6 ms·

2600 Magazine condemns DoS attacks

113 points by alecco 16y ago

J3L2404 16y ago
'The assault on Wikileaks must not be overshadowed by the recent denial of service attacks and these certainly must not be allowed to be associated with the hacker community. This will play right into the hands of those who wish to paint us all as threats and clamp down on freedom of speech...'
jacquesm 16y ago
Great piece, but reading it absolutely hurt my eyes. Is there are reason why they enjoy instigating migraine on visitors or is this meant as some kind of obscure test if you really want to read the contents or not ? If you highlight the text it gets marginally better.
- stevelosh 16y ago
  http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/ http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    I know about readability. I just don't understand why people that take the time to write a piece like that don't take the time to make their site readable. It is really totally counterproductive. It should not normally require a browser add-on in order to unlock the content of a webpage for someone with normal (or better than normal) eyesight.
    - tseabrooks 16y ago
      That's mostly a subjective determination though. I found the text to be very readable and easy on the eyes.
    - phwd 16y ago
      I get and agree with what you are saying though the design has stayed the same since 2000. I am sure people have complained in the past but others (maybe even the majority who read 2600 on the regular not just the occasional view from a news aggregation site) have grown accustomed to it. Just a different way to look at the issue.
    - grav1tas 16y ago
      Printer friendly format at the bottom. 2600 doesn't care about readability or design really, it's not their MO and they're cool with it. The site has looked like that for at least 10 years now. I think if a lot of them had their way, you'd still be reading their press stuff on Usenet and only Usenet.
- Pent 16y ago
  I like to browse the web with a style sheets toggle, often it improves my experience :)
- wladimir 16y ago
  Having no problems here, but I guess the readablity of grey text on grey background depends greatly on the contrast of your monitor.
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    I've been playing around with it for a bit and it seems that the most important factor here is viewing angle. If I tilt the monitor the text goes from absolutely illegible to somewhat legible. It's never 'good' though, no matter how I tweak the settings.
- assemble 16y ago
  I've found readability ( http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/ http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/ ) extremely helpful in situations like this.
- crocowhile 16y ago
  Just use the print friendly version of it.
fexl 16y ago
I certainly favor the market (i.e. free people) holding Paypal, Mastercard, and Visa accountable for their policies, but I don't condone vandalism. It seems that "Anonymous" have started on a more constructive approach, which is laudable: http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/09/anonymous-stops-drop.html http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/09/anonymous-stops-drop.ht... (This link courtesy of http://orlingrabbe.com/ http://orlingrabbe.com/, the "Dark Side of the Moon" of web sites.)
M1573RMU74710N 16y ago
More accurate headline: "Emmanual Goldstein (once again) gets his knickers in a twist over someone using the word 'hacker' in a way he doesn't like...." It's actually interesting that there's very little pretense about what the major issue is.... While I don't think I could support something like a DoS attack, I always find it amusing when Emmanuel feels the need to throw a hissy fit about the "correct" use of the word hacker. I guess it's because I find it a little hypocritical...he invariable downplays things like this (as he does in the Press Release) by saying "anyone could have done this, it takes no skill at all...." The problem is he's always saying stuff like "you don't need skill to be a hacker, you just need the hacker spirit"...the hacker spirit being a sort of inquisitive, industrious, and mischevious nature. 2600 Magazine presents all manner of simple and no-skill-needed activities as "hacking", so please forgive my bemusement... It's also funny that it seems like a lot of his associates don't feel the same way... there are occasionally embarrassed silences on Off The Hook when Emannual goes on about how some incident he doesn't approve of "isn't hacking". It seems to me what Emmanual really wants to do is impose arbitrary (though possibly agreeable) moral restrictions on what "hacking" is, and simply changes the definition to suit that without having to admit it. If I'm a little sarcastic, it's because I truly believe this is counter-productive and will backfire. Emmanuel will say "this takes no skill at all, anyone can do it". John Q Public and Suzy Cream-cheese will think "I sure as heck dunno how to do this....it's pretty impressive to me". Meanwhile Emmanual tries to slap down any attempt to distinguish between ethical hackers and the "blackhats". ..."Why do we need that?" he'll say..."We already have a word: 'criminals'". Well....because there clearly is a phenomenon in need of a description here....and "computer criminals" doesn't have quite as nice a ring and isn't as descriptive. Nobody complains we don't need the word "pick-pocket" because we can just call them "criminals".... I think it's a losing battle. Emmanual is bolstering (through implication) the opinion that "any complicated trick is hacking"...and his assurances that this is simple are discarded by people who consider it magical. Meanwhile, he gives them no alternatives...it's "hackers" or nothing....so of course they go with "hackers". Personally, I'm happy if they just qualify it with something like "black-hat hackers"... Overall I'm inclined to agree that these shenanigans are likely unproductive, not difficult to do, and hard to support ethically....still, I think it's fair to say they fit the rather liberal rubric 2600 generally uses to judge what constitutes "hacking" or at least what belongs in a "hacking magazine".
