:2)
I was wondering if you had any plans to work with new security expert John Dvorak in the future? With your notoriety and John's media connections (not to mention his $40 firewall [zdnet.com]) it would seem to be a partnership guaranteed to strike fear into the hearts of evil h4x0r5 everywhere.
======
"Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16
You = Moron (Score:1)
This way of thinking always pisses me off.
You have been reading slashdot for a whole week now?
Ever heard the phrase "Know thy enemy"!? The whole idea here is to know as much as you can, with view points from all sides. Let him speak for himself... then formulate your judgement.
Or, surround yourself in ignorance and go on getting pissed off.
What a shame.... (Score:4)
I've said it before, and i'll say it again; I believe slashdot may very well hurt themselves financially in the long run. Though these "articles" may create short term revenues, they detract from the site. I have little doubt that the real secret to slashdot is intelligent discussion. Katz and JP simply tear it apart--leading to flame and dogma. The people who participate vigorously in such discussions tend to be younger, immature, etc. People, such as myself, on the other hand, only have so much tolerance for this kind of behavior. When the more intelligent people (better contributors) leave, the heart and soul of slashdot will too. With out this certain intellectual vitality, slashdot will rapidly degenerate.
PS: I said I wouldn't, but I changed my mind...I knew JP a couple years ago on undernet (IRC) in #cha0s, and other such channels. He was, and always will be a clueless idiot. He is a horrible writer. He doesn't know the first thing about computer security. What he is, is an opportunist, and a not very intelligent one at that. The reason he is "popular", if you could call it that, is that he was in the right place at the right time. Namely, he acted as a conduit for the media when "Analyzer" (the moronic israeli hacker) did his thing. Since that time, he's been trying desperately to sensationalize everything and purporting himself to be an expert. In short, he's a hack.
Re:Slashdot no longer supported. Morons (Score:1)
OTOH this is a chance for many - at least you and me - to see how mature slashdot really is. Slashdot is able to give this guy and the world a massive impression of how we see him.
And we even wrote for Jane's about cyber warfare, so we are a authority in this area
Unprovoked Attacks on Other Security Experts (Score:4)
To Clarify the question:
Why do you proclaim them to be 'dangerous hackers' while they do essentially the same thing you claim to do, except that they do so better, faster, and more professionally.
Kintanon
15 Minutes... (Score:1)
After looking at your website, it's obvious that you've learned a lot from Microsoft's marketing over the years.
Do you think you will ever be ruled a monopoly and if so will you try to sue the judge?
Taco, Hemos etc., this is real disapointing. If you need a list of interviews to ask for, let me give you a few:
Donald Knuth, Bill Joy, Steve Wozniak, Alan Cox, George Patton, Mickey Mouse, Al Gore, Tipper Gore, Democrat Sponsored Tax Reduction
...Oops! A couple of these would be a problem wouldn't they? However, they are all more plausible than this one!
An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
Re:You = Moron (Score:1)
it is a young site. I have known of it for
quite sometime, but never really read much
on it except for the past year or so. SO don't
even try and assume things, you are very bad at
it. I think it would have been in their best
interest to have NOT posted it. There are
intelligent people who read slashdot, but the
facts of the world are, there are more stupid
people out there than we know what to do with.
They will follow some idiots to the end of the world. If JP gains one single friend from slashdot
posting this, then it was a tragedy. I'm more
so familiar with JP then the majority of people.
I have worked with Attrition, and HNN on stories
and news about JP, and I was the one who featured
him on netcriminals.org and past out fliers at
defcon about him and how to shun him. Never once
giving the domain name for people to surf his web site, and click on his little banners, and add
to his statistics, so his so called funding companies can see that the site is doing so well.
Hell, if you really want to, go ahead and look at
the site, notice how anything that doens't run from a cron job, hasn't been modified since mid last week, and most of his sections haven't been touched for over a month, unless updated with a cron. Nobody is answering the phones there, it is a waste of time. Better to 100% forget. The media
makes everything now a days, the media spreads the word. If the media had never mentioned slashdot.org even one time, it certainly wouldn't
be as popular as it is today. Granted, the site
gets a lot of hits,a nd a lot of people found them
from links, but a good majority probably hit this
site for their first time from links from sites like wired, and other major news sites. ANyway,
I firmly believe that if you just never mention, don't speak and forget about a site, it will die.
Check out JP's stats tommorow, I bet they sky rocketed today.
Question for JP: (Score:1)
? (Score:5)
Re:You = Moron (Score:2)
And I am still the geek who whipped your lily white arse in front of the entire school. I'm waiting for you by the schoolgates tonight...
another question: (Score:1)
Re:AntiOnline (new AO slogan) (Score:1)
the super market check out lane"
Sigh... (Score:1)
Who's next on the interview list? The unibomber?
Re:? --- Good Question (Score:4)
Can you please explain how you classified Slashdot, a site which reports news, does interviews, and encourages discussion as a Hacker website?
Kintanon
Better than Questions... (Score:1)
Re:Completely and utterly digusting (Score:1)
I don't know, that could be interesting, don't you think? I'd personally like to ask him what his plans are now that the Justice department appears to be about to restrain his biggest competition.
(That "Google" think had to have hurt...)
