4 ms·

For those, like myself, unsure about the significance of this post, this digital magazine has an infrequent and lengthy release cycle. The last issue is from 20

by tbeseda 15y ago

For those, like myself, unsure about the significance of this post, this digital magazine has an infrequent and lengthy release cycle. The last issue is from 2010.

zobzu 15y ago
I'm surprised how the younger generation does not seems to know all these things. It's not like if they weren't well-known. Sometimes I hear "what's 2600?" "why is it called 2600?" from "security professionals". Woot.
- jmspring 15y ago
  Those who forget history are not likely to learn from it... In all seriousness, in this day and age of social media, FB, etc. the old school tech mags just aren't well known. I'm really not surprised that even younger security interested people don't know them. 2600, Phrack, and the like just don't end up on people's radars... I'm not sure why that is.
  - TheCowboy 15y ago
    I think the landscape has changed a lot since then. Back then computer security had more of an underground feel it, where free and open discussion about it was viewed as being discouraged by 'the authorities'. The 'underground' pretty much existed for this reason. Now the information out there is so widely available. Given enough time and effort, you can become pretty well-versed based on what's available. Still, even back then most people weren't aware of Phrack, defcong and 2600. Kevin Mitnick was the only thing people knew of, and that came pretty late. Whereas today if you haven't heard of Anonymous you've been living under a rock. (Phreaking also has become less relevant with the proliferation unlimited cellphone plans, ubiquitous broadband, and proper encryption of cell calls. I never hear the term 'phreaking' anymore, which was a large part of 'the scene'.) Overall, I think the spirit of encouraging the'free exchange and discussion of information' has ultimately been successful.
    - keenerd 15y ago
      > Phreaking also has become less relevant with ... Fortress phones did not help much either. Of course now even those pay phones are getting removed from a lot of locations.
    - zobzu 15y ago
      I think we shouldn't sleep on our laurels. Free exchange of information, security wise, is certainly already a thing of the past. That's not good. Freedom of information (as I prefer to call it), in general, is more than ever at risk. In France, they're outlawing surfing on websites that can be called "terrorist". That include documenting yourself on "bad" countries' culture (bad as in your govt does not like them), or of course, reading phrack's art of exploitation. In Germany using tools such as nmap is outlawed if you're not a security professional. Not need to get started on China or even the USA. Then, take a look at Full disclosure's current activity. It's not dying because it's "an old ml". It's dying because people do not want to exchange free information. Who would, when you can sell it hundred thousand of dollars? (and the answer to that should be somewhere in your soul, right next to Phrack's World News)
      - TheCowboy 15y ago
        My post said nothing to argue 'resting on our laurels' or any other political arguments to do so. It was about today relative to the past. And I really don't see how free exchange is a thing of the past when even on HN there are posts and discussions about security. Sure, there are people working against the free exchange of information, but cherry-picking examples to suggest there has been a total reversal or that nothing has been accomplished is neither realistic nor fair.
  - iamdave 15y ago
    Not that the exception proves the rule, but I'm 26 and have been reading 2600 since about the 8th grade. Passed down from an uncle.
- lawnchair_larry 15y ago
  I doubt it is related to being the younger generation. I think it is more to do with Hacker News not having many "hackers" ;)
  - jcr 15y ago
    You might be right that there aren't many "hackers" on HN, but a lot of it has to do with how you define the term. As for not knowing eclectic but important bits of history like "2600" or even who "Lawnchair Larry" was, experience takes time, and knowledge takes effort. A good example is that most people don't know all of the available terminal commands available on a UNIX(-ish including MacOS/iOS/Android) system, let alone know the reasoning or history behind all those "funny" command names. BTW, I always get a giggle out of your HN user name even though the poor disturbed fellow who tied umteen helium balloons to a lawnchair and shutdown airspace of Los Angeles for a few hours eventually committed suicide after receiving his "Honorable Mention" on the Darwin Awards.
    - gbrindisi 15y ago
      > You might be right that there aren't many "hackers" on HN, but a lot of it has to do with how you define the term. Exactly. Here on HN the confusion is worsened because the definition of "hacker" has shifted from ~"security expert" to ~"technical enterpreuner". Nothing wrong in redefining terms but we shouldn't be surprised if outside here hacker has another meaning.
      - caf 15y ago
        ~"security expert" has never been the canonical definition. http://catb.org/jargon/html/H/hacker.html http://catb.org/jargon/html/H/hacker.html
  - stfu 15y ago
    Ironically true. I have some friends who are afraid of visiting the site on their work machines because their co-workers are "innocent" enough to think hackernews might be actually about "classic" hacking.
- leif 15y ago
  Thankfully, my security professor clued us in. I graduated undergrad last year, and I wrote my first exploit (for that class) based on the phrack article on format string exploits.
  - zobzu 15y ago
    I think the most well-known article is Smashing the stack for fun and profit by Aleph1
    - leif 15y ago
      What I read was scut's article. My exploits were format strings, not overflows. Now that I search for it, it may not have been in phrack after all, though I'm sure I had to read some phrack articles, so it must have referenced them.
- dillona 15y ago
  There are a LOT of "security professionals" who know nothing about security

by tbeseda 15y ago

For those, like myself, unsure about the significance of this post, this digital magazine has an infrequent and lengthy release cycle. The last issue is from 2010.

