U.S. Military Seeks Skilled Hackers and Crackers 190
The Inphidel wrote, "Hackers, and maybe even crackers, the goverment wants YOU.
Seems the pentagon wants to make sure enough GEEKS are on hand to kick some technological [redacted]. Sounds like fun to me." Story at Wired; another one on the same topic at Yahoo! News was submitted by Doofus.
Don't fall for it! (Score:3)
It's a trap!
X-Files enthusiasts, it is here we must make our united stand against diabolic government tricks.
------
Before all the anal-retentives freak out... (Score:1)
Salary (Score:1)
Goody! (Score:3)
"Dare we use our superior forces against our enemies to demonstrate how l33t we are? Is that fair?"
"Hell if I know, r00t the bastards!"
:-/
Ben
Man this would be a job i would love to have (Score:1)
You have to admit that this would be fun. (Score:2)
Still, I find it hard to believe that they would just enlist people to hack from the continental U.S. alone. Many of the networks that would need to be hacked would be secure networks. Someone would have to go in and splice/tap lines or use something like a TEMPEST. This raises the quesion:
How are the geeks going to gain access to the secure networks?
I ask this because its really the closed/semi-closed networks that are of major importance (although as we know network security as a whole over the world is shoddy).
For some strange reason I envision people parachuting onto a building at night and splicing cat-5 cable into extra nodes... (I have probably been watching too many movies.)
What good would hackers do? (Score:1)
- Break into non-military computers, like banking or sewer control, and scew things up.
- Do website vandalism for purposes of propoganda or psychological warfare.
- Break into the computers of banks and manufacturing companies to try to figure out how much of what weapons and stuff are being made.
However, I don't think that these types of things are what the military is hoping for (and the third thing would be handled by the CIA, wouldn't it?) Was this idea thought up of by some brass that doesn't have knowledge in the area of hacking/cracking? Or maybe this has some other purpose?WinNuke - arghhhhhh (Score:2)
This is the same US military that uses Windows NT. (Score:2)
What are they going to do, spoof Saddam's homepage?
You know, I hear that Matthew Broderick is an Ace hacker. Maybe they should get him in on this.
Working for the army is an immoral choice (Score:2)
But when these people suceeds in decrypting a secret code or penetrating and disrupting a foreign network who control communications and the electrical sector of a country, they are surely killing human beings as if they dropped a bomb in them. So if you think you can assume a position in the army, don't forget that you are taking a choice in my view immoral, because nothing can transform a war in a good cause(unless you believe in holy wars). If you are really a hacker with an ethical code(like RMS or ESR) then think twice before getting this job.
Oops! I forget to post as an Anonymous Coward! Now the US government will punish me to preach against military and war... But I'm lucky to live in Brazil, Uf!!!
I'm dyin over here (Score:2)
U H4V3 B33N 0WN3D, B1330000tCH!
Re:You have to admit that this would be fun. (Score:1)
Why, throught the air-conditioning ducts of course! Don't tell me you haven't seen Mission: Impossible.
Cyberwars becoming a reality. (Score:4)
At the moment the term 'hackers' brings nice warm thoughts of late night tinkering on the net to geeks, and a distant, unknown, but not that menacing thought to system administrators. If the government start re-training them, aren't they going to turn into something more like guerilla soldiers?
It would give hackers a bad name - I mean, worse than now.
Yes, many hackers have un-tapped skills, but taking these jobs would just bring forward a new age in warfare.
Cyberwarfare isn't like conventional warfare, where one side can simply win on bigger firepower. The net has always claimed to be a level playing field. Surely three hackers working for a third-world government (providing a decent level of resources) are as powerful as whole teams of hackers in a western-world country? It comes down to the abilities of an individual.
What's being proposed here is getting hackers to disable the enemy's defenses. This would lead to hackers aiming to turn opponents weapons back on their own country. Think about it for a minute. The more missiles you've got ready to launch on-command, the more firecrackers you've got waiting to blow-up in your face. And who's got the biggest number of firecrackers on the planet?...
It seems the US are setting out to hold the dog by the ears.
