5 ms·

>People who can make things work better within this rectangle have power over others; the whitehats who charge $10,000 for something we could teach you how to d

by scythe 15y ago

>People who can make things work better within this rectangle have power over others; the whitehats who charge $10,000 for something we could teach you how to do over the course of a weekend, providing you aren't mentally disabled. This is a common complaint among blackhats: they see whitehats as being in the game for the money and taking advantage of the unenlightened as much as they [the blackhats] themselves do. I don't really know what to make of it.

huckfinnaafb 15y ago
Blackhats can cost organizations way more than whitehats would charge in operating costs, personal identity theft, and reputation. Whitehats are only taking advantage of the unenlightened as much as a mechanic is taking advantage of someone who doesn't know anything about cars - they provide experience and expertise and offer a service for a high price - at least, a higher price than if the client knew how to fix it themselves.
- webXL 15y ago
  I love it when the economically illiterate attack others for "price gouging" as if the third party doesn't have a choice in the matter or they aren't "unenlightened" enough to properly appraise the value of what they are buying. How do I know that my jeweler isn't gouging me on my fiancee's 2 caret diamond ring? Because I know that there's a fixed quantity of available diamonds, and almost everyone would buy them at a given price. And if I need to verify that, I can go to the jeweler down the street. Everyone would buy security consulting at a given price, but that quantity is even more limited than 2 caret diamonds. Why is my house worth a third less than what it was 3 years ago? Because there's at least a third fewer potential buyers than there was when I bought it. I wasn't "price gouged" or fooled in either instance. Whitehats specialize in security and it frees up our time to specialize and produce excess value for others. It's not a conspiracy. If Steve Jobs and LeBron James aren't tricking people into giving them money, neither are whitehats. It's the free market and, believe it or not, it produces wealth.
  - seabee 15y ago
    Also foolish to forget that time is money, you pay knowledge workers for the time they spent studying. You too can "save" $10,000 by doing security yourself, but only if you spend several years training and understanding the domain.
    - marshray 15y ago
      Where can one buy security for $10,000 anyway? I'm not mentally disabled and have spent many weekends learning about info security. What are they even talking about?
  - scythe 15y ago
    >Because I know that there's a fixed quantity of available diamonds Meanwhile... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_vapor_deposition_of_diamond http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_vapor_deposition_of_di...
  - beedogs 15y ago
    Funny that you use diamonds as an example, when the diamond market is one of the most rigged institutions on the planet. Your jeweler is always gouging you when you buy diamonds.
    - cynest 15y ago
      It's less the jeweler and more his suppliers.
    - webXL 15y ago
      Just because a cartel exists somewhere in the supply chain doesn't mean I have to participate in the transaction or my perceived value of it is artificially inflated. The two caret ring was just hypothetical, but there are plenty men who value those rings more than the asking price, and their wives appreciate that. (at least the sensible ones do)
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
- Wilduck 15y ago
  Sure, but what blackhats often claim is that even if a company pays whitehats large sums of money, it is often fairly easy for the blackhats to do just as much damage as they could before.
alexophile 15y ago
That false comparison has always bothered me. Preying on the weak for fun instead of profit doesn't make you right, it makes you sound like a sociopath.
- seats 15y ago
  Preying on the weak for fun Preying on the weak for profit They both kind of have a sociopath sound to them
  - bxr 15y ago
    But, only one of them is the foundation of our society.
    - danielharan 15y ago
      Which one?
    - burgerbrain 15y ago
      I'm not sure which one you think it is, but I sure hope it's the one that does it for fun. A society driven by preying on the weak for profit is far more distressing.
      - bethling 15y ago
        As sad as it sounds, I really think it's preying on the weak for profit. So much of society/economy/whatever very much depends on taking advantage of those who are don't have much other choice in the matter. I don't think it's as visible to us as it used to be, but I think it's still very much there.
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
      - JoshCole 15y ago
        You guys do realize that the bit about preying on the weak for profit is just a bit of rhetoric? It isn't really true. The person who is weak in this case is a customer. This customer is lacking in skills related to computer security. The person who is preying on the weak is someone who invested time into learning about the skills that the customer does not know. Let's say this customer was a farmer. He is using the money he too got from preying on the weak non-farmers to purchase protection. In the case of preying on the weak for fun we also have some things being hidden behind the words. For example, fun in this case means stealing identities, trying to ruin relationships, and sending dildos to innocents. It's cool though for the author because by having things written in these terms its easy for people to talk past each other. They don't realize the context in which he has placed the words in the article. When other people see the terms its easy to think that maybe "preying on the weak for profit" is referring to blackhats instead of capitalism. Another thing worth pointing out is that the person who is volunteering to give away the information for free is actually someone who also put in a lot of time to learn all the things that the customer didn't know. So when he says "I could teach it to him quickly" he is really saying "I will provide the same service in exchange for you're weekend." The thing is that when these two "companies" compete only the one charging money is going to stay afloat. So the dildo sending altruist who wants fun to be the basis of society goes back to sending dildos while the guy who charged the money actually does the job.
dodo53 15y ago
It's a bit of a silly way to respond though - they could either be whitehats themselves and charge a more reasonable amount; or charge the same amount and donate whatever they think is reasonable to education campaigns or whatever.
JoshCole 15y ago
My guess is rationalization. They are lieing to themselves to justify their actions. I've read that even serial-killers think they are doing good. I don't see why blackhats would be much different.
jrwoodruff 15y ago
What corporation would ever trust a 'free' security consultant?

