Hacking, Hackers, and Hacktivism: Difference between revisions

From Technologies and Politics of Control
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
(30 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{ClassCalendar}}
{{ClassCalendar}}


'''April 9'''
'''April 22'''


Spend five minutes with anyone who studies “hackers” and you will quickly learn that the term is used to define a wide array of discrete subcultures, from homebrew computer programmers all the way through to military-industrial network vulnerability experts. If there is one unifying characteristic amongst all of these cultures (and there may not be), it is most likely the acknowledgement between these groups that the limitations imposed by code as a mode of regulating behavior can, and should, be subverted. Today we look to hackers, who they are, what they do, and what rules and norms govern those who do not recognize code as a governing influence.
Spend five minutes with anyone who studies “hackers” and you will quickly learn that the term is used to define a wide array of discrete subcultures, from homebrew computer programmers all the way through to military-industrial network vulnerability experts. If there is one unifying characteristic amongst all of these cultures (and there may not be), it is most likely the acknowledgement between these groups that the limitations imposed by code as a mode of regulating behavior can, and should, be subverted. Today we look to hackers, who they are, what they do, and what rules and norms govern those who do not recognize code as a governing influence.
Line 8: Line 8:


== Readings ==
== Readings ==
; Defining hackers, hacking, and hacktivism


* [http://gabriellacoleman.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Coleman-Phreaks-Hackers-Trolls.pdf Gabriella Coleman, Phreaks, Hackers, and Trolls: The Politics of Transgression and Spectacle (from ''The Social Media Reader'')]
* [http://gabriellacoleman.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Coleman-Phreaks-Hackers-Trolls.pdf Gabriella Coleman, Phreaks, Hackers, and Trolls: The Politics of Transgression and Spectacle (from ''The Social Media Reader'')]
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Payback Wikipedia, Operation Payback]


* [http://vimeo.com/46450688 Molly Sauter, Activist DDOS Campaigns: When Similes and Metaphors Fail] (video, watch from to 1:56 to 21:44)
* [http://vimeo.com/46450688 Molly Sauter, Activist DDOS Campaigns: When Similes and Metaphors Fail] (video, watch from to 1:56 to 21:44)


:* Sauter uses the term "DDoS" throughout. This is an abbreviation for "distributed denial of service," a specific form of attack to a web server described in more detail [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDos#Distributed_attack here].
:* Sauter uses the term "DDoS" throughout. This is an abbreviation for "distributed denial of service," a specific form of attack to a web server described in more detail [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDos#Distributed_attack here].
* [https://soundcloud.com/bwalker/doing-it-for-the-lulz Benjamen Walker, Doing it for the LULZ (from ''Too Much Information'')] (11:00 to 22:45 only, language at times is NSFW. ''Too Much Information'' drifts between fiction and non-fiction, but this excerpt is non-fiction.)
; Law and law enforcement


* [http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/docs/ccmanual.pdf United States Department of Justice, Prosecuting Computer Crimes] (read pages 1-11: Introduction to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Key Definitions)
* [http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/docs/ccmanual.pdf United States Department of Justice, Prosecuting Computer Crimes] (read pages 1-11: Introduction to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Key Definitions)


* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sundevil Wikipedia, Operation Sundevil]
* [http://www.cjr.org/cloud_control/scripps_hackers.php Sarah Laskow, Reporting, Or Illegal Hacking]
 
; Case studies
 
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Payback Wikipedia, Operation Payback]
 
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Chanology Wikipedia, Project Chanology]
 
* [http://www.dmlp.org/blog/2013/impact-aarons-law-aaron-swartzs-case Andy Sellars, The Impact of "Aaron's Law" on Aaron Swartz's Case]
 
* [http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/appeals-court-reverses-hackertroll-weev-conviction-and-sentence/ David Kravets, Appeals Court Reverses Hacker/Troll "Weev" Conviction and Sentence]


* [http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/secrecy-surrounding-zero-day-exploits-industry-spurs-calls-for-government-oversight/2012/09/01/46d664a6-edf7-11e1-afd6-f55f84bc0c41_story.html James Ball, Secrecy Surrounding “Zero-Day Exploits” Industry Spurs Calls for Government Oversight]
* [http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/2013/1113/Hacking-tool-threatens-Healthcare.gov-site Jeff Ward-Bailey, Hacking Tool Threatens Healthcare.gov Site]


== Optional Readings ==
== Optional Readings ==


* [http://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/past-debates/item/576-the-cyber-war-threat-has-been-grossly-exaggerated Intelligence Squared Debate: "The Cyberwar Threat Has Been Grossly Exaggerated"] (an [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford-Style_debate#Oxford-Style_debate Oxford-style debate] with Marc Rotenberg, Bruce Schneier, Mike McConnell, and Jonathan Zittrain; watch the video of the debate)
* [http://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/past-debates/item/576-the-cyber-war-threat-has-been-grossly-exaggerated Intelligence Squared Debate: "The Cyberwar Threat Has Been Grossly Exaggerated"] (an [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford-Style_debate#Oxford-Style_debate Oxford-style debate] with Marc Rotenberg, Bruce Schneier, Mike McConnell, and Jonathan Zittrain; watch the video of the debate)
* [http://www.law.northwestern.edu/lawreview/v107/n2/795/LR107n2Matwyshyn.pdf Andrea Matwyshyn, Hacking Speech: Informational Speech and the First Amendment]
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/31/technology/chinese-hackers-infiltrate-new-york-times-computers.html?_r=0 Nicole Perlroth, Hackers in China Attacked The Times for Last 4 Months (''New York Times'')]


* [https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-parties-use-influence-to-halt-operation-payback-101120/ TorrentFreak, Pirate Parties Use Influence to Halt Anonymous’ Operation Payback]
* [https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-parties-use-influence-to-halt-operation-payback-101120/ TorrentFreak, Pirate Parties Use Influence to Halt Anonymous’ Operation Payback]
* [https://soundcloud.com/bwalker/doing-it-for-the-lulz Benjamen Walker, Doing it for the LULZ (from ''Too Much Information'')] (11:00 to 22:45 only, language at times is NSFW)