I'd do it, but.... (Score:1)
Re:This is the same US military that uses Windows (Score:1)
To the .mils want to be l337? (Score:1)
Ethics (opinion) (Score:2)
I personally have a hard time condoning any of this. First of all, I find the ethics of xackors to be questionable to start. Xacking a system isn't necessarily always wrong, but the the majority of the typical website tagging, snooping, and trashing has no ethical ground to stand on. Claims that if it was meant to be secure, then they should have secured it are as logical as claiming you should be allowed to break into a house because the door isn't made of reinforced steel.
But then the U.S. military wants to hire Xackors. This pushes the ethics from the realm of mischevous anarchy to malicious calculated coordinated intent: xacking for a major powerful government body for the purpose of maintaining its agenda. This is far more insideous than changing the front page of Microsoft to say "Bill Gates lick my balls". Actions taken on behave of any government's military have consequences that can easily end in the death of many people. Sure you might save lives in some cases but will you always know which actions you take will result in the preservation of like over the loss of it. Will be able to back down on a mission that you feel will result in needless death.
We, as individuals, have to make ethical choices for ourselves. If you are a xackor then I hope you give it up for more constructive past times, but I'll settle for you not accepting a military offer.
They might not just be used for attacks... (Score:2)
"Those same tools would likely be a bigger threat to our systems than to those of any potential opponent,'' said Kawika Dagui of the Financial Information Protection Center, a Washington-based industry trade group. "
Who said they won't look for flaws in our own systems too? Im sure the door would swing both ways on how we could use their skills.
Re:What good would hackers do? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Where does it say that they want us? (Score:2)
A Trap !!! (Score:1)
Once the false hacker ( or cracker or whomever) is lured into their parlour, he will be tortured and his trade secrets extracted.
And then they will be imprisoned for life, and the DoD admins will never have to worry about network security issues again.
Re:This is the same US military that uses Windows (Score:1)
...Cuz, y'know, he's, like, wooden, wants to be a real boy someday....teehee....
Oh, man, I kill me.
Great way to get names of all wanna-be's (Score:1)
This is a 'big brother' check for the stupid.
Competing with private industry for talent (Score:3)
Fundamentally I would ask the fundamental question to what extent is a heavy-hardware offensive-oriented force necessary. While it's nice to had some muscle to back up world posturing, there are many other demands for public funds (education, health, legal aid, etc). The point about computers is that it reduces transaction costs and according to transaction economic theory, the key factors are price, opportunity and safeguards. With improved information (which includes laws, social habits, conventions, etc), safeguards can be reduced thus decreasing the price/cost for everyone. If CNN can identify potential conflicts and make world opinion unplatable for tin-pot dictators, perhaps there is less need for the iron fist and more for velvet diplomacy (not that I'm accusing the US of being particularly talented in this area either).
Anyway, if people are interested in outside opinions, take a look at Cato's policy analysis [cato.org], or foreign studies [cato.org] to broaden your views on defense matters.
LL
Right, let me get this straight... (Score:3)
Re:What color is the sky on your planet? (Score:1)
It is specious reasoning that without espionage the Cuban missile crisis would have escalated to WW III, since we can not know what a history without espionage would be like. In additions, it is a tautology to say that espionage is good because it bailed us out of the Cuban missle crisis because espionage put us into the Cuban missle crisis (why is it that the US can have nuclear missiles in northern Canada, but the Russians can't have them in Cuba?).
The U.S. military is a tool used to maintain the interests of the U.S. government. If you whole heartedly agree with those interests and the actions taken to preserve those interest, then you and I are on different wavelengths and might as well settle on a difference of opinion. If you do not wholy agree with the U.S. government agenda or their actions to develop the agenda, then you might see unethical nature of a position like this.
Re:Salary (Score:1)
Or do they? I wonder how many slashdotters are GCS d++
funny, but with a serious message (Score:1)
Back in the 1980s, there was a guy who hacked a database language called MUMPS (multi-user, multi-person system, I think). He worked mainly on healthcare patient record systems, but he was hooked in to the general Brit programming contractors' grapevine. He had a few friends who were more in the realm of FORTRAN, scientific computing etc.
One day, the word spread through this group of friends that the Ministry of Defence was hiring FORTRAN for big numbers. This chap seriously considered learning FORTRAN to get on the gravy train. Then a big record shop decided to use MUMPS for stock control, and he decided that would be cooler.
