5 ms·

To many, a hacker is anyone who does something with a computer that is not trivially understood. To law-enforcement and the criminal justice system, a hacker is

To many, a hacker is anyone who does something with a computer that is not trivially understood. To law-enforcement and the criminal justice system, a hacker is someone who commits a computer-involved crime. So to clarify, it's actually still a great time to be the former. It's not now, nor has it really ever been, a good time (or a good idea) to be the latter. The rest of the article seems to just be an explanation of why that is.

jessaustin 14y ago
To many, a hacker is anyone who does something with a computer that is not trivially understood. To law-enforcement and the criminal justice system, a hacker is someone who commits a computer-involved crime. "To law-enforcement and the criminal justice system" the former criterion implies the latter.
- tedunangst 14y ago
  Citation needed. Are they picking up random Haskell programmers off the street now?
  - jessaustin 14y ago
    You probably disagree with the common feeling that the prosecuted actions of e.g. Weev, Swartz, etc. would not actually be crimes in any decent society, but don't pretend you've never heard of them.
    - tedunangst 14y ago
      I disagree with the notion that weev and Swartz were arrested for "doing something that is not trivially understood."
      - jessaustin 14y ago
        To us their actions were trivial. To a trial jury or especially to a grand jury, not so much. But this specific objection actually undermines your entire argument. If justifiable trivial actions can be maliciously portrayed as crimes, so much more can justifiable nontrivial actions. It's a sliding scale anyway: I'm no über-hacker so I know that many things that are trivial to more skilled people would be initially mysterious to me. This is why just law must be based on the consideration of specific acts that either meet or fail to meet concrete widely-understood criteria. Just law does not punish acts that are in a "gray" area, which cannot be said with certainty to be crimes. When uncertainty is a basis for prosecution, the only criteria we have are the potential misunderstandings of the dumbest jury a prosecutor could possibly empanel. At that point, human innovation and happiness will cease. It seems pretty clear at this point that you did not in fact need any citations.
        tedunangst 14y ago
        I don't think trivial is, or has ever been, a synonym for legal.
  - BCM43 14y ago
    Well, I've yet to hear of any Haskell programmers being picked up , but Moxie Marlinspike and Jacob Applebalm have both been harassed repeatedly despite no evidence of any wrongdoing on either of their parts.
    - tedunangst 14y ago
      Applebaum's difficulties don't stem from any misunderstood technical magic afaik. The popo don't like what he's doing, but I think they understand it quite well.
  - georgemcbay 14y ago
    Only if they are running Haskell on their unlocked phones.
- unknsldr 14y ago
  I agree. Ignorance is certainly exacerbating this matter. I was facing criminal charges for a python script that monitored a mail server that I owned. My security clearance was suspended. My professional reputation was tarnished. The charge was that I "hacked" several computers. With no evidence, with little more than a complaint from two people, all of my previously reputable work (never mind my TS clearance) was discarded and I was regarded as a threat. An escort was required if I was near a computer. I could not use any of the Information Systems. I was given a utility closet with a 55 gallon trash can and some cleaning supplies to call my desk. My chair was missing one of the wheels so it rested at an angle. This lasted for four months. It was impossible to prepare myself. How would my script be 'understood'? I was trying to learn python. The script monitored headers for internal messages being forwarded to external accounts and blocked them. A message was sent to the offending party with the policy that prohibited this act. Pulling from the headers, the message included the intended recipient in the body to the offender. Yet it was more readily believed that I "hacked" the computers of the sender and recipient to accomplish the effect. Though this is trivially understood, it is not easily accepted by people who are not aware of the fundamental mechanisms of a mail server. I attempted to explain my script using postal mail as an analogy. I explained the auto response as being similar to vacation messages. The charges escalated from "hacking", which was the compromise of a system I did not own, to interfering with the delivery of sensitive information. I was mortified. In trying to explain what I was doing, I dug a deeper hole. Fortunately for me, definitely not for the 'victims', the information that was being sent was now classified and regarded as sensitive. The fact remained that I owned the mail server and it was not authorized for use transmitting sensitive information, which is the responsibility of the 'victims' to know. The charges were promptly dropped and I spent the next several months clearing up the matter with the rumor mill. My clearance took quite a while to be reinstated. I was no longer regarded as a credible subject matter expert to seek for consultation. I was blacklisted, in a sense. I packed up and moved on when I could. I wanted to better understand Python and mail servers and it nearly crushed me. Once I was labeled as a "hacker", the most diabolical intentions were projected upon my every behavior. Encrypted emails? Suspect. Modified a router to respond to all probe requests? Sinister. Assembled a transparent bridge using commercially available equipment in your garage? Treasonous. I was concerned that my curiosity would held against me. It was a nightmare. That is as mush as I can recount.
anExcitedBeast 14y ago
It's a great time to be both. Profit opportunities are virtually unending for attackers.
subsystem 14y ago
It's only great to be a hacker because the term has largely lost even its extended meaning. The hacker has, for lack of a better word, been gentrified.