alexwestholm 16y ago
I can't really remember a time when the hacker community wasn't trying to distance itself from script kids. It seems like a moot point among the tech savvy, but an uphill battle with the general public. I guess the layman's concept is focused on effects, which almost makes the script kids more "hackerly" than the author of the DDoS script itself... I guess this is a good juncture to try to correct this perception.
- alecco 16y ago
  Exactly. And this case is even worse since they are willfully cooperating bot-net nodes, they are not even script kiddies. What about "bot sheep" or "script sheep." Those websites claim running a node is "virtually zero risk" or something along the lines.
- phwd 16y ago
  I do believe it is important to correct it. It depends on how you look at the words hacker and tech savvy. Tech savvy these days is anyone with enough common sense to know their way around the computer to accomplish tasks, it is just a matter of digging and googling now. So everyone in this forum is "tech-savvy". So then it is not a moot point because some assume the title of hacker when they have not even took one step inside of bash (I have lurked in the background while I read people speak about hacker being a flexible term that can be applied anywhere but then it becomes one of those metaphors - He was able to put together that item as savvy as a hacker with his tools not a different set of meanings). Hacker is now used for every and anything so the value in the word is lost. 1337 has become a big joke and more of a game play slang. HackerNews (change ay yc spotlight, entrepreneurship,politics,web design freelancing,life advice, jobs, apple, microsoft , app development etc etc.) ,Household Hacker , Hacker (the Movie) all watered down and sometimes misused version of the original meaning. If hackerly means using tools without needing to know the inner workings then I guess that is one man's way to put it, because you will want to remove the boring repetitive sections of your method and make it automated (not having to resolve the problem every time). An other way would be to open things and observe until it is understood how it works. You can also think of the a graphic designer being offended every time someone says they know web/graphic design because they got a pirated version of Photoshop and Dreamweaver online. Or when people "hack" in games, they are using software that exploited the system. He (the original coder) has accomplished his task maybe even learned something new (about the registry , about game mechanics) along the way... The teenager on the other hand who acquired the software ends up just trying to feel like he is better than everyone else when in fact he has unfair advantage. No real "superiority" there. Useless battle or not, it is a title the author prefers to keep as clean as possible (even if that puts him in a elite set)
meadhikari 16y ago
Is this the reason behind the "Anonymous stops dropping DDoS bombs, starts dropping science" thing?
- gloob 16y ago
  Unlikely. I get the impression that the channers and their friends care less about whether or not they are "hackers" (by whatever mostly-arbitrary definition of the word is being used this week), and more about (1) not being arrested, and (2) making a plausible effort at being useful.
  - jkeel 16y ago
    I agree. It seems the "hacker" term is from the media still stuck in the past and not realizing that the Internet is pretty mainstream. I think the people that participate in Anon (since there really isn't a group) look at themselves more as citizens of the Internet using tools available to them. I've heard some guest on a news outlet equate the DDoS attacks as Internet sit-ins. This concept, while not exact is probably the closest analogy I've heard of.
wakeup 16y ago
cowards!
nowarninglabel 16y ago
So, from the latest issue of 2600, I'm led to believe that someone who cuts "$119.95" of a web page and replaces it with "$59.95" so they can get a discount at Best Buy is a hacker, but someone Emmanuel disagrees with is not a hacker?
jackolas 16y ago
I find it hilarious that this is blocked by my school's filter. How dare they denounce script kiddies and support intellectual freedom.
mkramlich 16y ago
i agree with 2600's stance
winternett 16y ago
I love the way they (2600) make an attempt to disconnect themselves from the DDOS attacks in the first part of the letter, but then admit to hosting the material in dispute at the end of the letter. The web is so informative and nonsensical at the same time. Makes for great cinema... Thank goodness for Open Source software though, or we'd never hear about any of this, because it would all be shut down even before anyone could notice. :P
krmboya 16y ago
In short, hackers build things, crackers break them.
iuguy 16y ago
I hate to ask the question, but how is 2600's view of any relevance in the modern world? 2600 Magazine always was to me a kind of basic script kiddie magazine that couldn't even hold a candle holder, let alone a candle to some of the e-zines like Phrack.