By 1990, he was the only surviving member of that group of acquaintances. None of the others had died of a disease or medical condition. Two had died in a series of car accidents, despite always having been careful, even cautious drivers. One had electrocuted himself on a kettle, despite having a degree in electrical engineering. One had fallen (or jumped) from a high window. And one had just been straight out murdered by a mugger who stole £10 and left his credit card.
Coincidences happen all the time. But this guy believes he owes his life to his mastery of that sucky database language. I personally wouldn't touch military work with a long stick
Anonymous for obvious reasons.
What's so strange about this? (Score:1)
THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS LONG AGO... (Score:2)
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
"register your domain for only $55" [npsis.com]
Dazed and Confused (Score:1)
I think what they need is a skilled, creative head or maybe department.
Besides: I think this is just a little joke again...
Agent 0101, licensed to KILLALL -9 (Score:4)
Turn me loose boss!
I'm the perfect agent to bring down WINDOWS
Actually, I'm no super-guru or anything. You could put me in Q&A testing as the ultimate stability tester. Turn me loose on the system and see what I can fsck up. If it CAN be fscked up, I WILL find a way to do it! Usually, completely by accident.
Oh no!
BAD HAIKU INSPIRATION!:
A government job
Sit on my butt and break things
That's my kinda job
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
straight out of good will hunting (Score:1)
(where he talks about why he turns down a government crypto job)
YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT! (Score:1)
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
"Get your domain name for only $55" [npsis.com]
There is a good precident (Score:3)
War can be a good cause (Score:2)
But I should also say that my Grandparents live in a building with a fair number of people who have numbers on their arm and who havent worn a short sleve shirt since 1945.
Portfolio? (Score:2)
Re:Right, let me get this straight... (Score:1)
Re:There is a good precident (Score:1)
Re:Right, let me get this straight... (Score:2)
They just want the funding! (Score:1)
This story reminds me that one about Bill Clinton's call for crackers to stay put during the turn of the year. That sounded to me like a bait for script kids. Picture a scenario in which a lot of unimportant web pages had been defaced. The media would make a lot of noise around it, and then the government would come up with this story. All in perfect synch. Unfortunately for them, the kids were probably all well-oiled that evening. Serious hackers knew that was not the right time for cage-rattling (everyone was complaining about having to work on new year's eve, right?).
An evidence showing that this is not 100% serious is that one of those 3 articles (there's one in CNN too) claims that millitary computers were subjected to +- 18.000 attacks last year, IIRC. That means almost 50 a day! No way, unless you consider every single port scan attempt as an attack.
-------------------------
Re:I'd do it, but.... (Score:1)
Attention all personnel... condition Broken Arrow (Score:2)
So enlist Slashdot.... (Score:3)
Private Jones: Sir, the enemy has just brought up a web server revealing the truth about the motivations for our war. Permission to prosecute?
Sergeant Smith: Go ahead... give 'em hell!
PJ: OK... submitting enemy URL to Slashdot now.
Five minutes later...
PJ: Target eliminated, sir. Total DOS.
SS: Good work, son. There's a medal in this for you.
Good... bad... I'm the one with the gun.
Re:There is a good precident (Score:1)
-------------------------
Re:There is a good precident (Score:1)
Re:To the .mils want to be l337? (Score:1)
Re:Working for the army is an immoral choice (Score:1)
Sorry, but you are wrong. (Score:3)
This is approximately how it was done:
1. The French obtained through espoinage in the early days of the war an instruction book of how to use the machine. After the French and British were not able to find anything in it to significantly assist their attacks on the enigma, the book eventually found its way to a Polish team of scientists.
2. One Polish guy had an insight on a weakness which had eluded others studying it. This weakness was a combination of the enigma design and the German standard operating procedure. The team passed the work on to the British because (a) they couldn't continue in Poland, and (b) the weakness still required a lot of brute-force checking - ie. automation was required. The British had Turing et. al. working for them. (c) the German codes changed every day, so this attack had to be run on the first interceptions of the day, every day, to be able to read the rest of the day's messages.