zobzu 15y ago

I'm surprised how the younger generation does not seems to know all these things. It's not like if they weren't well-known. Sometimes I hear "what's 2600?" "why is it called 2600?" from "security professionals". Woot.

jmspring 15y ago
Those who forget history are not likely to learn from it... In all seriousness, in this day and age of social media, FB, etc. the old school tech mags just aren't well known. I'm really not surprised that even younger security interested people don't know them. 2600, Phrack, and the like just don't end up on people's radars... I'm not sure why that is.
- TheCowboy 15y ago
  I think the landscape has changed a lot since then. Back then computer security had more of an underground feel it, where free and open discussion about it was viewed as being discouraged by 'the authorities'. The 'underground' pretty much existed for this reason. Now the information out there is so widely available. Given enough time and effort, you can become pretty well-versed based on what's available. Still, even back then most people weren't aware of Phrack, defcong and 2600. Kevin Mitnick was the only thing people knew of, and that came pretty late. Whereas today if you haven't heard of Anonymous you've been living under a rock. (Phreaking also has become less relevant with the proliferation unlimited cellphone plans, ubiquitous broadband, and proper encryption of cell calls. I never hear the term 'phreaking' anymore, which was a large part of 'the scene'.) Overall, I think the spirit of encouraging the'free exchange and discussion of information' has ultimately been successful.
  - keenerd 15y ago
    > Phreaking also has become less relevant with ... Fortress phones did not help much either. Of course now even those pay phones are getting removed from a lot of locations.
  - zobzu 15y ago
    I think we shouldn't sleep on our laurels. Free exchange of information, security wise, is certainly already a thing of the past. That's not good. Freedom of information (as I prefer to call it), in general, is more than ever at risk. In France, they're outlawing surfing on websites that can be called "terrorist". That include documenting yourself on "bad" countries' culture (bad as in your govt does not like them), or of course, reading phrack's art of exploitation. In Germany using tools such as nmap is outlawed if you're not a security professional. Not need to get started on China or even the USA. Then, take a look at Full disclosure's current activity. It's not dying because it's "an old ml". It's dying because people do not want to exchange free information. Who would, when you can sell it hundred thousand of dollars? (and the answer to that should be somewhere in your soul, right next to Phrack's World News)
    - TheCowboy 15y ago
      My post said nothing to argue 'resting on our laurels' or any other political arguments to do so. It was about today relative to the past. And I really don't see how free exchange is a thing of the past when even on HN there are posts and discussions about security. Sure, there are people working against the free exchange of information, but cherry-picking examples to suggest there has been a total reversal or that nothing has been accomplished is neither realistic nor fair.
- iamdave 15y ago
  Not that the exception proves the rule, but I'm 26 and have been reading 2600 since about the 8th grade. Passed down from an uncle.
lawnchair_larry 15y ago
I doubt it is related to being the younger generation. I think it is more to do with Hacker News not having many "hackers" ;)
- jcr 15y ago
  You might be right that there aren't many "hackers" on HN, but a lot of it has to do with how you define the term. As for not knowing eclectic but important bits of history like "2600" or even who "Lawnchair Larry" was, experience takes time, and knowledge takes effort. A good example is that most people don't know all of the available terminal commands available on a UNIX(-ish including MacOS/iOS/Android) system, let alone know the reasoning or history behind all those "funny" command names. BTW, I always get a giggle out of your HN user name even though the poor disturbed fellow who tied umteen helium balloons to a lawnchair and shutdown airspace of Los Angeles for a few hours eventually committed suicide after receiving his "Honorable Mention" on the Darwin Awards.
  - gbrindisi 15y ago
    > You might be right that there aren't many "hackers" on HN, but a lot of it has to do with how you define the term. Exactly. Here on HN the confusion is worsened because the definition of "hacker" has shifted from ~"security expert" to ~"technical enterpreuner". Nothing wrong in redefining terms but we shouldn't be surprised if outside here hacker has another meaning.
    - caf 15y ago
      ~"security expert" has never been the canonical definition. http://catb.org/jargon/html/H/hacker.html http://catb.org/jargon/html/H/hacker.html
- stfu 15y ago
  Ironically true. I have some friends who are afraid of visiting the site on their work machines because their co-workers are "innocent" enough to think hackernews might be actually about "classic" hacking.
leif 15y ago
Thankfully, my security professor clued us in. I graduated undergrad last year, and I wrote my first exploit (for that class) based on the phrack article on format string exploits.
- zobzu 15y ago
  I think the most well-known article is Smashing the stack for fun and profit by Aleph1
  - leif 15y ago
    What I read was scut's article. My exploits were format strings, not overflows. Now that I search for it, it may not have been in phrack after all, though I'm sure I had to read some phrack articles, so it must have referenced them.
dillona 15y ago
There are a LOT of "security professionals" who know nothing about security