113 points by alecco 16y ago

'The assault on Wikileaks must not be overshadowed by the recent denial of service attacks and these certainly must not be allowed to be associated with the hacker community. This will play right into the hands of those who wish to paint us all as threats and clamp down on freedom of speech...'

jacquesm 16y ago

Great piece, but reading it absolutely hurt my eyes. Is there are reason why they enjoy instigating migraine on visitors or is this meant as some kind of obscure test if you really want to read the contents or not ? If you highlight the text it gets marginally better.

stevelosh 16y ago
http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/ http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/
- jacquesm 16y ago
  I know about readability. I just don't understand why people that take the time to write a piece like that don't take the time to make their site readable. It is really totally counterproductive. It should not normally require a browser add-on in order to unlock the content of a webpage for someone with normal (or better than normal) eyesight.
  - tseabrooks 16y ago
    That's mostly a subjective determination though. I found the text to be very readable and easy on the eyes.
  - phwd 16y ago
    I get and agree with what you are saying though the design has stayed the same since 2000. I am sure people have complained in the past but others (maybe even the majority who read 2600 on the regular not just the occasional view from a news aggregation site) have grown accustomed to it. Just a different way to look at the issue.
  - grav1tas 16y ago
    Printer friendly format at the bottom. 2600 doesn't care about readability or design really, it's not their MO and they're cool with it. The site has looked like that for at least 10 years now. I think if a lot of them had their way, you'd still be reading their press stuff on Usenet and only Usenet.
Pent 16y ago
I like to browse the web with a style sheets toggle, often it improves my experience :)
wladimir 16y ago
Having no problems here, but I guess the readablity of grey text on grey background depends greatly on the contrast of your monitor.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  I've been playing around with it for a bit and it seems that the most important factor here is viewing angle. If I tilt the monitor the text goes from absolutely illegible to somewhat legible. It's never 'good' though, no matter how I tweak the settings.
assemble 16y ago
I've found readability ( http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/ http://lab.arc90.com/experiments/readability/ ) extremely helpful in situations like this.
crocowhile 16y ago
Just use the print friendly version of it.

fexl 16y ago

I certainly favor the market (i.e. free people) holding Paypal, Mastercard, and Visa accountable for their policies, but I don't condone vandalism. It seems that "Anonymous" have started on a more constructive approach, which is laudable: http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/09/anonymous-stops-drop.html http://www.boingboing.net/2010/12/09/anonymous-stops-drop.ht... (This link courtesy of http://orlingrabbe.com/ http://orlingrabbe.com/, the "Dark Side of the Moon" of web sites.)

M1573RMU74710N 16y ago

More accurate headline: "Emmanual Goldstein (once again) gets his knickers in a twist over someone using the word 'hacker' in a way he doesn't like...." It's actually interesting that there's very little pretense about what the major issue is.... While I don't think I could support something like a DoS attack, I always find it amusing when Emmanuel feels the need to throw a hissy fit about the "correct" use of the word hacker. I guess it's because I find it a little hypocritical...he invariable downplays things like this (as he does in the Press Release) by saying "anyone could have done this, it takes no skill at all...." The problem is he's always saying stuff like "you don't need skill to be a hacker, you just need the hacker spirit"...the hacker spirit being a sort of inquisitive, industrious, and mischevious nature. 2600 Magazine presents all manner of simple and no-skill-needed activities as "hacking", so please forgive my bemusement... It's also funny that it seems like a lot of his associates don't feel the same way... there are occasionally embarrassed silences on Off The Hook when Emannual goes on about how some incident he doesn't approve of "isn't hacking". It seems to me what Emmanual really wants to do is impose arbitrary (though possibly agreeable) moral restrictions on what "hacking" is, and simply changes the definition to suit that without having to admit it. If I'm a little sarcastic, it's because I truly believe this is counter-productive and will backfire. Emmanuel will say "this takes no skill at all, anyone can do it". John Q Public and Suzy Cream-cheese will think "I sure as heck dunno how to do this....it's pretty impressive to me". Meanwhile Emmanual tries to slap down any attempt to distinguish between ethical hackers and the "blackhats". ..."Why do we need that?" he'll say..."We already have a word: 'criminals'". Well....because there clearly is a phenomenon in need of a description here....and "computer criminals" doesn't have quite as nice a ring and isn't as descriptive. Nobody complains we don't need the word "pick-pocket" because we can just call them "criminals".... I think it's a losing battle. Emmanual is bolstering (through implication) the opinion that "any complicated trick is hacking"...and his assurances that this is simple are discarded by people who consider it magical. Meanwhile, he gives them no alternatives...it's "hackers" or nothing....so of course they go with "hackers". Personally, I'm happy if they just qualify it with something like "black-hat hackers"... Overall I'm inclined to agree that these shenanigans are likely unproductive, not difficult to do, and hard to support ethically....still, I think it's fair to say they fit the rather liberal rubric 2600 generally uses to judge what constitutes "hacking" or at least what belongs in a "hacking magazine".