3. UNKNOWN TO THE ENGINEERS/MATHEMATICIANS, some code books for particular months were captured. The "management" decided to keep this info from the engineers, and to persist with the daily automated cracking as a defence against the majority of the time when they didn't have the books of keys.
So in summary, the cracking of the enigma machine was the result of a clever mathematical insight, and operational predictability to do with the initial alignment of the tumblers. This made possible a brute force attack, which was automated with banks of electro-mechanical "computers".
Australia can crack into its citizen's computers. (Score:1)
crackers? Are they hiring crackers now? If they
did, would we know about it? If the Australian
government is allowed to break into computers,
and the American military is looking for people
with cracking skills, what are they both
planning to do with it? Who is going to be the
victim? To hackers, and crackers with some
morals, I say: Don't work for big brother,
you will not help anyone.
TomG
Pentagon Seeks Bomb-Makers! (Score:1)
The next thing you know, Pentagon, FBI and the rest will want "help" from people who can make kitchen-bombs to help in their war against Saddam Hussein...
Finally... (Score:1)
Sweden is doing it as well (Score:1)
"1999-12-27
The military is launching an IT-offensive
The defence force will in a few years have the ability to hack into those computer systems that can threaten national security. This is the orders given to the military by the Swedish government.
- We should first be able to protect our own IT-systems, but in the future we should also be able to disrupt or disable others, say colonel Michael Moore at the defence HQ in Stockholm.
Modern societies are dependent on and controlled by the help of computer During the growth of information technology new threats have emerged. One such threat is distant computer warfare. That means that a hostile state or group could use so called hackers and IT-soldiers to penetrate and destroy the military and civilian networks of states. Confusion, and eventually destroying the ability to rely on important systems, are the goals of offensive IT-units.
In October a Swedish military delegation visited Pentagon. Important connections were made in Washington.
- For several days we were given a look into the problems and possibilites in the area of information warfare. My impression is that the americans have decided to share their information and experiences in the area much more than they used to, says Ingvar Åkesson.
As a consequence of the USA-visit, the government has decided that the military and the military university shall perform a first exercise to increase security in civilian infrastructure systems next year. During the exercise it is permitted to try to break into the two agencies computer systems. A group of experts on computer security will be hand picked from several areas of the defence.If the exercise works well, another step will be taken in 2001. The government wants the military to perform a large test as the one previously done in America.
The "Eligible Receiver" test was performed in the summer of 1997, and it gave the Pentagon a nasty chock. 35 government computer experts were given the task of hacking into the most sensitive information systems in the US. The experts were able to crack codes to several military bases and battle ships using software freely available to anyone.
**********************
1999-12-27
Försvaret satsar på IT-offensiv
Försvarsmakten ska inom några år ha förmåga att tränga in i främmande datasystem, som kan hota landets säkerhet. Det framgår av regeringens senaste uppdragsbrev till Försvarsmakten.
- Vi ska dels kunna skydda våra egna IT-system, men också på sikt kunna störa eller slå ut andras, säger överste Michael Moore vid försvarshögkvarteret i Stockholm.
I det så kallade regleringsbrevet till Försvarsmakten heter det:
"Försvarsmakten skall stärka förmågan att motstå informationskrigföring samt öka informationssäkerheten inom sina IT-system. Försvarsmakten skall även utveckla sin förmåga att genomföra informationsoperationer."
Den sista meningen leder till en ny offensiv uppgift för Försvarsmakten. Traditionella frontkrig med militära styrkor stående mot varandra får allt mindre betydelse i internationell militär planläggning. På 2000-talet handlar det mera om vad som kan utspelas i cyberrymden.
Moderna samhällen styrs och leds med datorns hjälp. Under informationsteknologins framväxt har nya hot tagit form. Ett sådant är datakrig på distans. Det betyder att en illasinnad stat eller grupp med hjälp av så kallade hackers och IT-soldater kan tränga in och förstöra staters militära och civila ledningssystem.
Förvirring och på sikt oförmåga att använda viktiga system, är målet för offensiva IT-förband.
I oktober besökte en svensk militär delegation försvarshögkvarteret Pentagon.