* [https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/interactive/events/2012/10/soghoian Christopher Soghoian, The Growing Trade in Software Security Exploits]
* [https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/interactive/events/2012/10/soghoian Christopher Soghoian, The Growing Trade in Software Security Exploits]


* [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/31/technology/chinese-hackers-infiltrate-new-york-times-computers.html?_r=0 Nicole Perlroth, Hackers in China Attacked The Times for Last 4 Months (''New York Times'')]


</onlyinclude>
</onlyinclude>
Line 40: Line 55:


== Links ==
== Links ==
===Links Shared in Adobe Connect Session===
CAPTCHAs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAPTCHA
Operation Payback: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Payback


The MIT hacks gallery: http://hacks.mit.edu/
Boston Globe paywall: http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/242132/boston-globe-drops-paywall-adds-meter-instead/


MIT Tetris Hack: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAIPUGO1iko
Examples of Robots.txt: http://www.robotstxt.org/orig.html


Steven Levy's Hackers: http://www.amazon.com/Hackers-Heroes-Computer-Revolution-Anniversary/dp/1449388396
Adblock Plus: https://adblockplus.org/


Captain Crunch Whistle Hack:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Draper
Heartbleed: http://heartbleed.com
   
More on heartbleed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heartbleed


Joe Engressia is the blind phreaker: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joybubbles
XKCD explainer of heartbleed: http://xkcd.com/1354/


WarGames: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WarGames
OpenSSL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSSL


Able Archer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83
Bruce on Heartbleed: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/04/heartbleed.html


White Hat: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_hat_(computer_security)
How Netflix Reverse Engineered Hollywood: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/01/how-netflix-reverse-engineered-hollywood/282679/


Black Hat: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hat_hacking#Black_hat
Zombie network: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_(computer_science)


Grey Hat: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_hat
LOIC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_Orbit_Ion_Cannon


Zero Day Exploit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-day_attack
Molly's Book: http://www.amazon.com/The-Coming-Swarm-Hacktivism-Disobedience/dp/1623564565


Google's Application to apply for an exploit bounty: http://www.google.com/about/appsecurity/reward-program/
Evgeny Morozov defending DDOS as civil disobedience: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2010/12/in_defense_of_ddos.html


Article about Chrome bounty: http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9204882/Google_pays_record_bounty_for_Chrome_bug
Troll Face: http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/trollface-coolface-problem


National Vulnerability Database: http://nvd.nist.gov/
CALEA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_Law_Enforcement_Act


Cablegate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_diplomatic_cables_leak
CFAA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act


Tom Cruise video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFBZ_uAbxS0
Text of CFAA: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1030


Operation Clambake: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Clambake
Teen hacks into worcester airport: http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9803/18/juvenile.hacker/


Hacker zines like 2600: http://www.papercutzinelibrary.org/wordpress/
Article discussing War Games impact on CFAA: http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/students/groups/is/files/2012/02/Kapitanyan.FE_.Final_.Weber_.pdf


Electronic Disturbance Theater: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Disturbance_Theater
Weev, whose conviction was just tossed out: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/appeals-court-reverses-hackertroll-weev-conviction-and-sentence/


Ban on Guy Fawkes Mask: http://rt.com/news/bahrain-ban-mask-vendetta-478/
ICCID: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICCID#ICCID


Operation Chanology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Chanology
Heartbleed test: https://filippo.io/Heartbleed/


Al Qassam attacking US banks: http://news.softpedia.com/news/al-Qassam-Cyber-Fighters-to-Resume-Attacks-Against-US-Banks-on-March-5-332647.shtml
Google bug bounties: http://www.google.com/about/appsecurity/reward-program/


Operation Ababil: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ababil
$115k for an apple bug: http://www.forbes.com/sites/firewall/2010/03/25/the-bounty-for-an-apple-bug-115000/


***
Fire Sale Hacker message on Live Free or Die Hard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyGhT3YTP7A


This is for pure enjoyment, but fans of Molly's discussion on media portrayal of hackers will enjoy this article by [http://www.theonion.com/articles/fasttalking-computer-hacker-just-has-to-break-thro,32000/ The Onion]. [[User:Asellars|asellars]] 10:00, 10 April 2013 (EDT)
Story about the mom who created fake myspace profile: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1089908/Mother-faces-jail-300-000-fine-setting-fake-MySpace-profile-bully-girl-later-killed-herself.html


== Class Discussion ==
US federal sentencing guidelines: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Federal_Sentencing_Guidelines
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">'''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Asellars|Asellars]] 15:29, 21 January 2013 (EST)'''</div>
 
MBTA vs Anderson: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Bay_Transportation_Authority_v._Anderson
 
Aaron Swartz: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz


*****
MAC address: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAC_address


I was particularly interested in this week's reading: United States Department of Justice, Prosecuting Computer Crimes it was interesting to see the amount of amendments as the years went by that the federal government attempted to control the internet behaviors of the public. This reading relates closely with my topic for my final paper of the governments control on a macro level in contrast to my paper which exams a small micro community that the federal government is attempting to control. In the readings it appears as if the government reacts in the way of a bell shape curve. Initially they are reactive in nature to something that they are late in response to, then they build up the momentum with legislation, then they continue to amend this legislation to be more and more restrictive until overregulation takes place. The federal government should look into addressing this method of over regulation for it does not protect the public from hackers or those that intend to do wrong, as much as it hurts the freedoms of the public citizens. [[User:Interestingcomments|Interestingcomments]] 10:49, 9 April 2013 (EDT)
Secret Service's National Computer Forensics Institute: https://www.ncfi.usss.gov/ncfi/


*****
Felon Voting: http://felonvoting.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000286


Computer Hacking!  Whether done for national intelligence reasons, protesting for civil rights, or simply causing disarray, hacking is now a common reality.  The articles and video this week shed light on various hacking attributes. For this post, I’d like to address two:  ''the relationship between hacking and activism (hacktivism), and identify theft.''
RECAP the law: https://www.recapthelaw.org


