[aklug] Re: Why hacking isn't fun anymore

Quoting Christopher Howard <choward@indicium.us>:

> - The laws fail to comprehend the differences between the modern
> digital setting and the traditional environments in which crime occurs.
> In many (most?) cases where computer "break-ins" occur, the "assailant"
> is utilizing a deficiency in some service that has been freely exposed
> to the public. (http://xkcd.com/327/) Arguably, liability could be
> shifted back to those who provided and/or implemented the defective
> software. Instead of playing that blame game, why not just judge the
> /results/ of the hacking, that is: what damage was actually done?

I'd like to explore this thought further.

What would it take to figure out what damage was actually done?

Do you feel motive is a part of this solution, or a separate issue?

There are some statistics available that claim that an increasing =20
number of crime comes from INSIDE the organization.

We would probably have to set up some sort of auditing function within =20
every organization to ensure that the wolf wasn't watching the hen =20
house.

Additionally, what about the protection of the hacker?

Let's assume that you are going to hack a local community bank to =20
inform the folks inside that bank (because you are one of their most =20
loyal customers) of their security lapses.

However, during that process, someone inside notices you are doing =20
this, but instead of trying to stop you, they "hijack" your "hack" and =20
take money for themselves making it look like you did it.

Now, even though your motive was completely altruistic, you are now in =20
a bad position.

This is an interesting discussion and I'd like to hear more on what =20
folks think about this.

Mike B.

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

---------
To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
Received on Sun Aug 8 10:56:28 2010