Gruppen leddes av Försvarsdepartementets rätts - och expeditionschef Ingvar Åkesson. I gruppen ingick bland andra FOA-chefen Bengt Anderberg, generalmajor Staffan Näsström från FMV och departementets säkerhetsexpert överste Ingvar Hellqvist.
Viktiga dörrar öppnades i Washington.
- I flera dagar fick vi inblick i problem och möjligheter inom området informationskrigföring. Mitt intryck är att amerikanarna bestämt sig för att i större utsträckning än tidigare dela med sig av sina erfarenheter på området, berättar Ingvar Åkesson.
Som en konsekvens av USA-besöket har regeringen beslutat att Försvarsmakten och Försvarshögskolan nästa år ska genomföra en förberedande övning för att öka säkerheten i samhällsviktiga informationssystem.
Under övningen ges möjlighet att försöka tränga in i de två myndigheternas datasystem. En grupp experter på dataintrång och IT-kontroll ska handplockas från flera myndigheter i totalförsvaret.
Om övningen faller väl ut tas ytterligare ett steg år 2001. Då vill regeringen att Försvarsmakten genomför en stor dataövning efter amerikansk förebild.
Sommaren 1997 genomfördes övningen "Eligible Receiver", som gav Pentagon näst intill skrämselhicka. 35 statliga dataspecialister fick uppgiften att tränga in i USA:s mest känsliga informationssystem. Specialisterna kunde med hjälp av vanlig civil programvara knäcka källkoder till flera militärbasers och hangarfartygs ledningssystem.
************************************************ ***
"Xacking" -- Was Re:Ethics (opinion) (Score:2)
The lesson: New words and phrases are best coined unintentionally.
Re:They just want the funding! (Score:1)
Re:Right, let me get this straight... (Score:1)
Interesting dilemma (Score:3)
I mean, if they tell everybody about it, then that really does not help them in attacking anyone...
However, if they don't tell anyone, then they have this situation:
A) There is a fatal security problem in a widely used application.
B) Knowing this gives them an advantage if they should at any time wish to be aggressive towards anyone else.
C) Software is global; People all over the world tend to use the same software, nomatter where they are physically situated.
D) If someone else knows of this problem, they will have the exact same advantage as the US army does, should this someone choose to be hostile towards american computer installations.
E) The US army knows that since they found the bug, it's possible to find this bug.
F) Any cracker/hacker in the world has a small chance of finding this fatal flaw; it's not a question of wheter this bug will be discovered by someone, it's a question of when.
-------
If all of the above is true, then by logic the below must also be true (assuming my logic is not somehow flawed, of course):
1) The US army will be witholding information that would benefit not only America as a whole, but everyone in the world that uses this software (ok, by a small degree, but still).
2) Keeping this information secret only gives the US army a transient advantage, as this bug will eventually be discovered by someone else.
3) If terroists smarten up and begin cracking instead of blowing stuff up (or behaps blowing stuff up through their cracking), then if they find this bug, they will not hesitate to exploit the possibilities this opens to them.
Imagine a terroist cracker finding a fatal flaw that works in all versions of Windows. This flaw allows him to break in and do whatever he wants to any Windows maschine.
Now, I happen to know that atleast we have an american battleship somewhere that runs windows NT... He'd have total control of this thing for atleast a few minutes, perhaps hours if he's very lucky and skilled.
Imagine what a terroist might like to do with such a ship...
Also, he'd probably be able to access alot of confidential information, perhaps even getting access to all the other security bugs and techniques the US army never told anyone about!
I just don't understand how people can think combat over the net can be a good thing. It leaves every country in the world very vulnerable. It opens up the possibility that one person, with enough information, acting completely on his won, can take down alot of stuff.
A group of skilled hackers could do to a country what some people thought the Y2K bug would do to the world (ok, let's say a small country
All that this requires is that they find enough security errors in programs in wide use, preferably an OS.
Of course, this hasn't happened yet, which would seem to indicate that it will never happen.
I don't find that argument very good, as this simply tells us that the crackers we are facing today are not really out to sabotage larger areas.
However, alot of people really, really hate (in the strongest sense possible) the US. Imagine if all fundamentalists suddenly stopped training for physical combat, and instead began learning cracking... There are alot of fundamentalists in the world, you know... And, well, fundamentalists are not known for showing restraint when they have the ability to cause harm to things and people in the USA, or anyone else they happen not to like.