As noted in Molly Sauter’s presentation, a primary goal of hacking is to attract media coverage that reveals the identity of those participating in a given action.  This concept is an interesting one to consider from a retrospective viewpoint:  before the Internet, how did information about public officials or public entities leak in the same manner?  Did the same amount of information spill?  Or, was there a much greater sense of privacy throughout industries, the government, and civil life?  Mass media is a powerful mechanism that can "change the word" overnight, but how can we examine the interplay between the Internet and media?  From one perspective, they are the same: messages spread quickly to large audiences across both avenues.  From another perspective, the Internet acts as a stimulus that shapes media coverage.  In other words, it's the first stepping-stone that turns privacy into publicity, which can begin through hacking.
== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">'''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution.  This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 10:28, 17 December 2013 (EST)</div>


As defined on the Wikipedia page [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacktivism], ''"Hacktivism is the use of computers and computer networks to promote political ends, chiefly free speech, human rights, and information ethics."''  One important characteristic to consider with hacktivism, however, is "perspective."  It’s all about one’s perspective surrounding a given "hacktivist's act:"  those who believe they are simply exercising their freedom of speech may inevitably be committing felonies that destroy other people's identity or an organizations' operationsHacking Iran's nuclear system is much different than hacking someone's bank account, but at the same time they're both deceitful, correct?  When we think about activism, we think "good:"  activists fight toward a common cause to create positive change in society (most commonly).  When we think about hacktivism, however, ''good'' is not always the first thing that comes to mind. What do you think about the interplay with these two words?  Can they mean the same thing or are they always different?
:In July 2012, someone successfully hacked my iphone and installed spy software on it. Any and all movements on my iPhone were being stored/tracked unbeknownst to me, including app activity (Chase Bank, emails, etc) for one month. I found out about it when I had taken my iPhone in a shop to get checked out - the screen would glitch at times and would randomly lose about 1% per minute. (I learned this was when my GPS data was being tracked up to minute). Among other things, the next step was to file a police report of this incident for my personal safety, as I’ll never be certain which data of mine was compromisedAt the time I went to local police, either they didn’t care enough or they just didn’t have proper protocol to handle it.
:I understand this is a miniscule crime, in comparison to the huge cyber-crimes in the class readings. However, it lead me to research how equipped local police are for such smaller incidences. The result: They're not. (yet).  I’m certain similar, smaller crimes will only increase over time and will be dealt with by the local police. While crime is increasingly moving online, state and local police are having a hard time keeping up. If the case is significant enough, the police have to hire specialized cyber-security companies to conduct digital investigations. The techniques the police will need to be equipped with are going to have to be more “IT specialist” and less “Law and Order” over the next few years. It seems hackers will be one step ahead, at a local level, until the police shift their skill set to more IT training. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 02:41, 21 April 2014 (EDT)


The second point I’d like to address is "privacy."  When examining confidentiality today, I often ask myself what is truly private online?  The article about China infiltrating the New York Times, or the reference about hacking Sarah Pallin's personal information illustrates that none of us are truly safe from being hackedEmails are not private; Facebook is not private; and to certain extent, passwords are not private.  With this in mind, how can we protect ourselves from identity theft?  How can we create passwords that are impossible to hack?  How can we protect our online identity (i.e., our real-world identity)?  As we all file our 2012 taxes, for example, consider IRS refund fraud....Citizens with no IT background are able to earn tens of thousands of dollars through online hacking; and the majority are never caught.  Are these types of hackers also hacktivists, because their united behind a common cause?  What defines a hacker vs. a hacktivist?  Why is it OK to invade one person’s or organization’s privacy, but not another’s?  Is it OK when the vast majority disagree with a person's viewpoint, or a country's ideals, or a company's mission? Or, is hacking always wrong?
:: I'm very glad you mentioned this because I completely agree. On a smaller level such as the local police, I agree that they do not have the resources or the structure in place yet to deal with hacking of cell phones and breaches of personal information.  While large national crimes are handled properly, there should also be an active protocol for situations such as this, which happen very often. The lack of a targeted action by law enforcement against these small time criminals facilitate identity theft and unless there is a strong development in the law enforcement IT department, chances are these crimes will only increase with time. [[User:Lpereira|Lpereira]] 09:16, 22 April 2014 (EDT)
 
I've asked a lot of questions in this post, because hacking in another complex topic to dissect.  Many of  us "live online," and for that reason I question what will happen in the near- and long-term as our day-to-day lives become even more virtual.   No matter how vigilant we are, no matter how many times we change our password, and no matter how many password characters we use, we may all, eventually, be hacked! [[User:Zak Paster|Zak Paster]] 11:28, 9 April 2013 (EDT)


Having been a student, practitioner as a criminal and Constitutional lawyer, a teacher, a journalism and most importantly an observer of government and political behavior along with these touching subjects of invasion of privacy, free speech, independence, communication, and what should be a global effort at cooperation for the advancement of the entire society, for over 50 years *yee gads, I must be old) I have seen government in action, in inaction and pretending it is in action. The latter is the rule, not the exception. Our elected officials and the real powers behind the throne, non-elected officials and lobbyists create a proverbial chicken coup run by the fox. The top echelon of elected officials are figureheads who revel in their fame, power and fortune, Whether it be going through the motions at airport security, or passing insignificant laws that are more bark than bite that they expertly market to create the impression of having meat behind them they exist in their ivory towers.  The problem in this country particularly is that most of us are fat cats living a lifestyle greater than an society before and really do not want to upset the real status quo. So they sit back for the most part and not rock the boat.  The Dutch 350 years ago could not care if Holland or England was in power, so long as they were left alone to do their business.  In Sicily where my ancestors lived the so-called "Mafia" operated in a way much like the American Dutch, but of course in a much more violent and way to control others. Sicily has been "governed" due to its strategic location along the first major trade routes by virtually every seagoing power of the last two millenniums, but early in the 2nd A.D. the Mafia was formed and since until recent attacks by the government as their power lessened has existed as the real governing body.
::: Several readings this week caused me to think about the perceived value, real and potential, of personal data. Targeted hacking of trade secrets, governments, publications like the New York Times and other large-scale operations are rooted in fairly straightforward incentives. So too are hacktivists and hackers that are "doing it for the lulz"- outcomes that are for more about provoking a response or creating change. Targeted hacks of individuals for personal data not only are much more difficult to prevent, identify and pursue on the part of law enforcement- they also happen on a scale that is not seen to have a significant enough impact economically, societally or organizationally to receive the attention truly deserved. Given the frequency of such instances, and the yearly increase in information and services processed solely online, the public service and private sector incentive to have structures in place to respond to such attacks surely must reach a tipping point soon? [[User:akk22|akk22]] 14:26, 22 April 2014 (EDT)-----
Cyber warfare will take on a greater importance in conventional warfare and Government hackers will be crucial to this. It only makes sense as weapons, communications and systems become more sophisticated. Hackers may be used to break into countries systems to steal data and cause widespread disruption or break into the phones of country leaders and their key staff. This is evidenced in the Ukraine crisis by relentless hacking attacks on Russian websites by Ukraninan hackers and visa-versa. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-05/russia-ukraine-standoff-going-online-as-hackers-attack.html [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 01:06, 22 April 2014 (EDT)