Re:This disappoints me (Score:2)
-Mike
Re:Explanation of Packet Storm (Score:1)
Its more than worthwhile to me... (Score:1)
HFG (Score:1)
After the statute of limitations is over for
the HFG hacks, will you finally admit to being
HFG?
Also, once the statute of limitations is over
for the sites you paid people to hack, will you
admit to those? Is this your companies life long
plan, is to sit being poor for 8 years, and then
make these announcements in the mid 200x era,
and then get a ton of hits from those
announcements? That is a BRILLIANT plan. Wow,
you are far more intelligent than I had thought!
Also, what exactly do you have to say about
your interferance with packet storm? Did
you find them to be a big competition with
you, so you figured you would cry and moan
and threaten until they were shut down?
What do you plan to do when a company
with money gets sick of your girlish
whining and pissing, and sinks you
like Jimmy Hoffa?
Could you please reply to every single thing
that attrition.org says on their dedicated
section to you, and try to prove them wrong?
(with as little lying as possible if you could).
Right on! (Score:2)
I say we flat out ignore him - he's of no value to the community. The only thing he does is stir up trouble and act as the town provocateur.
--
Rags to Trash (Score:1)
Questions for JP:
1) Why did you betray your 'friends'?
2) How can you now be trusted?
3) How do you feel about spending this dirty money?
4) What were your charity donations for 1998 tax year?
question (Score:3)
JP - One quick one if you have time: (Score:1)
Great idea (Score:1)
Just to add some dB to your voice.
Yes, Ken Williams would be great! I would be very interested in how he came to make packetstorm and what he does now...
Re:You = Moron (Score:1)
Slashdot would only get half as many posts if you eliminated the mindless knee-jerking.
my question (Score:1)
--
What happened to Packet Storm? (Score:1)
JP Who? (Score:1)
Doubtless some of the members of Attrition and some contributers to Packetstorm are not without blame.
These people never tried to stop the free flow of information about computer security. For good or bad, they passed (and still pass, thank you) information about computer security for everyone.
JP apparently feels that to get security information, you have to play the high-school popularity games of "I'm in the gang. Don't ask us if you're not" when he himself is at best a collecter of script kiddie attacks.
Gee, JP, where did you get your information? Did you (GASP!) HACK something? Now, was it YOUR system?
Really, Slashdot, I thought better of you.
Re:wireless technology (Score:1)
Why is everyone complaining? (Score:1)
--
This is sad (Score:1)
Why are you legitimating this kook? (Score:1)
10 questions (Score:1)
John,
1) When will you go away?
2) Can you make it any sooner?
3) What can we, as a community, do to speed your departure?
4) When you leave, will you promise not to return?
5) Are you still here?
6) You haven't left yet?
7) Go.
8) Leave.
9) Scram.
10) Can you take Katz with you?
Question for JP? (Score:1)
After all, people who are entrenched in IT Security despise you, however the clueless dimwits in the IT society respect and even like you.
LK
The meaning of "Interview" (Score:1)
I mean, like, duh!
-nme!
Re:The meaning of "Interview" (Score:1)
-nme!
I'll throw in with this one.. (Score:2)
Apathy truly is the coldest emotion. Nothing can freeze someone as cold as ignoring them. Completely. Utterly.
I am annoyed, however, that Signal 11 over there used a term to describe this tool that he tried applying to me once (as seen here [slashdot.org].. well the reply to that, to be precise). Grr. ;)
Re:Contributions (Score:2)
Me? Quiet? HA! (Score:5)
But John Vranesevich?
He is arguably the most despised figure in the h(cr)acker community, with Carolyn Meinel neck and neck. Both of them follow the same ideals and public image. What's that? Being a FAKE. Vranesevich has shown many many times that he has absolutely no clue about real computer security, and has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt in my mind that he goes to disgusting lengths to get a story, i.e.: "Hey, here's some cash. Hack that site, and let me cover it." (Attrition's site [attrition.org] has remarkable backing for this theory.)
What's more, Vranesevich absolutely cannot stand being criticized. Any site which puts up content that criticizes, parodies, or shows Vranesevich to be a fraud, he throws a fit, cries, and threatens legal action. Attrition, Innerpulse [innerpulse.com], PacketStorm all have received threats. (At one point, Slashdot ran a less-than-flattering story about him, and I E-Mailed CmdrTaco letting him know that he quite possibly might get possible legal action from JP. (Nothing happened, but everyone knew it could have.)
You may be wondering how I know all of this. Well, a long long time ago, JP was an operator in a very large IRC channel [hackphreak.org] on undernet [undernet.org]. I happened to be an op too. The difference is, I still am. He knows I know him, as does everyone in the channel. We knew him when he was a small time loser. He's still a loser, but now just big-time.
