4 ms·

That's a strange thing to read on Hacker news. Isn't that description the definition of hack value? As in http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/H/hack-value.html http

by Aachen 2y ago

That's a strange thing to read on Hacker news. Isn't that description the definition of hack value? As in http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/H/hack-value.html http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/H/hack-value.html Now, it depends what the "it" is referring to here, but so far all I've heard is about an alert() message saying the usernames will be sent to a breach alerting site. If they're doing it just for the heck of it, it's still costing a lot of people a lot of time that they could have spent doing better things, but I'd reserve special places in hell for the people who do plan this out carefully and make malicious demands

jonahx 2y ago
There is a big difference between doing something for pure curiosity, love, or exploration and doing something directly harmful to other people for the same reasons. One is art; the other is sadism.
- Aachen 2y ago
  I'm not sure that placing free long distance calls isn't harmful to the org whose infrastructure you're using for your own benefit, but 2600 (Hz) is a respected hacker magazine and phreaking and Cap'n crunch whistles are seen as cool Hacking the Internet Archive and only placing an alert with a provocative message, I could see my teenage self do that. My judgment of the character is going to depend on what it turns out they've actually done Of course, my grown up self (or late teen also, as I've done responsible disclosures back then as well) would rather have seen them do a coordinated vulnerability disclosure, but alas, I just meant to remark upon the "special place in hell" for not having a plan or motive bit *Edit:* wait, I just saw in the article (I opened the thread before the link was changed) that this quote refers to a DDoS, not the alert() message that the thread was initially about > the site was experiencing a DDoS attack, posting on Mastodon that “According to their twitter, they’re doing it just to do it. That's indeed just destructive and not related to (hacker) curiosity...
  - jonahx 2y ago
    There's a spectrum and case by case judgement. I'd agree your examples are harmless even if technically they harm the phone company. Taking down the internet archive just for the hell of it has a distinctly less "cool" or "fun" flavor, to my eye.
    - alwa 2y ago
      And I mean… one was a profit-making monopoly, and the other is a hacker-flavored charity doing a public service on a shoestring budget of donations.
  - snvzz 2y ago
    Doing the internet equivalent of burning the largest library in the world is not exactly a good person's behavior.
    - oxygen_crisis 2y ago
      This isn't the equivalent of burning it, a closer equivalent would be barricading it for a while. Still awful, but nowhere near as awful as the former.
  - mlyle 2y ago
    > I'm not sure that placing free long distance calls isn't harmful to the org whose infrastructure you're using for your own benefit, If there's a call you wouldn't make unless it was free, the infrastructure isn't at capacity, and you're not acting otherwise in a detrimental fashion to other users of the infrastructure-- there's no harm to that organization.
    - Aachen 2y ago
      Certainly a fair point, but it also costs a lot of person-hours to patch up that infrastructure's security and trace who's placing the calls when one could just choose not to do this fraud in the first place. I am not old enough to know whether carriers also charged each other back then, but at least nowadays it could also incur charges for the originating party; costs which the caller isn't covering Toying with the system, learning how it works and finding what you can make it do, there's a certain art to it and I'd encourage anyone to at least tinker with the systems they own (and everything else within reason and ethics), but there's two sides to nearly everything
- lolinder 2y ago
  Is it better to deface a website for ransom or to support a scam than it is to deface a website because you're bored? The action is reprehensible either way, but if this is truly just an old-fashioned Anonymous attack with no ulterior motive beyond just being bad that's honestly kind of refreshing.
ttepasse 2y ago
https://www.ccc.de/en/hackerethik https://www.ccc.de/en/hackerethik > Make public data available, protect private data.
- Aachen 2y ago
  For all I know, they've given the private data to an organisation dedicated to alerting people about breaches. If they fear that the data may also have been accessed by others, that's not a reprehensible thing to do by itself. Besides the DDoS apparently being from the same author (which seems odd because those ethics are incongruous), I don't know what else they've done so I don't know that it's in violation of what you linked
zymhan 2y ago
It isn't "breaking into things" hackers. It's "whipping something together" hackers. Breaking into the Internet Archive's servers is like breaking into your public library. There's no honor to be had.
- yard2010 2y ago
  Imagine physically breaking into your local library for the lulz
Apocryphon 2y ago
This isn't Cracker News.
klntsky 2y ago
True hackers probably have a special place in hell, but, in a good sense.
- yard2010 2y ago
  If god is the good guy and satan is the bad guy - why do bad people sent to hell? They would just chill with the devil laughing about all the DDoS they did for the lulz.
  - latency-guy2 2y ago
    Satan is canonical for one thing in particular out of most things - he does not like humanity. Getting sent there isn't a fun field trip where you get to hang out with your buddies/partners in crime after the game is over, presumably. Think of it more along the lines of you having a blinding hatred of mosquitos, and then they keep getting sent to you, and at the same time you're a very powerful, capable individual who can deal with hordes of mosquitos in fantastically wicked ways.
NelsonMinar 2y ago
Did you miss the part about the DDOS attack?
- Aachen 2y ago
  I did actually, since the quote didn't specify and the submission's link changed after I opened the comments. Thanks for pointing it out in case I hadn't seen it in the meantime!
skeaker 2y ago
Accessing the data is one (hackery) thing, haphazardly publishing it and not responsibly disclosing it is another (criminal) thing.

by Aachen 2y ago

jonahx 2y ago

There is a big difference between doing something for pure curiosity, love, or exploration and doing something directly harmful to other people for the same reasons. One is art; the other is sadism.