What does this all have to do with the Internet and government controlI will tell you, it is a similar scenario, a similar mathematical formula in which the power is in the people, but until the people stop being conned they will never take it. Now, I am not and hope I do not sound like a Communist by our principals claims that we are a country, "By and for the People," and our only hope and salvation as a society is to wake up and become active participants and uncover the charades we are subject to by those we elect who under the color of authority are paper pushers.
----
[[User:Rich|Rich]] 12:24, 9 April 2013 (EDT)
Andy, thanks for your article on the Aaron Schwartz prosecutionAs you put it, "CFAA is shockingly broad when it is laid out" -- but that's not the only issue with it. It's just another case of private industry co-opting the criminal justice system to enforce things that ought to be largely handled by the civil system (which strikes me as lousy public policy).  As you noted in your quote from the CFAA itself, "access in violation of an agreement or contractual obligation, such as an acceptable use policy or terms of service agreement..." In other words, the CFAA makes it a crime to violate the AUP or TOS with your ISP.  Outside of copyrights and information technology stuff, how common is it for the US government to get involved in criminalizing the violations of contracts between private parties?
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 09:46, 22 April 2014 (EDT)


*****
----


In my view, major corporations and government security departments have acknowledged that hacker break-ins are out of control within the Internet arena. Some companies are too fearful to join networks due to diverse software programs that could develop ample growing problems. Computer security in our days, is portrayed within usage of difficult passcode, however, is it enough? Hackers seem to carry the responsibility of security break-in, however are they truly liable for company’s loss? As clients demand security of their assets, the vulnerability of security breach highlights that it could not be protected eternally. Ample amount of money is spent on protecting devices that target the hackers, however do these systems support this protection, and why it is still an issue? With the advent of modern law, the characteristics of this issue seem to lack a common ground, which hackers and diverse security programs rely upon. And what are the rights of the government to seize documents and computer ware in case of the hacking incident? The responsibilities of system operators seem to be quite inadequate in comparison to a “true” right for protection. Current law acknowledges that a new threat is emerging where computer “criminals” would potentially be capable of industrial espionage and damaging infrastructures. How could the current law be altered or improved upon these various hacking frameworks? And what would be considered a freedom of information in this matter? How could the unauthorized theft be the primary focus of diverse corporation? And how vulnerability of various security measures could prevent drastic corporate or governmental invasions?
In the article "Hacking tool threatens Healthcare.gov site" a DDoS is the least of warranted concerns. A DoS attack is grave in nature and is rather simple to perform. Many attempts have been made to develop systems that could either launch a DoS attack or be immune to one, but to assume that the nefarious minds out there in the arena aren’t constantly working on new and novel methods to exploit systems is naïve and foolish. The rash and explosion of virus and malware activity in the recent decades testifies to the fact that there is no dearth of people working to venture into, exploit and topple your systems. The use of pre configured or automated tools that are easy to operate in order to pursue their disruptive activities against systems in a network are identifiable. . DoS attacks are nothing but an onslaught or assault against your system that will affect in that system not being able to accomplish its intended job. The direction of the argument within the article fails to look at the programming and structure of the website itself that may allow for significant data leakage. [[User:VACYBER|VACYBER]] 13:05, 22 April 2014 (EDT)
[[User:User777|user777]] 12:46, 9 April 2013 (EDT)


*****


Rules that the Supreme Court regarding writing computer code and whether it is protected under a free speech clause is interesting, but I believe for the most part addressed under the Department of Justice Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which deliniates in detail the federal crimes that an individual or group may commit, for example, by performing acts of trespassing on other peoples' or organizations computers by "exceeding authorized access" and taking National Security information. In my mind, if and individual or group is proven to show that they create a mechanical device for the purpose of terrorism, accessing National Security information, or in anyway creating code to exceed access for a non-authorized user, that is very obviously a federal crime. When one wishes to create that which defends such information protected by National Security acts, then that group or individual can do it in an authorized area with an authorized group, such as the military or a government authorized facility. It is difficult to overemphasize how seriously the US and other governments take hacking. Mostly it is viewed as organized crime at the lowest level if it does not cross international borders, terrorism if it does. One has to bring up humorously the movie Hackers with Angelina Jolie. Even though it is over 20 years old, it most accurately describes what is happening today in a prophetic manner. [[User:Daniel Cameron Morris|Daniel Cameron Morris]] 15:58, 9 April 2013 (EDT)
----


