4 ms·

George Hotz, who has publicly spoken out against piracy, would object to the title "cracker", which connotes piracy.

9999 15y ago
I'm using Stallman's definition of cracker, "people who break computer security" http://stallman.org/cgi-bin/showpage.cgi?path=/archives/archive-2002.html&term=cracker&type=norm&case=0 http://stallman.org/cgi-bin/showpage.cgi?path=/archives/arch... That's exactly what George Hotz does. He breaks security. iPhone security, PS3 security, etc. He's not a hacker according to the RMS definition, the pg definition, or probably most of the classical definitions. He may fit the current journalist's definition of "hacker" which is much closer to RMS' cracker. Since the web site we are on is named hacker news after the original definition, I think we should probably go with cracker for the people that primarily break security.
- elehack 15y ago
  However, he primarily breaks security on devices he purchased, so that he and others can repurpose them for their own needs and desires. That is a very "hacker" thing to do. "I have this device. Can I make it do something useful?" If he were primarily breaking security on other people's computer systems, then the distinction would likely be merited.
  - 9999 15y ago
    The "making it do something useful" part is the hack. Breaking the security to do that thing is a crack.
- nkassis 15y ago
  I disagree with this, let's not forget RMS did a lot of "cracking" himself, like the ITS password hack and some shady things like reverse engineering code from Symbolics and gave it to Lisp Machine. GeoHotz did a hard and ingenious hack to get his ps3 to do things it's not longer suposed to do. That's not cracking per se. I think cracking mostly happens with things like these folks did. Using a simple SQL injection (probably automated) to hack Sony's site. It's all in the ingenuity level. That where the distinction should be.
- robomc 15y ago
  If you're making something run linux that didn't run linux before, then you're a hacker, in the classic sense.

9999 15y ago

I'm using Stallman's definition of cracker, "people who break computer security" http://stallman.org/cgi-bin/showpage.cgi?path=/archives/archive-2002.html&term=cracker&type=norm&case=0 http://stallman.org/cgi-bin/showpage.cgi?path=/archives/arch... That's exactly what George Hotz does. He breaks security. iPhone security, PS3 security, etc. He's not a hacker according to the RMS definition, the pg definition, or probably most of the classical definitions. He may fit the current journalist's definition of "hacker" which is much closer to RMS' cracker. Since the web site we are on is named hacker news after the original definition, I think we should probably go with cracker for the people that primarily break security.

elehack 15y ago
However, he primarily breaks security on devices he purchased, so that he and others can repurpose them for their own needs and desires. That is a very "hacker" thing to do. "I have this device. Can I make it do something useful?" If he were primarily breaking security on other people's computer systems, then the distinction would likely be merited.
- 9999 15y ago
  The "making it do something useful" part is the hack. Breaking the security to do that thing is a crack.
nkassis 15y ago
I disagree with this, let's not forget RMS did a lot of "cracking" himself, like the ITS password hack and some shady things like reverse engineering code from Symbolics and gave it to Lisp Machine. GeoHotz did a hard and ingenious hack to get his ps3 to do things it's not longer suposed to do. That's not cracking per se. I think cracking mostly happens with things like these folks did. Using a simple SQL injection (probably automated) to hack Sony's site. It's all in the ingenuity level. That where the distinction should be.
robomc 15y ago
If you're making something run linux that didn't run linux before, then you're a hacker, in the classic sense.