jessaustin 14y ago

tedunangst 14y ago
Citation needed. Are they picking up random Haskell programmers off the street now?
- jessaustin 14y ago
  You probably disagree with the common feeling that the prosecuted actions of e.g. Weev, Swartz, etc. would not actually be crimes in any decent society, but don't pretend you've never heard of them.
  - tedunangst 14y ago
    I disagree with the notion that weev and Swartz were arrested for "doing something that is not trivially understood."
    - jessaustin 14y ago
      To us their actions were trivial. To a trial jury or especially to a grand jury, not so much. But this specific objection actually undermines your entire argument. If justifiable trivial actions can be maliciously portrayed as crimes, so much more can justifiable nontrivial actions. It's a sliding scale anyway: I'm no über-hacker so I know that many things that are trivial to more skilled people would be initially mysterious to me. This is why just law must be based on the consideration of specific acts that either meet or fail to meet concrete widely-understood criteria. Just law does not punish acts that are in a "gray" area, which cannot be said with certainty to be crimes. When uncertainty is a basis for prosecution, the only criteria we have are the potential misunderstandings of the dumbest jury a prosecutor could possibly empanel. At that point, human innovation and happiness will cease. It seems pretty clear at this point that you did not in fact need any citations.
      - tedunangst 14y ago
        I don't think trivial is, or has ever been, a synonym for legal.
- BCM43 14y ago
  Well, I've yet to hear of any Haskell programmers being picked up , but Moxie Marlinspike and Jacob Applebalm have both been harassed repeatedly despite no evidence of any wrongdoing on either of their parts.
  - tedunangst 14y ago
    Applebaum's difficulties don't stem from any misunderstood technical magic afaik. The popo don't like what he's doing, but I think they understand it quite well.
- georgemcbay 14y ago
  Only if they are running Haskell on their unlocked phones.
unknsldr 14y ago
I agree. Ignorance is certainly exacerbating this matter. I was facing criminal charges for a python script that monitored a mail server that I owned. My security clearance was suspended. My professional reputation was tarnished. The charge was that I "hacked" several computers. With no evidence, with little more than a complaint from two people, all of my previously reputable work (never mind my TS clearance) was discarded and I was regarded as a threat. An escort was required if I was near a computer. I could not use any of the Information Systems. I was given a utility closet with a 55 gallon trash can and some cleaning supplies to call my desk. My chair was missing one of the wheels so it rested at an angle. This lasted for four months. It was impossible to prepare myself. How would my script be 'understood'? I was trying to learn python. The script monitored headers for internal messages being forwarded to external accounts and blocked them. A message was sent to the offending party with the policy that prohibited this act. Pulling from the headers, the message included the intended recipient in the body to the offender. Yet it was more readily believed that I "hacked" the computers of the sender and recipient to accomplish the effect. Though this is trivially understood, it is not easily accepted by people who are not aware of the fundamental mechanisms of a mail server. I attempted to explain my script using postal mail as an analogy. I explained the auto response as being similar to vacation messages. The charges escalated from "hacking", which was the compromise of a system I did not own, to interfering with the delivery of sensitive information. I was mortified. In trying to explain what I was doing, I dug a deeper hole. Fortunately for me, definitely not for the 'victims', the information that was being sent was now classified and regarded as sensitive. The fact remained that I owned the mail server and it was not authorized for use transmitting sensitive information, which is the responsibility of the 'victims' to know. The charges were promptly dropped and I spent the next several months clearing up the matter with the rumor mill. My clearance took quite a while to be reinstated. I was no longer regarded as a credible subject matter expert to seek for consultation. I was blacklisted, in a sense. I packed up and moved on when I could. I wanted to better understand Python and mail servers and it nearly crushed me. Once I was labeled as a "hacker", the most diabolical intentions were projected upon my every behavior. Encrypted emails? Suspect. Modified a router to respond to all probe requests? Sinister. Assembled a transparent bridge using commercially available equipment in your garage? Treasonous. I was concerned that my curiosity would held against me. It was a nightmare. That is as mush as I can recount.

anExcitedBeast 14y ago

It's a great time to be both. Profit opportunities are virtually unending for attackers.

subsystem 14y ago

It's only great to be a hacker because the term has largely lost even its extended meaning. The hacker has, for lack of a better word, been gentrified.