*****


Discussion: Last week I succeeded at programming the wiki to not include my name when I signed it, as required; this week I have a discussion about radicalism and hackers and the knowledge of a cat. So in reviewing the substance of this assignment I have realized that the understanding on the wall of this page is the problem not the other way around. Therefore this is not the conclusion,. A bit of haste will make anyone impuctual as I have just demonstrate. Now I will discuss the necessity for review: Jonathan Zittrian is not a type of ready made rice snack in the grocer aisle or the Webster of deconstructivist lexicography, and memory loss, he was pretending to be Dave Navarro not Jimmy Fallon. I have a cat named Nipper, she loved the lecture about internet attacks. If anyone of you think this is Wall Street, think again! This is how my cat thinks. So I guess that the problem is not the computer, but, merely the author of the program and this association is FALSE. So basically, I am hot and ready for a frozen pizza but I cannot remember the brand. I guess my computer has a memory problem. That is my goal as I continue on the last assignment (which I received a 1 on, if people missed that comment [last week]).[[User:Johnathan Merkwan|Johnathan Merkwan]] 13:32, 9 April 2013 (EDT)
I have to say this is one of the topics I was most looking forward to this semester, particularly with the growing number of hacktivist groups and hackers. I was quite intrigued by the recent events around the Heartbleed bug, which they are calling one of the greatest security threats in the online era (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heartbleed). As I have noticed in many of your posts already, I believe the growing consensus is that hacking is here to stay and will likely become more predominate in our national security moving forward. As more and more functions of our society move online (think traffic grids, manufacturing processes, defense systems), the urgency to protect against hacking threats grows each year.


*****
What will then intrigue me to hear is what is being done to slow down hackers, particularly those who may pose a greater security risk than say, taking over a facebook page. I believe part of the issue is that the NSA needs to be able to attract and retain elite computer hackers who can help in this regard, yet have been unable to do so. The best computer minds would rather take a payday from Google than work for the government at a more modest wage.


These articles were absolutely fascinating! I was particularly intrigued by the "Phreaks, Hackers, and Trolls" chapter, especially the theatrical aspect of modern internet hacking. While hackers were once limited to the 256 character options of ASCII text available on usenet and .alt boards, modern multimedia possibilities can arouse more shock value, such as the flying phallus prank in Second Life. However, disguised behind elaborate digital costumes, the authentic human voice and political intention is lost. Not only has the increasing unhuman-ness of internet technology impacted the real-life, humanitarian aims of hackers, but also as Gabriella Coleman articulates, "Aesthetic hyperbole has made it difficult to parse out truth from lie," resulting in "cultural obfuscation." She later asserts that many breeds of hackers use the internet as a stage to parody real life. This strategy often seems at odds with producing legitimate social change or reformation of systems that hackers attack. For instance, trolls who employ racist and sexist language to mock and exploit chauvinistic real world structures are generally met with three types of responses. 1. They are flamed, criticized, or exiled for their behavior. 2. Their behavior approves of others to express similarly bigoted language and opinions. 3. Their trolling is met with a disaffected awareness that they are indeed trolls, and other users are not to pay them attention. This public awareness of trolls trolling grants internet communities a free pass to write off real racism that may manifest. As these trolls wrap legitimate social issues in absurdism/idiotism, the internet public feels less threatened by these hateful contributions and more neglectful of the power structures that such bigotry reaffirms, even in an anonymous online venue. [[User:Jax|Jax]] 16:49, 9 April 2013 (EDT)
Can't wait to hear this lecture and see what there is to be said about slowing hackers in the future.  


The material this week was quite eye opening.  I am still somewhat amazed at how 'virtual' seems to be the buzz word for bytes and bites... This myriad of information is anything but virtual...it's not going away...it's coded by the billions upon billions of 0,1s ...  And if information is hanging out there that becomes accessible to folks by breaking in, how is that any different than them picking the lock on your front door and stealing your grandmother's secret recipe of spaghetti sauce.  I was amazed at the debate and how anyone couldn't think there wasn't a potential threat.  This cyber world Is a thief's utopia.... [[User:Caroline|Caroline]] 17:15, 9 April 2013 (EDT)Caroline
[[User:Drogowski|Drogowski]] 13:13, 22 April 2014 (EDT)


****
----


This week's readings were again, very interesting. I think they have been getting better as the course goes on.
Grrr... The site logged me out while I wrote my last message and then proceeded to delete it :(


Some thoughts on the readings:
Any ways, I think this weeks' readings raise a lot of questions about the "morality" of internet behavior and online hacktivism. Interestingly, there seems to be an influx of individuals who wouldn't necessarily be apt to breaking and entering in the physical world, but who are doing just that via their computers. I wonder in these cases whether it is the ease, the relative security, or that it feels less invasive/illegal that draws people to hacking rather than more physically invasive means.


I was amused by the apparently contradictory description of hackers in the Coleman article which read: "...hackers tend to uphold a value for freedom, privacy and access..." I could not help but wonder how one can value both privacy and access, when taken to the extremes that those that are labeled "hackers" today take them. For example, if you are willing to obtain unauthorized access to a system/database and extract someone else's private information only to make it public for the purpose of causing them embarrassment or financial damage, then you obviously support and extreme notion of access but do not respect privacy.  
It also seems that there is a great degree of ambiguity to the laws which govern how one is expected to comport themselves online. This is made especially clear in Sarah Laskow's article, in which she points out that "The CFAA isn’t a law that journalists are taught to look out for." This presents us with a scary reality, that individuals like you and I, as well as professionals such as reporters, might be subject to laws which we might not realize exist or understand and could easily be breaking, just by doing what we think is simple research. While I understand the necessity of regulation, it can also be a catch-22.  


That one criticism of Coleman aside, his article was absolutely outstanding. It was a very accurate trip down memory lane for me - I was around and enjoying the age of dial-up modems, electronic bulletit board systems including pirate boards and what he deems as "bitch boards" as well as the early (1980's) days of hacking, phreaking and dial-up (300 baud!) modems. He did a great job of providing a brief overview of the history of hacking and the various pranks and shenanigans (e.g. trolling) that go on online.
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 15:14, 22 April 2014 (EDT)


The new analytical model proposed by Molly Sauter was an interesting concept. Her model considers three points of analysis: motivations and intended effects, actual effects and technologies used. I can see some instances where motivations and intentions might be less relevant as even if an attack were to result in effects more significant than what was intended, they are still presumably caused by the hackers. Just the same, the cat pictures in her presentation rule!!
----


I'd be interested in understanding Molly's definition of a "reasonable act of civil protest" because she seemed to imply that Operation Assange which had (her words) "A secondary goal was to cause financial damage and embarrassment to the corporations targeted." was an ethical and reasonable act. Her analysis was valuable in that it sheds light on how this community thinks. I'm looking forward to hearing her speak tonight.
As it is clear from readings and Aaron's case, the security of information is the crucial question of nowadays. Data contained in computer, data contained in mobile phone is so essential and important that they ruin lifes once they are disclosed. When it comes to criminalization of hackerisim or non-authorized access or "with exceeding authorizatiob" is a right direction from point of security. But, still I think that this is more technological issue rather than legislative. Aysel Ibayeva ([[User:Aysel|Aysel]] 15:21, 22 April 2014 (EDT))


[[User:CyberRalph|CyberRalph]] 17:26, 9 April 2013 (EDT)
----


*****
First of all, I'm surprised that the Intelligence squared debate wasn't in the required readings, as I found to be the most interesting "reading" this week.