Which is why I'm puzzled, amazed, and quite frankly disappointed that Slashdot chose him for an interview. He's not at all insightful, and can't offer any kind of intelligence to this forum.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
2 questions (Score:3)
Why do you feel that sites containing satirical humor based antionline are not protected by law and therefore open to your threats of legal action?
attrition (Score:2)
http://www.attrition.org/negation/index2.html
http://www.attrition.org/negation/links.html
http://www.attrition.org/negation/www/tech.01.h
Can't find the article where JP confuses a nuclear plant in Israel with one in India. That was funny...
here it is (Score:2)
http://www.reznor.com/news/cwd0899.html
I'm saving this one
Make your own decision: - URLs FYI (Score:4)
http://www.attrition.org/negation/
http://kuruption.cha0s.org/jp/jp.html
http://www.forbes.com/columnists/penenberg/1999
http://www.antioffline.com
http://www.antionline.com
http://www.happyhacker.org
Try running a query on HNN's news archives:
http://www.hackernews.com/cgi-bin/htsearch?conf
Try specific queries with AO and certain News Orgs:
http://www.altavista.com/cgi-bin/query?pg=q&sc=
http://www.altavista.com/cgi-bin/query?sc=on&q=
Search Altavista for the keyword Antionline, but exclude any from that domain:
http://www.altavista.com/cgi-bin/query?sc=on&q=
I'm sure there is more, but I cannot think of any off hand.
"AntiOnline" (Score:2)
Anti-Anti-Anti-Online (Score:3)
Re:Explanation of Packet Storm (Score:4)
On the other hand, I've never found anything of value at AntiOnline. Nothing. Nada.
While I don't really care for some of the attitudes and actions of the black hat community (the l0pht being one huge exception), I find AntiOnline's much, much worse. AntiOnline's goals seem to be more to harass people who may or may not be involved in questionable activities, rather than educate people about security and privacy issues, which is what I believe is the true purpose of a security professional.
And no, I never was a 'c00l hax0r d00d' either.
I personaly don't think that Mr. Vranesevich is qualified to act as a security professional, let alone as an 'expert'.
I have no questions that I would care to hear his answer on. In fact, when his article comes up, I would hope that no one reads it or comments on it. That would be the ultimate protest on Slashdot...
jf
Serious questions that aren't insulting (Score:3)
by NME
There are a lot of security information sites on the net, of varying quality. Why should I read AntiOnline? I suppose I'm wondering what you feel that you're adding/offering that makes you unique.
by mochaone
Why are you hated so damn much and do you care?
by Rabbins
How do you define your current role? -and- How do you see your role in the future?
by platypus
What were your most important works in the security related area, ie. posting to relevant(!) mailing lists (let's say bugtraq, ntbugtraq, RISK), articles in magazines, papers or lectures?
by Kintanon
What is the basis for your attacks on security experts such as Attrition.org?
by imac.usr
What's your opinion on the security of wireless standards like 802.11? Are devices like the AirPort secure enough, and if so, for how long?
Additional question of my own:
Why are you so law-suit happy with your detractors and rivals? A lot of people have critized you for this, from fellow security sites to Forbes magazine. How does it help you (if it does)? If it doesn't help you then why do you do it?
Re:Slashdot no longer supported. Morons (Score:2)
/. is a *forum* for discussion. If you expect to like everything you read, stick your head back in the sand, e.g. don't read it. A prior response makes an excellent point - know thy enemy. The point of this article is not to get JP press, but to "Grill" him as his peers. This is how others in the know will determine how the guy responds (or doesn't) to incisive questioning.
I for one look forward to reading his answers. Note: I did not say *believing* his answers, just reading them.
Katz (Score:2)
A lot of people like to take pot shots at Katz because it's easy. Sure Katz is often sensational and promotional...he can't escape his journalistic roots...but at least he
On the other hand, I think JP adds no value to anything. In fact, I think the net value of the system would increase if AntiOnline and JP were eliminated.
Re:? --- Good Question (Score:2)
"Can you please explain how you classified Slashdot, a site which reports news, does interviews, and encourages discussion as a Hacker website?"
And even so, what is the point of banning travelers who have come from a supposed "hacker" site. Is there something you want to hide from people who know better?
I disagree. (Score:2)
What I care about is the fact that he ADDS nothing to this world. If he wishes to write books, that is his business. But when he is given a forum on slashdot regularly, I take issue. The fact of the matter is that he has an incentive to write for slashdot, I assure you. Maybe he wishes to "signal" to the publishers that his books are popular, by directing slashdot readership to it, thus creating further demand for his books. Quid Pro Quo. Or perhaps, he feels that he can better sell books by understanding and interacting with the slashdot mentality, his readership. I don't know what his motives are exactly, but they strike me as entirely based in self-interest.
In either case, I don't believe he is sincere. Even if he is, he isn't adding anything that I want to read or discuss at length. Every one his articles has provided an alarmist or "hypist" tone. He also turns on his words repeatedly. In short, I see no redeeming value to his writings, and many downsides.
I am curious... (Score:2)
I want to know what this guy thinks. I am not worried about him becoming the next pariah or something merely because slashdot links to him!
We have others comparing this to interviewing Satan, or giving credit to those who deny the Holocaust. Well, to be honest, I would be curious to hear from them as well. But I do not need you, or others to formulate my opinions, protect me, or worry about me endorsing someone you hate.
From everything I have read, heard and seen, I can not stand the guy either. If he were standing on a corner in my neighborhood yelling to a crowd, I would most likely walk right on by. But this is a chance to read someone's opinions vastly different than mine and the great majority of those on this forum... and the great thing, is that he will be responding to challenges made from people who openly can't stand him. That is a little different than listening to him rant and rave. I simply like to hear different views, no matter how twisted, insane, eveil and stupid they might be.