Therefore, I really think what the US army should be consearned about is defending themselves. Security of computer installations is a matter of national security (for any country), and global stability.
If everyone has great defences, aggression will logically be less beneficial, and it won't be as much of a problem.
This issue will become more and more important as everyone gets more and more dependant upon technology.
Working for the US Mil` (Score:1)
Also, just because you can't SEE the people you are fighting doesn't mean it's OK to hurt them. The're still suffering!
Re:Right, let me get this straight... (Score:1)
Do you really think US has the right to intervene in a country using the excuse of "humanitarism"? Why then they don't press the russian government to stop the chechen slaughter? Why they just don't stop to sell weapons to Turkey, who uses them to destroy and supress the curdish people? Why they waited to do something about the situaition in East Timor? Oh, sorry! I forgot that Turkey is a NATO member and Serbia not! I forgot that Indonesia is an asiatic Tiger and a strategic ally of USA in the Pacific. Oh, I forgot that US wants to integrate Russia in his sphere of financial influence and has nuke weapons to pressure everyone.
But it doesn't matter, what matters is your proud to be a nationalist and see your country dominates others, instead of helping them to develop and rise their standards of living!
Re:Working for the army is an immoral choice (Score:2)
Now the US government will punish me to preach against military and war... But I'm lucky to live in Brazil, Uf!!
'Ve haff friends in Brazil...'
======
"Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16
Re:They just want the funding! (Score:1)
That's what I'm saying: if you regard every port scan as an attack you may consider these numbers to be true. But they are as harmless as the pictures I took from the White House during a trip to D.C. .
A dangerous attack is something else entirely, demanding planning and skills from a methodical hacker and there aren't *that* many people in the world who fit this profile. The average citizen would never tell the difference so they buy it, but you can do better than that.
While you're talking about this, I'm behind a proxy/firewall too, so you have my sympathy :). At least they left *one* port open.
-------------------------
Reality is a self-induced hallucination. (Score:1)
By the way Brazil has a government and military
Re:THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS LONG AGO... (Score:1)
And that's why the army (including Air Force and the Navy) is exactly the wrong place for them to be. Historically, military is about taking a mass of peasants and organizing them into a somewhat controllable killing mechanism. The army organization is basically a holdover from the feudal times. Note that anybody higher in rank than you is automatically considered to be smarter, know better, and can order you to do whatever he deems necessary.
I would bet that the army would be extremely uncomfortable with hackers, and hackers would feel completely out of place in the army.
Kaa
Re:Cyberwars becoming a reality. (Score:1)
Unless, of course, you regard the *ackers themselves as being the firepower; kinda like a really good *acker being the equivalent of a nuke (guaranteed destruction of the target), while "lesser" ones are more like conventional weapons (they'll probably do damage, maybe even destroy it, but your mileage will vary from target to target and *acker to *acker).
Tim
Re:Working for the army is an immoral choice (Score:2)
The purpose of STRATCOM is peace. "Peace is our profession." That seems like an odd motto for a group of people who plan WWIII but there is a reason for it.
Only if everyone understands what will really happy can WWIII be averted. Every time some fool of a general get's the idea that his country can win a nuclear war, we have to be there with enough proof to keep him from pushing the button. That's how the game is played.
Wars happen. The reasons the US got into the gulf war and WWII we're not the best of reasons. The actions of some of our people were not the best of actions. However, to have not gotten into those wars at all would have been an even worse mistake. If good men stand by and do nothing then they really aren't good men, are they?
Once committed, our job is to end the war, and end it soon. This means people are going to die, in droves. That's what war is. If you don't like it the put the chains on your wrists and go into slavery. If your life is so precious that you cannot bear to lose it, then the contents of your life are controled by anyone willing to take it.
I'm not saying it's nice or it's clean, but it's necessary. We may not like the feds or the cops or the electric chair but it beats living next to Ted Bundy.
To not recognise the reason for the military is to ignore history. We may not like it, but as protest singer Phil Oachs was fond of pointing out, "We're the cops of the world boys."
Or did you really expect everyone to play nice and share their toys?