I always read media articles outlining hacking attacks eminating from China with a grain of salt, these media stories are rolled out once a week in the press but we never hear reciprocal stories about hacking perpetrated by the US government on other countries. Nicole Perlroth’s, Hackers in China Attacked The Times for Last 4 Months, would seem to be another in a long line of articles casting aspersion’s on the Chinese government, without stopping to investigate whether the US acts in kind. Even when there is an odd story about US hacking attacks, the attacks are always framed positively, such as when the US and Israel hacked the Iranian nuclear weapons. We don’t hear about all the other types of espionage the US government carries out, unless it is against its own citizens (I recall reading a story about massive servers in California essentially running algorithms on hugh swathes of the internet to detect terrorist comments). Perhaps the reason China doesn’t want its citizens to be using google, facebook, and other American internet behemoths is because it doesn’t want all sorts of Chinese information to be passing through servers easily accessible to the US government. [[User:Joshywonder|Joshywonder]] 17:36, 9 April 2013 (EDT)
On a different note, Phreaks, Hackers, and Trolls got me thinking about how the line between the hacker community and the general public is getting more and more blurred... I would argue that many of the actors on the internet who would have clearly been assigned to the hacker community just 10 years ago, such as trolls, producers of internet memes, etc., are now no longer clearly a part of that community which created them. At the same time, the lines between these individual actors is becoming more pronounced. I was fairly active in the hacker community in the 2000s, and most people in the community would be at once geeks, trolls, security experts, meme designers and political activists, all bound by similar values. Today, it feels as if this community is almost gone, divided instead into those who use internet for the lolz alone, those who merged with the general internet public, and those who are becoming almost too serious about the agenda and activities. If there is something that remains close in the general feeling, its the Open Source community, but it too is very different from what it was. --[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 15:39, 22 April 2014 (EDT)


*****
----


Here's a great Russian Times article about crashing a commercial jet liner with an android phone...  
Gabriella Coleman’s account clearly shows the relationship status between phone phreaks, hackers, and trolls. Starting with the discovery of the 2600 hertz tone that could “stop the phone”, phreaking developed a huge following with printed magazines, newspapers, and even a magazine named after the 2600 hertz tone itself. The growth of technology caused the Internet and computers to became more available along with new ways to tinker with it. Due to pop culture growth with movies such as War Games, the challenges imposed by code hacking became the new pastime. Trolls, having similarities with hackers (and possibly even being hackers) are different in their lust for the “lulz”. They specialize in audacious, shocking, and flagrant humor. Occasionally, the worst cases acquire a “disease” called CTS where the trolling becomes such a habit that they no longer restrict it to strangers but look for “lulz” by victimizing their own friends and family.
DDoS attacks are an effective tool that are tricky to guard against. In simple terms, because of the users ability to rapidly intensify the attack by aggregating more users to assist with the attack, the assault becomes overwhelming.
Operation Payback was a series of DDoS attacks by the group “Anonymous”. They were champions of peer-to-peer sites. Attacking music sites, copyright advocates, governments, law firms, censorship sites, and basically any group that held views against free circulation of data on the Internet, Anonymous received lots of criticism and even some DDoS attacks to their own site. Even Pirate Party UK and United States Pirate Party spoke out against their actions calling for a more democratic “legal” way to handle their problems. Even though the affected sites were down for a little while, there was not enough significant damage to the attacked parties to produce permanent damage. The down time can best be compared to people boycotting an unpopular store.
The Computer Fraud And Abuse Act seems to be very vague, especially in the way it was applied in the Scripps “Hackers” and Andrew "weev" cases. It is implied that normal regular Internet surfing could have the potential to land someone in jail. [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:41, 22 April 2014 (EDT)


http://rt.com/news/teso-plane-hijack-android-716/
----


[[User:Phildade|Phildade]] 17:54, 11 April 2013 (EDT)
I was recently watching a car review show on YouTube and found out that nowadays hackers are so sophisticated that they can even break into one's vehicle. Generally speaking, I do not think that hackers do recognize codes as governing forces of the internet as they can manipulate a lot of them as they wish. More e-commerce sites and even some social networking platforms are increasingly doing their best in order to fight with these groups as a way of controlling their audiences.
***********
([[User:cheikhmbacke|cheikhmbacke]] 15:42, 22 April 2014 (EDT))

Latest revision as of 14:07, 23 April 2014

April 22

Spend five minutes with anyone who studies “hackers” and you will quickly learn that the term is used to define a wide array of discrete subcultures, from homebrew computer programmers all the way through to military-industrial network vulnerability experts. If there is one unifying characteristic amongst all of these cultures (and there may not be), it is most likely the acknowledgement between these groups that the limitations imposed by code as a mode of regulating behavior can, and should, be subverted. Today we look to hackers, who they are, what they do, and what rules and norms govern those who do not recognize code as a governing influence.