Ignore him if you would like... you probably know a lot more about him than I do. But I want to hear from him, and I bet there are others who would like to also. If he is encouraged by this attention, well... so be it.
I have a good one. (Score:2)
I never receive any kind of response from you or anyone else in the hacker community. You all seem to be so obsessed with flaming yourselves and others that you fail to recognize the impact of your actions have on the rest of us.
You claim that now you are are on "the good side" but to the community at large you are regarded with extreme hostility, and your actions appear from many sources to appear to be nothing but imflamitory. I honestly ask you what good do you think you do when you have managed to ailinated most of the major forces involved in the security establishment?
Privacy (Score:2)
This one puzzles me because the "attackers" aren't doing anything wrong. You've invited them to "attack" that computer. Yet you treat them with the same level of respect as you do any other "cracker"...
--------------
I tried to keep this nice and just address the issue at hand. Please, nobody start lecturing the difference between hacker and cracker! It's just he's got all this info posted here [antionline.com] and, though it's one thing to make alleged attacks public, I feel it's another thing entirely to reveal the identies of people whom he's invited to attack his site.
That's all.
History of litigation threats... (Score:2)
Here, let me help (Score:5)
Hey slashdot editors! I know you are busy, and maybe that's why you thought interviewing JP would be a great idea. I've already posted a comment on why I think this is a very bad idea. So I thought I would try and be productive. Here is a list of people who are of the right caliber to merit an interview (that is to say, try interviewing great folk like this FIRST before wasting your time and ours on JP):
(from the 1999 Free Software Award Nominee [gnu.org] page)
Granted, some of these have been covered already, but maybe a handful at the most. I must confess to maybe knowing who 10% of these people are. I would sure like to know something about the rest of them. Just imagine all the cool stuff each of these people has to offer--why in the world are we looking to interview inflamatory, damaging people like JP?
Just trying to help :-) I figure 80 some odd suggestions should keep you busy for a while.
Carolyn Meinel (Score:2)
Re:Katz (Score:2)
You're obviously bitter... (Score:2)
http://www.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=99/10/3
1. I don't read his crap anymore. Though Katz hype articles DO take away from that "critical" mass that is formed in other discussions, thus hurting me.
2. I, and others, just might stop reading slashdot, if things don't improve. But I won't go without a "fight", so to speak.
3. I'm actually in the process of doing something much like that, though with a different spin.
4. Other parties are more than entitled to express their opinions, but that doesn't mean that I can't desire not to see it on slashdot. You'd hardly advocate Bill Gates' right to post FUD on here regularly...or KKK (et.al).
5. You're obsessed with "factual" arguments. Because the editors know what they are doing perfectly well, I do not need to "prove" anything. In truth, the only thing that really matters is that significant portions of the mature readership here object to Katz articles. Instead of wasting time, I provide them with a financial argument as to why they shouldn't shrug off editorial control.
Additionally, I don't need "factual" arguments. In fact, these "factual" arguments are numerous on Katz's articles--they ARE the problem. Though it is true that I have posted comments on a Katz's thread, I won't sustain the argument like many others will.
PS: If you think all action and argument must be made on "fact", then you're a bigger fool than I thought. Your notion of "fact" is statistics. The fact of the matter is that statistics are easily bent. There is a saying "There are three kinds of lies in this world: lies, damn lies, and statistics."
You don't need to know the exact statistics to know that driving drunk is dangerous, you can be reasonably confident though when you OBSERVE multiple friends that have died in such crashes that it is infact dangerous.....and pssst, Since when does Katz bring "fact" into his arguments? By your reasoning, since he lacks "facts" he can make no claims about: society, law, computing, etc.
JP's general hypocrisy. (Score:5)
Several months ago I was raided by FBI for supposed involvement with the "hacker" group gh. The extent of my involvement was participating, as a caller only, in illegally funded phone conferences. JP, who also participated in this conferences, labeled me as a hacker, and a member of gh on his "news" site. Neither of these accusations are true. He has many more ties to this and other hacker groups than I have ever had. My first question is this; If you label me a hacker, than do you label yourself one? Are you in your little database of supposed computer criminals? Secondly, How can you pretend to be taking a stand against "hackers" while you are involved in the same activities?
My third question is in regards to your coverage of the situation. You posted unconfirmed information from an unreliable source in regards to the status of my employment at a prominent software development company. As a result of this I was contact by several news agencies, and immediately stereotyped as a hacker even though I have never illegally penetrated any computer system, nor had I been charged with, or accused of any crimes by the FBI. In response to this I granted one news agency an interview, which I thought went well, but also backfired. As a result of the negative press my former employer could not even consider allowing me to stay. My question being, Do you expect people to consider you as a reliable news source even though you report data which you receive through unreliable channels? And lastly, Did you ever stop to think what the impact of your coverage might be? It seems to me that in your rush for the big story you have failed to check for the correctness in your articles, and as a result of this you are hurting innocent people, such as myself. I'm sure this has gone on in other cases, but mine is the only one I have enough knowledge to comment on. I don't attribute these unfortunate events to you, but you certainly did not follow good news practices in reporting them. You have only served to injure my credibility and your own.