by scythe 15y ago

huckfinnaafb 15y ago

Blackhats can cost organizations way more than whitehats would charge in operating costs, personal identity theft, and reputation. Whitehats are only taking advantage of the unenlightened as much as a mechanic is taking advantage of someone who doesn't know anything about cars - they provide experience and expertise and offer a service for a high price - at least, a higher price than if the client knew how to fix it themselves.

webXL 15y ago
I love it when the economically illiterate attack others for "price gouging" as if the third party doesn't have a choice in the matter or they aren't "unenlightened" enough to properly appraise the value of what they are buying. How do I know that my jeweler isn't gouging me on my fiancee's 2 caret diamond ring? Because I know that there's a fixed quantity of available diamonds, and almost everyone would buy them at a given price. And if I need to verify that, I can go to the jeweler down the street. Everyone would buy security consulting at a given price, but that quantity is even more limited than 2 caret diamonds. Why is my house worth a third less than what it was 3 years ago? Because there's at least a third fewer potential buyers than there was when I bought it. I wasn't "price gouged" or fooled in either instance. Whitehats specialize in security and it frees up our time to specialize and produce excess value for others. It's not a conspiracy. If Steve Jobs and LeBron James aren't tricking people into giving them money, neither are whitehats. It's the free market and, believe it or not, it produces wealth.
- seabee 15y ago
  Also foolish to forget that time is money, you pay knowledge workers for the time they spent studying. You too can "save" $10,000 by doing security yourself, but only if you spend several years training and understanding the domain.
  - marshray 15y ago
    Where can one buy security for $10,000 anyway? I'm not mentally disabled and have spent many weekends learning about info security. What are they even talking about?
- scythe 15y ago
  >Because I know that there's a fixed quantity of available diamonds Meanwhile... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_vapor_deposition_of_diamond http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_vapor_deposition_of_di...
- beedogs 15y ago
  Funny that you use diamonds as an example, when the diamond market is one of the most rigged institutions on the planet. Your jeweler is always gouging you when you buy diamonds.
  - cynest 15y ago
    It's less the jeweler and more his suppliers.
  - webXL 15y ago
    Just because a cartel exists somewhere in the supply chain doesn't mean I have to participate in the transaction or my perceived value of it is artificially inflated. The two caret ring was just hypothetical, but there are plenty men who value those rings more than the asking price, and their wives appreciate that. (at least the sensible ones do)
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
Wilduck 15y ago
Sure, but what blackhats often claim is that even if a company pays whitehats large sums of money, it is often fairly easy for the blackhats to do just as much damage as they could before.

alexophile 15y ago

That false comparison has always bothered me. Preying on the weak for fun instead of profit doesn't make you right, it makes you sound like a sociopath.

seats 15y ago
Preying on the weak for fun Preying on the weak for profit They both kind of have a sociopath sound to them
- bxr 15y ago
  But, only one of them is the foundation of our society.
  - danielharan 15y ago
    Which one?
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    I'm not sure which one you think it is, but I sure hope it's the one that does it for fun. A society driven by preying on the weak for profit is far more distressing.
    - bethling 15y ago
      As sad as it sounds, I really think it's preying on the weak for profit. So much of society/economy/whatever very much depends on taking advantage of those who are don't have much other choice in the matter. I don't think it's as visible to us as it used to be, but I think it's still very much there.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - JoshCole 15y ago
      You guys do realize that the bit about preying on the weak for profit is just a bit of rhetoric? It isn't really true. The person who is weak in this case is a customer. This customer is lacking in skills related to computer security. The person who is preying on the weak is someone who invested time into learning about the skills that the customer does not know. Let's say this customer was a farmer. He is using the money he too got from preying on the weak non-farmers to purchase protection. In the case of preying on the weak for fun we also have some things being hidden behind the words. For example, fun in this case means stealing identities, trying to ruin relationships, and sending dildos to innocents. It's cool though for the author because by having things written in these terms its easy for people to talk past each other. They don't realize the context in which he has placed the words in the article. When other people see the terms its easy to think that maybe "preying on the weak for profit" is referring to blackhats instead of capitalism. Another thing worth pointing out is that the person who is volunteering to give away the information for free is actually someone who also put in a lot of time to learn all the things that the customer didn't know. So when he says "I could teach it to him quickly" he is really saying "I will provide the same service in exchange for you're weekend." The thing is that when these two "companies" compete only the one charging money is going to stay afloat. So the dildo sending altruist who wants fun to be the basis of society goes back to sending dildos while the guy who charged the money actually does the job.

dodo53 15y ago

It's a bit of a silly way to respond though - they could either be whitehats themselves and charge a more reasonable amount; or charge the same amount and donate whatever they think is reasonable to education campaigns or whatever.

JoshCole 15y ago

My guess is rationalization. They are lieing to themselves to justify their actions. I've read that even serial-killers think they are doing good. I don't see why blackhats would be much different.

jrwoodruff 15y ago

What corporation would ever trust a 'free' security consultant?