Readings

Defining hackers, hacking, and hacktivism
  • Sauter uses the term "DDoS" throughout. This is an abbreviation for "distributed denial of service," a specific form of attack to a web server described in more detail here.
Law and law enforcement
Case studies

Optional Readings



Videos Watched in Class

Links

CAPTCHAs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAPTCHA

Boston Globe paywall: http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/242132/boston-globe-drops-paywall-adds-meter-instead/

Examples of Robots.txt: http://www.robotstxt.org/orig.html

Adblock Plus: https://adblockplus.org/

Heartbleed: http://heartbleed.com

More on heartbleed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heartbleed

XKCD explainer of heartbleed: http://xkcd.com/1354/

OpenSSL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSSL

Bruce on Heartbleed: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/04/heartbleed.html

How Netflix Reverse Engineered Hollywood: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/01/how-netflix-reverse-engineered-hollywood/282679/

Zombie network: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_(computer_science)

LOIC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_Orbit_Ion_Cannon

Molly's Book: http://www.amazon.com/The-Coming-Swarm-Hacktivism-Disobedience/dp/1623564565

Evgeny Morozov defending DDOS as civil disobedience: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2010/12/in_defense_of_ddos.html

Troll Face: http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/trollface-coolface-problem

CALEA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_Law_Enforcement_Act

CFAA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act

Text of CFAA: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1030

Teen hacks into worcester airport: http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9803/18/juvenile.hacker/

Article discussing War Games impact on CFAA: http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/students/groups/is/files/2012/02/Kapitanyan.FE_.Final_.Weber_.pdf

Weev, whose conviction was just tossed out: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/appeals-court-reverses-hackertroll-weev-conviction-and-sentence/

ICCID: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICCID#ICCID

Heartbleed test: https://filippo.io/Heartbleed/

Google bug bounties: http://www.google.com/about/appsecurity/reward-program/

$115k for an apple bug: http://www.forbes.com/sites/firewall/2010/03/25/the-bounty-for-an-apple-bug-115000/

Fire Sale Hacker message on Live Free or Die Hard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyGhT3YTP7A

Story about the mom who created fake myspace profile: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1089908/Mother-faces-jail-300-000-fine-setting-fake-MySpace-profile-bully-girl-later-killed-herself.html

US federal sentencing guidelines: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Federal_Sentencing_Guidelines

MBTA vs Anderson: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Bay_Transportation_Authority_v._Anderson

Aaron Swartz: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz

MAC address: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAC_address

Secret Service's National Computer Forensics Institute: https://www.ncfi.usss.gov/ncfi/

Felon Voting: http://felonvoting.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000286

RECAP the law: https://www.recapthelaw.org

Class Discussion

Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (~~~~) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: Andy 10:28, 17 December 2013 (EST)
In July 2012, someone successfully hacked my iphone and installed spy software on it. Any and all movements on my iPhone were being stored/tracked unbeknownst to me, including app activity (Chase Bank, emails, etc) for one month. I found out about it when I had taken my iPhone in a shop to get checked out - the screen would glitch at times and would randomly lose about 1% per minute. (I learned this was when my GPS data was being tracked up to minute). Among other things, the next step was to file a police report of this incident for my personal safety, as I’ll never be certain which data of mine was compromised. At the time I went to local police, either they didn’t care enough or they just didn’t have proper protocol to handle it.
I understand this is a miniscule crime, in comparison to the huge cyber-crimes in the class readings. However, it lead me to research how equipped local police are for such smaller incidences. The result: They're not. (yet). I’m certain similar, smaller crimes will only increase over time and will be dealt with by the local police. While crime is increasingly moving online, state and local police are having a hard time keeping up. If the case is significant enough, the police have to hire specialized cyber-security companies to conduct digital investigations. The techniques the police will need to be equipped with are going to have to be more “IT specialist” and less “Law and Order” over the next few years. It seems hackers will be one step ahead, at a local level, until the police shift their skill set to more IT training. Marissa1989 02:41, 21 April 2014 (EDT)
I'm very glad you mentioned this because I completely agree. On a smaller level such as the local police, I agree that they do not have the resources or the structure in place yet to deal with hacking of cell phones and breaches of personal information. While large national crimes are handled properly, there should also be an active protocol for situations such as this, which happen very often. The lack of a targeted action by law enforcement against these small time criminals facilitate identity theft and unless there is a strong development in the law enforcement IT department, chances are these crimes will only increase with time. Lpereira 09:16, 22 April 2014 (EDT)
Several readings this week caused me to think about the perceived value, real and potential, of personal data. Targeted hacking of trade secrets, governments, publications like the New York Times and other large-scale operations are rooted in fairly straightforward incentives. So too are hacktivists and hackers that are "doing it for the lulz"- outcomes that are for more about provoking a response or creating change. Targeted hacks of individuals for personal data not only are much more difficult to prevent, identify and pursue on the part of law enforcement- they also happen on a scale that is not seen to have a significant enough impact economically, societally or organizationally to receive the attention truly deserved. Given the frequency of such instances, and the yearly increase in information and services processed solely online, the public service and private sector incentive to have structures in place to respond to such attacks surely must reach a tipping point soon? akk22 14:26, 22 April 2014 (EDT)-----

Cyber warfare will take on a greater importance in conventional warfare and Government hackers will be crucial to this. It only makes sense as weapons, communications and systems become more sophisticated. Hackers may be used to break into countries systems to steal data and cause widespread disruption or break into the phones of country leaders and their key staff. This is evidenced in the Ukraine crisis by relentless hacking attacks on Russian websites by Ukraninan hackers and visa-versa. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-05/russia-ukraine-standoff-going-online-as-hackers-attack.html Marissa1989 01:06, 22 April 2014 (EDT)


Andy, thanks for your article on the Aaron Schwartz prosecution. As you put it, "CFAA is shockingly broad when it is laid out" -- but that's not the only issue with it. It's just another case of private industry co-opting the criminal justice system to enforce things that ought to be largely handled by the civil system (which strikes me as lousy public policy). As you noted in your quote from the CFAA itself, "access in violation of an agreement or contractual obligation, such as an acceptable use policy or terms of service agreement..." In other words, the CFAA makes it a crime to violate the AUP or TOS with your ISP. Outside of copyrights and information technology stuff, how common is it for the US government to get involved in criminalizing the violations of contracts between private parties? Jradoff 09:46, 22 April 2014 (EDT)