Lastly, have you ever considered what legal action may be taken against you for your involvement with these criminals? Do you even recognize the hypocrisy of your stance on hackers being one yourself by your own definition?
Sincerely,
Jeff
Re:This disappoints me (Score:2)
OK, well take it from someone who has then. JP, and his friend Carolyn, are the definition of shady. They are shameless self promoters, public image spin doctors, and can only be trusted to do what is best for themselves.
The first thing I asked when I read this was "Why on earth is
Why is he seeking this much publicity? Probably because his site is going down the tubes. Updates are anything but regular, the information available is the same stuff you can get anywhere (and in many cases, it's exactly the same information [attrition.org]), and his investors may be getting a little antsy at all the hatred he's attracted in the community that he's claimed to be such a part of.
Anyway, if this is going to be a real interview, I'll play Mike Wallace and ask the tough questions:
John, how do you respond to the allegations made and supported by pretty convincing evidence [attrition.org]that you've violated the copyright of numerous web news organizations by copy-pasting nearly (or in some cases, fully) verbatim, especially the cases of Discovery On-line, Hacker News Network, and Attrition?
Re:JP's general hypocrisy. (Score:2)
"We hope you find fun and laughter in the new millenium" - Top half of fastfood gamepiece
Re:? --- Good Question (Score:2)
After all, that is something Slashdot indubitably is! On the other hand, he seems to have been treating it as meaning the same as "Cracker" or "Trespasser", which few (if any) on Slashdot are.
(I suspect the few genuine "crackers" on Slashdot - note the difference between C and c - are very different from the sort of people he imagines. As for Script Kiddies, you get them everywhere. I think they're one of those Super Bugs that the medical profession is so concerned about.)
Re:my question (Score:2)
Also, I noticed it's impossible to wander through antionline without tripping over bad spelling. Look at the first paragraph on that very same page.
The AntiOnline offices are located in the beautyful and rural...
So much for professionalism.
By the way, is it me, or are those computer tables converted exercise bikes?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
oh my God (Score:2)
first thing i see:
Can You Trust Them?
Monday, November 8, 1999 at 11:06:49
Is the security industry your friend, or is the proverbial doctor selling you snake oil?
http://www.antionline.org/cgi-bin/News?type=ant
Read this. it is PATHETIC. Basically it is: jp bashing packetstorm! Apparently not content to dog it to its death, he looks at its new incarnation and, overbrimming with FUD, suspicious statements and things like "the information on packetstorm was compiled by MALICIOUS HACKERS!!".. my God.
I know only a little bit about the whole antionline/packetstorm thing. But even if i'd known _nothing_ it would be pretty obvious just from _reading_ this that this kind of nasty personal attack on a competitor is just totally uncalled for.. blech. i feel dirty having read it.
But you'd think that JP would have kinda sorta realized that having packetstorm shut down was a horrifying dirty act that made him no friends.. and at least had the decency not to immediately attack it once it is brought back from the dead. I guess not?
You're putting words in my mouth. (Score:2)
1) I put "fact" in quotations for a reason. Mainly because "fact" seems to have a very special meaning for mochaone. If you had read previous comments of his, you would understand this. For instance, he tells me that I have no "proof" that the US tort system need adjustment. Despite my being able to cite numerous companies that have been adversely affected by huge awards...including ones owned by family and friends. Yet, at the same time he effectively states that corporations are "evil" and need to be restrained by force of excessive lawsuits. That is just the tip of the iceberg, and low resolution at that...
2) Slashdot can do whatever it wants to do. That does not mean that I have to remain silent about it. I don't need any proof to say that I, and many others, are growing discontent with the editorial control on slashdot. If the KKK were to be given a podium on slashdot every other day, you're not going to spend hours trying to "disprove" every one of their claims. You simply KNOW it to be untrue, and have better ways to spend your time. Instead, you express your discontent to slashdot; in the hope that, with enough similar complaints, action will be taken. I simply know what Katz is up to, and I refuse to contribute to the problem (e.g., being on the other end of the flame fest doesn't extinguish the flames). Slashdot is not usenet afterall; it IS moderated and editorial controls are used.
3) My problem with JP has NOTHING to do with his use of unsubstantiated claims. JP (whom I know) flat out lies and intentionally distorts the truth. The problem does not lie in the proof, it lies in the person. He is a hack. So to compare me to JP is nonsense.
4) Katz doesn't use "facts". His position is certainly not that of the status quo--he is infact very much of a liberal*. You should try reading his drivel for a change. Futhermore, I'm not writing an article, merely a comment. Because of size and time constraints on slashdot, and particularly its temporal nature, I'm not going to spend a great deal of time "disproving" some silly point.
5) I don't purport every one of my statements to be scientific proof. That is an unreasonable standard, and nothing would happen if every comment had to fit to such a standard. Slashdot is simply not the forum for that. The fact is that there IS utility in a forum with REASONED debate, even if you don't have statistics to back up your claim. You can still develop an argument. However, that by no means, means that it must be swallowed whole and without inspection.
...anyhow, I've wasted enough time on slashdot for a couple days. Bye
Analysis of a AntiOnline User (Score:2)
Hello.