Re:funny, but with a serious message (Score:1)
Back in the 1980s, there was a guy who hacked a database language called MUMPS (multi-user, multi-person system, I think).
Are you sure that isn't More Urban Myth Programmer Stories?
US Army's new ad campaign (Score:1)
YO!
Do you have the mad skillz to break your enemy's NT box like a cheap toy? Can you use someone else's program to wreak havoc? Do you know how to type in 31337-5p34K? Apply today, because the U.5. R00|z, b0Y33!@#$
Uncle Sam wants YOU...to ping -s 65536
-Legion
Re:Right, let me get this straight... (Score:1)
Well, what he says is standard Slashdot fare, so maybe it does not deserve the Troll status, but Truth it definitely ain't. One, of course, is entitled to hold any opinions one likes, but this guy's views on history will not survive any serious (hell, even cursory) rational examination.
Kaa
Re:"Xacking" -- Was Re:Ethics (opinion) (Score:1)
I'm not entirely sure I see the parallel. Your friend is attempting to make an economic commentary on the social security system, (i am assuming) implying that the securities will not be there for him when he because of the strain the baby boomers will have on it.
The only new word/phrase I used was Xackor/xacking, which was to sidestep the hacker/cracker debate and keep people focused on the issues raised by replacing the h or cr part with the random variable x. New words and phrases are best coined out of necessecity, not random chance.
Obviously, it didn't work this time, with people getting hung up on some new terminology that is quite well defined by context. However, through repetative use, I will eventually be able to have people respond to the content of my posts.
Re:Right, let me get this straight... (Score:1)
Yes, that is exactly what we should all do.
Unfortunately, as you so rightly point out, there are some very bad people in this world. It's not that we shouldn't, but that we can't.
Tim
Not Exactly New (Score:1)
For example, at a recent college recruiting convention, the CIA was passing out fliers on their CITO (Clandestine Information Technology Office). The flier stated that CITO's mission was to exploit foreign information technology. They even advertise for these types of positions on their employment web site at:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/employment/ci aeindex.htm [cia.gov]
Some of us TRIED to do it, several years ago. . . (Score:1)
I had attempted to set up a hackish Vulnerability Assessment Team, as a first step to developing a offensive capability, back in 1996-7. I even had people at OSD (Office of the Secretary of Defense) who liked the idea. But, alas, I was a peon at one of the many Beltway Bandits, and corporate leadership didn't think that this was a reputable business to go into. Instead, they wanted I.T. to concentrate on embedded MS Access applications for network use.
Mind you, nowadays I teach network engineering to government people, and at least THEY learn to hack their own systems to reduce their own vulnerabilities. It's just irritating that years later, my team was finally vindicated. . .
Re:Cyberwars becoming a reality. (Score:1)
Hackers in the Military? What next, scientists? (Score:1)
The only people less suitable to the military than hackers might might be scientists, and we know the military could never do anything on a big scale with scientists.
Ok... with that point made...
"Now we're all son's of bitches" - Kenneth Tomkins Bainbridge to J. Robert Oppenheimer after the first atomic test.
Do we really want hackers to join that club?
--Mike--
W4R3Z K1DD135 UN1T3 (Score:3)
W4R3Z K1DD13: 3y3 w1ll h4x0r th3 3n3my
Army d00d: Okay, your target is the Iraq Military Command.
W4R3Z K1DD13: 3y3 w1ll punt th3m
Army d00d: Uhh.. they don't use AOL
W4R3Z K1DD13 0h, 0k4y... 3y3 w1ll s3nd th3m 4 w1nd0ws v1rus
Army d00d: they're not using windows, they're using a unix server
W4R3Z K1DD13: 0h gn0! l3mm3 g0 f1nd 4n 3xpl0it
Army d00d: Out! Get the hell out of here, your not a hacker... your a lame ass script kiddie
Re:Ethics (opinion) (Score:1)
A war must be fought for just reasons. Self-defense is usually considered just, as are defending against crimes against humanity and other similar ends.
Secondly, a war must be fought justly. In the modern day, this means obeying the Geneva & Hague conventions, avoiding civilian casualties, etc.
If just war does exist -- international legal scholars have thought so since the birth of modern international law -- then it cannot be immoral in and of itself to work for the military. but if they ask you to fight unjustly, thats another story...