Aachen 2y ago
I'm not sure that placing free long distance calls isn't harmful to the org whose infrastructure you're using for your own benefit, but 2600 (Hz) is a respected hacker magazine and phreaking and Cap'n crunch whistles are seen as cool Hacking the Internet Archive and only placing an alert with a provocative message, I could see my teenage self do that. My judgment of the character is going to depend on what it turns out they've actually done Of course, my grown up self (or late teen also, as I've done responsible disclosures back then as well) would rather have seen them do a coordinated vulnerability disclosure, but alas, I just meant to remark upon the "special place in hell" for not having a plan or motive bit *Edit:* wait, I just saw in the article (I opened the thread before the link was changed) that this quote refers to a DDoS, not the alert() message that the thread was initially about > the site was experiencing a DDoS attack, posting on Mastodon that “According to their twitter, they’re doing it just to do it. That's indeed just destructive and not related to (hacker) curiosity...
- jonahx 2y ago
  There's a spectrum and case by case judgement. I'd agree your examples are harmless even if technically they harm the phone company. Taking down the internet archive just for the hell of it has a distinctly less "cool" or "fun" flavor, to my eye.
  - alwa 2y ago
    And I mean… one was a profit-making monopoly, and the other is a hacker-flavored charity doing a public service on a shoestring budget of donations.
- snvzz 2y ago
  Doing the internet equivalent of burning the largest library in the world is not exactly a good person's behavior.
  - oxygen_crisis 2y ago
    This isn't the equivalent of burning it, a closer equivalent would be barricading it for a while. Still awful, but nowhere near as awful as the former.
- mlyle 2y ago
  > I'm not sure that placing free long distance calls isn't harmful to the org whose infrastructure you're using for your own benefit, If there's a call you wouldn't make unless it was free, the infrastructure isn't at capacity, and you're not acting otherwise in a detrimental fashion to other users of the infrastructure-- there's no harm to that organization.
  - Aachen 2y ago
    Certainly a fair point, but it also costs a lot of person-hours to patch up that infrastructure's security and trace who's placing the calls when one could just choose not to do this fraud in the first place. I am not old enough to know whether carriers also charged each other back then, but at least nowadays it could also incur charges for the originating party; costs which the caller isn't covering Toying with the system, learning how it works and finding what you can make it do, there's a certain art to it and I'd encourage anyone to at least tinker with the systems they own (and everything else within reason and ethics), but there's two sides to nearly everything
lolinder 2y ago
Is it better to deface a website for ransom or to support a scam than it is to deface a website because you're bored? The action is reprehensible either way, but if this is truly just an old-fashioned Anonymous attack with no ulterior motive beyond just being bad that's honestly kind of refreshing.

ttepasse 2y ago

https://www.ccc.de/en/hackerethik https://www.ccc.de/en/hackerethik > Make public data available, protect private data.

Aachen 2y ago
For all I know, they've given the private data to an organisation dedicated to alerting people about breaches. If they fear that the data may also have been accessed by others, that's not a reprehensible thing to do by itself. Besides the DDoS apparently being from the same author (which seems odd because those ethics are incongruous), I don't know what else they've done so I don't know that it's in violation of what you linked

zymhan 2y ago

It isn't "breaking into things" hackers. It's "whipping something together" hackers. Breaking into the Internet Archive's servers is like breaking into your public library. There's no honor to be had.

yard2010 2y ago
Imagine physically breaking into your local library for the lulz

Apocryphon 2y ago

This isn't Cracker News.

klntsky 2y ago

True hackers probably have a special place in hell, but, in a good sense.

yard2010 2y ago
If god is the good guy and satan is the bad guy - why do bad people sent to hell? They would just chill with the devil laughing about all the DDoS they did for the lulz.
- latency-guy2 2y ago
  Satan is canonical for one thing in particular out of most things - he does not like humanity. Getting sent there isn't a fun field trip where you get to hang out with your buddies/partners in crime after the game is over, presumably. Think of it more along the lines of you having a blinding hatred of mosquitos, and then they keep getting sent to you, and at the same time you're a very powerful, capable individual who can deal with hordes of mosquitos in fantastically wicked ways.

NelsonMinar 2y ago

Did you miss the part about the DDOS attack?

Aachen 2y ago
I did actually, since the quote didn't specify and the submission's link changed after I opened the comments. Thanks for pointing it out in case I hadn't seen it in the meantime!

skeaker 2y ago

Accessing the data is one (hackery) thing, haphazardly publishing it and not responsibly disclosing it is another (criminal) thing.