In the article "Hacking tool threatens Healthcare.gov site" a DDoS is the least of warranted concerns. A DoS attack is grave in nature and is rather simple to perform. Many attempts have been made to develop systems that could either launch a DoS attack or be immune to one, but to assume that the nefarious minds out there in the arena aren’t constantly working on new and novel methods to exploit systems is naïve and foolish. The rash and explosion of virus and malware activity in the recent decades testifies to the fact that there is no dearth of people working to venture into, exploit and topple your systems. The use of pre configured or automated tools that are easy to operate in order to pursue their disruptive activities against systems in a network are identifiable. . DoS attacks are nothing but an onslaught or assault against your system that will affect in that system not being able to accomplish its intended job. The direction of the argument within the article fails to look at the programming and structure of the website itself that may allow for significant data leakage. VACYBER 13:05, 22 April 2014 (EDT)




I have to say this is one of the topics I was most looking forward to this semester, particularly with the growing number of hacktivist groups and hackers. I was quite intrigued by the recent events around the Heartbleed bug, which they are calling one of the greatest security threats in the online era (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heartbleed). As I have noticed in many of your posts already, I believe the growing consensus is that hacking is here to stay and will likely become more predominate in our national security moving forward. As more and more functions of our society move online (think traffic grids, manufacturing processes, defense systems), the urgency to protect against hacking threats grows each year.

What will then intrigue me to hear is what is being done to slow down hackers, particularly those who may pose a greater security risk than say, taking over a facebook page. I believe part of the issue is that the NSA needs to be able to attract and retain elite computer hackers who can help in this regard, yet have been unable to do so. The best computer minds would rather take a payday from Google than work for the government at a more modest wage.

Can't wait to hear this lecture and see what there is to be said about slowing hackers in the future.

Drogowski 13:13, 22 April 2014 (EDT)


Grrr... The site logged me out while I wrote my last message and then proceeded to delete it :(

Any ways, I think this weeks' readings raise a lot of questions about the "morality" of internet behavior and online hacktivism. Interestingly, there seems to be an influx of individuals who wouldn't necessarily be apt to breaking and entering in the physical world, but who are doing just that via their computers. I wonder in these cases whether it is the ease, the relative security, or that it feels less invasive/illegal that draws people to hacking rather than more physically invasive means.

It also seems that there is a great degree of ambiguity to the laws which govern how one is expected to comport themselves online. This is made especially clear in Sarah Laskow's article, in which she points out that "The CFAA isn’t a law that journalists are taught to look out for." This presents us with a scary reality, that individuals like you and I, as well as professionals such as reporters, might be subject to laws which we might not realize exist or understand and could easily be breaking, just by doing what we think is simple research. While I understand the necessity of regulation, it can also be a catch-22.

Castille 15:14, 22 April 2014 (EDT)


As it is clear from readings and Aaron's case, the security of information is the crucial question of nowadays. Data contained in computer, data contained in mobile phone is so essential and important that they ruin lifes once they are disclosed. When it comes to criminalization of hackerisim or non-authorized access or "with exceeding authorizatiob" is a right direction from point of security. But, still I think that this is more technological issue rather than legislative. Aysel Ibayeva (Aysel 15:21, 22 April 2014 (EDT))


First of all, I'm surprised that the Intelligence squared debate wasn't in the required readings, as I found to be the most interesting "reading" this week.

On a different note, Phreaks, Hackers, and Trolls got me thinking about how the line between the hacker community and the general public is getting more and more blurred... I would argue that many of the actors on the internet who would have clearly been assigned to the hacker community just 10 years ago, such as trolls, producers of internet memes, etc., are now no longer clearly a part of that community which created them. At the same time, the lines between these individual actors is becoming more pronounced. I was fairly active in the hacker community in the 2000s, and most people in the community would be at once geeks, trolls, security experts, meme designers and political activists, all bound by similar values. Today, it feels as if this community is almost gone, divided instead into those who use internet for the lolz alone, those who merged with the general internet public, and those who are becoming almost too serious about the agenda and activities. If there is something that remains close in the general feeling, its the Open Source community, but it too is very different from what it was. --Seifip 15:39, 22 April 2014 (EDT)


Gabriella Coleman’s account clearly shows the relationship status between phone phreaks, hackers, and trolls. Starting with the discovery of the 2600 hertz tone that could “stop the phone”, phreaking developed a huge following with printed magazines, newspapers, and even a magazine named after the 2600 hertz tone itself. The growth of technology caused the Internet and computers to became more available along with new ways to tinker with it. Due to pop culture growth with movies such as War Games, the challenges imposed by code hacking became the new pastime. Trolls, having similarities with hackers (and possibly even being hackers) are different in their lust for the “lulz”. They specialize in audacious, shocking, and flagrant humor. Occasionally, the worst cases acquire a “disease” called CTS where the trolling becomes such a habit that they no longer restrict it to strangers but look for “lulz” by victimizing their own friends and family.

DDoS attacks are an effective tool that are tricky to guard against. In simple terms, because of the users ability to rapidly intensify the attack by aggregating more users to assist with the attack, the assault becomes overwhelming.

Operation Payback was a series of DDoS attacks by the group “Anonymous”. They were champions of peer-to-peer sites. Attacking music sites, copyright advocates, governments, law firms, censorship sites, and basically any group that held views against free circulation of data on the Internet, Anonymous received lots of criticism and even some DDoS attacks to their own site. Even Pirate Party UK and United States Pirate Party spoke out against their actions calling for a more democratic “legal” way to handle their problems. Even though the affected sites were down for a little while, there was not enough significant damage to the attacked parties to produce permanent damage. The down time can best be compared to people boycotting an unpopular store.

The Computer Fraud And Abuse Act seems to be very vague, especially in the way it was applied in the Scripps “Hackers” and Andrew "weev" cases. It is implied that normal regular Internet surfing could have the potential to land someone in jail. Emmanuelsurillo 15:41, 22 April 2014 (EDT)


I was recently watching a car review show on YouTube and found out that nowadays hackers are so sophisticated that they can even break into one's vehicle. Generally speaking, I do not think that hackers do recognize codes as governing forces of the internet as they can manipulate a lot of them as they wish. More e-commerce sites and even some social networking platforms are increasingly doing their best in order to fight with these groups as a way of controlling their audiences. (cheikhmbacke 15:42, 22 April 2014 (EDT))