I attend a high school here in a suburb of one of the major cities in the united states. Almost everyone here has a computer and it is just as common for them to subscribe to an internet service provider. Lately, it seems that there are many of these teenagers (or even pre-teens) are interested in computer security. (Or so they claim.)
This in itself is not surprising. Computers have played a large role in the shaping of twentieth-century America. (If I keep talking like this they'll put me on the Discovery Channel.) Computers are everywhere. In the corner of every billboard is a world wide web address. You can not go through a box of frozen waffles without being berrated at to "Visit www.cyberwaffles.com for the digiwaffles experience pushing binary envelope!" (I do not know if it exists. If it does, please run to your local establishment of religion and _pray_!). Schools, the establishment where those of the noted age spend hours of each day, are now inseperably intertwined into the ubiquitous (Yeah, that's right kid, reach for your dictionary.) computer-culture of networks, servers and databases.
Another facet of life that teenagers often experience is rebellion. Everyone wants to be James Dean. Marilyn Manson, Korn and Ozzy Ozzbourne* are all examples of rebellious outlets. Others include shoplifting, cigarettes, and flavor crystals in Cinn*a*burst gum. I know people who will commit pointless, but incriminating feats of idiocy in school and then revel in pride when they are called to the assistant principle's office. It's a stage for most people. Most people experience it some time. Beyond this, you can read the volumes of psychiatry on adolescent rebellion ( Cheesy psychiatrist voice: Do you do this to your parent's because it makes you feel like you're getting back at them, Bobby?).
This combination breeds a special type of teenager. It is easy to tell who is and isn't. Let's see here... People of this type often...
o Claim to be "Hackers, Hax0rz, etc."
o Use Microsoft Windows (And every now and then a Mac user.)
o Pirate Software ("Warez")
o Have simple knowledge of the way that MS-DOS and Windows systems work. (i.e. Modify Autoexec.bat, win.ini, etc.)
o Have intrest in "anarchy"-type information. (Jolly Roger-Anarchist cookbook, etc.)
o Use AOL or SLIP/PPP type network connection.
o May use viruses
o Use simple "hacking" programs
Let me explain these points. First, everyone has some definition of what a hacker is. (A definition which is mostly wrong.) There is all kinds of media surrounding these misconceptions. I will list a few:
o Movies : _Hackers_ (The worst of them), _The Net_, _Masterminds_, the movie in the works by Miramax about Kevin Mitnick, many, many made-for-tv-movies.
o Books: _Secrets of A Superhacker_, _The Happy Hacker's Handbook_ (please whatever you do, don't read this), _Cyberpunk_ (Kevin Mitnick has been in jail a long time unneccassarily and John Markoff helped put him there.), _The Cyberpunk Handbook_ (to the point of hilarity), and many, many "cyber-novels" (a phrase of Upright Citizen's Brigade Fame).
So everyone is pretty sure a hacker is someone who breaks into computers, right? Wrong. See the _Jargon File_ or _The New Hacker's Dictionary_. Anyway, these troubled youths choose to identify themselves as "hackers", because in their definition, "hacking" is what they do.
On to the flawed existence of Microsoft Windows. Windows is the most common operating system on the face of the earth if I am not mistaken. Real hackers, whenever remotely possible, do not concern themselves with Windows. Go get Linux. The fact that the these who claim to be "elite" are using a operating system that is the equivalent of a sanitarium with padded walls and crayons for writing letters can be used to prove that these "hackers" are really technically inept.
Software piracy, a.k.a. "warez" is a common activity of these faux "hackers" because it gives them a sense of doing something that is wrong and more importantly, illegal. This is easily attributable to their rebellious nature, which was discussed earlier. Here I will note the importance of flashy graphics. I have seen many, many "hax0r" webpages that are done entirely in Adobe Photoshop with nothing but selection and Alien Skin Software EyeCandy plugins. Most of these pages (probably yours if you used lots of EyeCandy) have *no* element of graphic design whatsoever. It is easy to impress these so-called "hackers" with this kind of design. They thrive on social support for self-confidence and attempt to impress each other with these pointless images. This is why Adobe Photoshop is a common item on "warez" pages.
Everyone has used computers. Some people know more than others. In this case with the kids I am discussing, they may or may not know more, but by only a thin margin. It is even possible that they may know BASIC programming. Their peers see that they have (slightly) surperior knowledge and may express admiration. This is what builds up the whole "elite" attitude. No one likes an egomaniac.
Anarchy files is a simple extension of the need for rebellion. No one really needs to know how to make napalm. No one reading this, at least. Intrest such as these are purely childish and even less justifiable than software piracy. If the government ever makes an organized attempt at complete totalitarianism, the only thing you will be able to do is insert your head between your legs and kiss your sorry ass goodbye.
The single most popular isp among these wannabes is probably aol. AOL is a terrible company (although they did score points with the Netscape open-source issue) and is the least desirable access provider anywhere. I would rather live in North Korea and eat dog than show up on someone's server log as coming from an aol ip address. Aol isn't always the way modus operandi, though. But reagrdless, they will, with few exceptions, always use a SLIP/PPP networking connections. Why is this relevant? Because it shows their technical hopelessness. I garauntee you that you can sit any of these "hakz0rs" down at a bash shell and the first thing they will try to do is type "win" or maybe "dir *.exe" and finally "help". They need their precious gui interfaces because without them they will drown in their sea of bad MS-DOS syntax. This is statement can be supported by their love for cheesy graphics. Do you think most "31337 d00dz" optimize their sites for Lynx? I didn't think so.