alexwestholm 16y ago

I can't really remember a time when the hacker community wasn't trying to distance itself from script kids. It seems like a moot point among the tech savvy, but an uphill battle with the general public. I guess the layman's concept is focused on effects, which almost makes the script kids more "hackerly" than the author of the DDoS script itself... I guess this is a good juncture to try to correct this perception.

alecco 16y ago
Exactly. And this case is even worse since they are willfully cooperating bot-net nodes, they are not even script kiddies. What about "bot sheep" or "script sheep." Those websites claim running a node is "virtually zero risk" or something along the lines.
phwd 16y ago
I do believe it is important to correct it. It depends on how you look at the words hacker and tech savvy. Tech savvy these days is anyone with enough common sense to know their way around the computer to accomplish tasks, it is just a matter of digging and googling now. So everyone in this forum is "tech-savvy". So then it is not a moot point because some assume the title of hacker when they have not even took one step inside of bash (I have lurked in the background while I read people speak about hacker being a flexible term that can be applied anywhere but then it becomes one of those metaphors - He was able to put together that item as savvy as a hacker with his tools not a different set of meanings). Hacker is now used for every and anything so the value in the word is lost. 1337 has become a big joke and more of a game play slang. HackerNews (change ay yc spotlight, entrepreneurship,politics,web design freelancing,life advice, jobs, apple, microsoft , app development etc etc.) ,Household Hacker , Hacker (the Movie) all watered down and sometimes misused version of the original meaning. If hackerly means using tools without needing to know the inner workings then I guess that is one man's way to put it, because you will want to remove the boring repetitive sections of your method and make it automated (not having to resolve the problem every time). An other way would be to open things and observe until it is understood how it works. You can also think of the a graphic designer being offended every time someone says they know web/graphic design because they got a pirated version of Photoshop and Dreamweaver online. Or when people "hack" in games, they are using software that exploited the system. He (the original coder) has accomplished his task maybe even learned something new (about the registry , about game mechanics) along the way... The teenager on the other hand who acquired the software ends up just trying to feel like he is better than everyone else when in fact he has unfair advantage. No real "superiority" there. Useless battle or not, it is a title the author prefers to keep as clean as possible (even if that puts him in a elite set)

meadhikari 16y ago

Is this the reason behind the "Anonymous stops dropping DDoS bombs, starts dropping science" thing?

gloob 16y ago
Unlikely. I get the impression that the channers and their friends care less about whether or not they are "hackers" (by whatever mostly-arbitrary definition of the word is being used this week), and more about (1) not being arrested, and (2) making a plausible effort at being useful.
- jkeel 16y ago
  I agree. It seems the "hacker" term is from the media still stuck in the past and not realizing that the Internet is pretty mainstream. I think the people that participate in Anon (since there really isn't a group) look at themselves more as citizens of the Internet using tools available to them. I've heard some guest on a news outlet equate the DDoS attacks as Internet sit-ins. This concept, while not exact is probably the closest analogy I've heard of.

wakeup 16y ago

cowards!

nowarninglabel 16y ago

So, from the latest issue of 2600, I'm led to believe that someone who cuts "$119.95" of a web page and replaces it with "$59.95" so they can get a discount at Best Buy is a hacker, but someone Emmanuel disagrees with is not a hacker?

jackolas 16y ago

I find it hilarious that this is blocked by my school's filter. How dare they denounce script kiddies and support intellectual freedom.

mkramlich 16y ago

i agree with 2600's stance

winternett 16y ago

I love the way they (2600) make an attempt to disconnect themselves from the DDOS attacks in the first part of the letter, but then admit to hosting the material in dispute at the end of the letter. The web is so informative and nonsensical at the same time. Makes for great cinema... Thank goodness for Open Source software though, or we'd never hear about any of this, because it would all be shut down even before anyone could notice. :P

krmboya 16y ago

In short, hackers build things, crackers break them.

iuguy 16y ago

I hate to ask the question, but how is 2600's view of any relevance in the modern world? 2600 Magazine always was to me a kind of basic script kiddie magazine that couldn't even hold a candle holder, let alone a candle to some of the e-zines like Phrack.