Computer viruses. Personally, I think that anyone that has taken the time to learn assembly should write themself a microkernel so they can network their toaster ovens or electric toothbrushes or do something at least semi-productive. But alas, it appears some insist upon pointlessly annoying innocent computer users. Not that these people that are capable of producing such programs are common in "hak3r" culture. Virus distribution is just another way to feel rebellious and badass while in reality it's the equivalent of setting random people's homes on fire. Pretty cool, huh?
AOHell, WinNuke, port scanners, Back Orifice, the list goes on. It appears that every now and then one of these kids actually figures out the winsock control in Visual Basic and in a malevolent orgy of simplemindedness produces another one of these idiot machines. (My sincere apologies to the l0pht; I don't care how many CERT advisories you've caused, you still can't spell.) I program. In C. No, not Visual C++, that doesn't count. Try the GNU compiler for a real programming experience. Lost without your anarchy symbol pointer and some buttons to push, huh? All of these programs are simple to design. WinNuke is something like five winsock.dll calls, I believe. Back Orifice isn't the genius it's made out to be. Wow guys, I'm in this guys hard drive! Remote access utilities are very common. Back Orifice is not the first or the best,, by any measure. The only difference is that Back Orifice makes a few registry calls, uses datagrams and runs transparently. The people who use such programs think that their designers are really "l33t", when in truth they are just simple socket programming exercises. No magic. The vast majority of the so-called "hacking" population does not know how to program anything at all and uses these programs without caring how they work. Where's the hacker spirit at?
If you meet any two of those conditions, with exception to numbers two, four and six, I would immediatly seek out psychiatric help for your immaturity.
I have now defined, and hopefully clearly so, what I think of most people my age who call themselves hackers really are like. I meet these types of people in alarming frequency. A few weeks ago another student told me, and then when I told him he was wrong *insisted* that the reason he could access the MS-DOS shell was because of an error in the *server* software. I'm sure. Now I know why the network at my school is protected very well. It doesn't need to be with people like him. Virus protection maybe, but I wouldn't worry about the bindery too much. These people constantly are asking me "How do I hack the school's network?" or "Do you use Back Orifice" (always mispronouncing "orifice") and lately, it seems the question has been "Have you been to AntiOnline?".
[I have not reread this before posting (yeah, I know, poor form) but I am quite confident that it is still an accurate representation of the facts and what I believe.
Kspett
Re:Here, let me help (Score:2)
I immediately thought of how bad a choice this is. You know that no question moderated up is one he is willing to answer. I'm interested to see how/if he'll reply.
As for your list, (besides the fact that it appears to be mostly verbatim from another recent list) the first name that I'd pick is Patrick Volkerding. C'mon, he made the first high-quality Linux distrib.
Of course I wouldn't mind seeing some of those other names that haven't been interviewed yet. JWZ, John Ousterhout, Donald Becker, Miguel de Icaza, Bill Joy, Andrew Tridgell,
Sadly, you'll have to remove number 66 from that list. It's too bad, that would have been a very interesting interview.
Please Moderate That Up. (Score:2)
I have to respond to this as well... The whole responce to this interview has caused me to become very disappointed in the slashdot readers. We are supposed to advocate open source, but apparently not free speech now?
I've followed the whole AntiOnline/Happy Hacker/Packetstorm/Attrition thing for quite awhile now, and I disagree with JP on pretty much everything. But, that doesn't mean that people don't have a right to their side or the story.
Applause is due to Rob and company for taking on such a controversial interview. Heck, I'm impressed that JP was willing to do it. He has to know that it is gonna be rather hostile, as
Hell, here's your chance to either 1) ask some technical computer security questions to see if he gets stuck, or 2) Try and get him to justify his actions that you disgree with. Take advantage of it.
Anyway, here's my questions:
1) Why do you belive you are qualified to be a computer security "expert"? What justification is there for you being concidered a credible source?
2) In dealing with the Packetstorm incident, why did you not attempt to contact Ken Williams first? Instead of going directly to his upstream, better Internet ettiquite would have been to attempt to resolve your problems with the site maintainer. If someone had a problem with your site, wouldn't you prefer that they went to you, instead of going over your head and talking directly to StarGate?
-Wintermute
This is silly (Score:2)
(This is probably a rehash of other peoples questions, but here goes)
For Mr. Vranesevich: There is a strong sentiment against you in the online community. What do you feel are the key reasons for this and how do you respond to them? Do you intend to do anything to try to alter this perception?
For the Slashdot maintainers: There has been a lot of flack thrown out here, but I would ignore it. I do think it would be cool to see some of the people recommeded for interviews in the various postings here, along with possibly some writers such as Steven Levy, or William Gibson (or have they been done already?)
For the people who now hate Slashdot because of this interview: What a stupid reason to leave. I for one won't miss you.
Why haven't you taken legal action? (Score:2)
You should seek the advice of a lawyer. You certainly have a couple parties that you could prosecute, if your story is accurate. It would take time/energy/money which you may not be interested in spending, but I think you have reasonable cause.
First of all, if JP posted libel on his site, and didn't make an effort to verify it OR (more importantly) post a retraction/apology when it turned out to be false, then you have a case against him. And secondly, the employer who fired you is certainly on shaky legal ground. Admittedly, I don't live in the States and your laws might treat that differently, but I don't think they are allowed to fire you based on false statements about your activities... particularly if you have never been arrested/charged by the FBI and if that was their motive for firing you. Of course, it's possible they may not have explicitly used that as the reason, they could pretend it was something else, but it IS worth looking into. That sort of thing is not only personally damaging, it can make it difficult to find employment in the future.
Of course, without proper legal advice, or all the details, it is hard to judge what sort of evidence you'd have, or if you could prove your story satisfactorily to a judge. Heh, ironic... JP is always threatening to take people to court for slander, maybe it's about time he got a taste of that.
---
Re:communities (Score:2)
Who, JP? (Score:2)
I believe he stopped using IRC recently as he acquired too many enemies, particularly packet pixies/script kiddies. Though he evidently goes on anonymously or has someone else go for him, so he can get his script kiddy leads.
Re:My question is: (Score:2)
Seeing how his public image surged, Rloxley made him the one and only senior op. When I openly (quite openly) voiced my opinion on JP's knowledge, skills, situation handling, and occasionally sexual orientation, I was removed as an op.
Rloxley thankfully saw the error in having this asshole run the channel, and JP was removed. at this point, JP took over the channel, banned *!*@*, and pretty much threw a tantrum. In the meantime, Antionline was growing from a small useless waste of bandwidth into a big one.
The answer to your question is this: A long time ago, JP was a reasonable person. That's when he got ops. Then he turned into a media whore. Whenever JP removed me, RLoxley repeatedly re-added me. Now, myself, alienbaby, doxical, and L1thium are senior ops. JP never comes into #HackPhreak anymore. Whee!
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Don't pull my comments out of context. (Score:2)
I do not get upset over this stuff. I was making a point, that I see a general trend, a focus of trying to create flamewars to increase banner revenue. This trend results in an increasingly singular viewpoint, that of geek fanaticism.
It is my belief that the slashdot editors KNOW what they're doing; thus I don't need to prove it to them. Instead, I made a financial argument that it could hurt them in the long term. The mere fact that they generate increased hits in the short term does NOT mean it is healthy in the long term. For example (though extreme), if I were to put the KKK up on slashdot, to spread their propaganda. I have no doubt it would generate a thousand comments. If I kept doing this on a regular basis, the readership would get fed up--they would leave en masse.
I am not putting a gun to the editors' heads, my points remain open for consideration. The mere fact that I lack exact statistics does not make my efforts worthless. Also, I have OBSERVED a number of people, those whom I believe to be the more worthwhile posters on
It is ironic that you purport that Katz's articles are apropos for slashdot, yet the KKK or Bill Gates is not. What facts do you have the back this up? What proof do you have that Gates' claims of MS superiority are indeed FUD? How does this differ from my claims that Katz's articles are essentially anti-establishment FUD (though my comment presumes that the editors already KNOW)--with an immature sycophantic geek-cheerleading-squad?
If you assume that user replies/moderation are an accurate indicator of the intrinsic worth of a comment, then I am significantly better off than yourself. My comment/Karma history demonstrates this well. Or would you have me believe that, perhaps, there are other criterion? You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Ok... (Score:2)
I did view your Karma/comment history briefly. You were giving me "pointers" on how to write, implying that mine don't deserve the time of day. My first comment on this thread has recieved a score of 4. And you seem to imply that whatever the readership comments or moderates is good. I see a certain paradox in saying that Katz's articles are worthwhile because they draw moderation and comments, yet saying that mine, which draws moderation and comments, is not. Or yours....or whatever...
...anyhow, I've got work to get done today. Bye
For your selective viewing pleasure.. (Score:2)
Conversely, it seems odd to me to respond to such a long, drawn-out thread without having read entire said thread. During any long, drawn-out argument, one side or the other is likely to slip up with regards to examples, wording, or some other semantic error. No one is perfect. I'd personally recommend reading the entire thread next time, as it would most likely shed a little light and give you a much better perspective on the argument as whole. This particular situation would have been no different had you taken the time to do so.
A few points... (Score:2)
Futhermore, what majority desires is not neccessarily better for them. The majority may desire to do geek-cheerleeding, but it hurts everyone as those who're most reasonable are put off by it--causing inbalance. They may be only 5% of slashdot, but in BALANCING slashdot, they carry a great deal more weight.
There is no way to "prove" any of this, at least without extensive effort. That does not mean they're worthless. The majority of slashdot comments, yours included, don't live up to this standard of "proof". You can, however, draw thought and futher review.
My original comment was largely targeted at THE EDITORS. Since it is my belief that the editors know what they're doing, I provided the editors with a RATIONAL argument as to why they MIGHT not want to exclusively pursue the whims of the apparent majority (if Katz-comment-traffic-people are indeed a majority).
W. Richard Stevens (Score:2)
Please don't moderate this as "funny" because it isn't. I'm just saying that your list hasn't really gotten the fine-tooth comb treatment.
--
grappler