Re:Competing with private industry for talent (Score:1)
In my country, the army will pay your way through university in exchange for a few years of service. It is not a free ride, but it is financially attractive. Especially attractive to smart people who can't afford university without going heavily into dept.
Re:Ethics (opinion) (Score:1)
where X = Cr or H
PREDICTION (Score:1)
Russia has most firecrakers... (Score:1)
This is anti-free software (Score:2)
Now, consider which kind software a developing nation is going to prefer. What's reliable, secure, free, and mostly unhindered by export law?
You got it. In the not so distant future, these "cyber-soldiers" will be trying to break and subvert the very stuff we write and give away. They may even, posing as real hackers, try to sneak trojans into some software to make their jobs easier. And you certainly can't expect them to tell us about the security flaws they find.
And if the military finds it is too hard to break the worldwide infrastructure of open source software, they may just pressure the bureaucrats into making laws that restrict its distribution. Hey, it happened to encryption, right? And supercomputers. And certain types of radio equipment.
We should protest this sort of thing now, before it comes back to bite us on the ass.
Don't forget... (Score:1)
According to some news reports (yeah, I know...media...take it for what its worth), the "generic" Kuwaitis had more freedom under the Iraqi(sp?) occupation than under their own monarchy.
But Saddam is evil...he gas bombs the dissidents in his country and we call it genocide. (which, imo it is)
The US just fire bombs its dissidents.
Of course the US would never carry out a mission of genocide against any group of people within its claimed borders. See Native Am.
Re: Cato (Score:1)
Check out Cato's opinions, but be aware that Cato represents corporate-style libertarianism.
In this [fair.org] article by the media watchdog Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting, you'll see that Cato is funded by big oil, pharmaceutical, tobacco, and other big corporations including
I recommend the foreign policy sections of Z Magazine's web page [zmag.org] for analysis of defense matters and to learn what ordinary people are doing for peace.
Still, when people say that it is good to cut defense spending and stop imperialist military actions, I will agree with them, right or left.
These conservative think-tanks get quoted all the time in the media, without mentioning who their funding comes from. One of their latest projects is to "reform" Social Security. This means to convince people that Social Security won't be there for them when they retire and that we need to be able to invest the money in the stock market instead. The major funding comes from
Re:Spoken like a true American (Score:2)
Re:Hackers in the Military? What next, scientists? (Score:1)
The military bullshit was a little much to put up with at times, but it was worth it to work along side guys who have been coding for longer than I've been alive.
U.S. Military History - Killing non-capitalists (Score:1)
The corporate/wealthy establishment running the government was able to convince Americans that there was an "international communist conspiracy" to enslave the world. The USSR actually had little role in many of the countries attacked by the U.S., especially in Latin America.
Millions have been killed for trying to organize alternatives to U.S.-dominated capitalism. The people tortured and killed include teachers, priests, nuns, folk singers, labor unionists, students, mayors, and actual communists - although many of the communists were completely unconnected with the USSR (which didn't invent communism - remember). If you don't want to read the book, read up on the histories of Greece, Indonesia, Guatemala, Chile, El Salvador, Cuba, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Brazil, the Phillipines (sp?)
You can be part of all this if you help the military. At least if you like Corporate America you wouldn't have to make a tough choice, you'd still be working for them!
Re:WinNuke - arghhhhhh (Score:1)
What, you run it, and suddenly Redmond, WA becomes a steaming pile of ashes?
---
Just War Re:Ethics (opinion) (Score:1)
My statements "Sure you might save lives in some cases but will you always know which actions you take will result in the preservation of like over the loss of it. Will be able to back down on a mission that you feel will result in needless death." touched on this topic lightly. You can help save lives by taking lives, such as in a Just War. But even if the War is just, a particular battle may have aspects of injustice. Even if you are justified in killing to save lives, not every kill necessarily saves a life.
There are other inherent problems to the concept of a Just War. "Just" is a matter of perspective and in most cases both sides feel Just. If an invader attacks us, are we Just in defending ourselves? Is our culture pure enough that it should survive along side others? How about Iraq's culture? Was Iraq Just in defending itself against the US in the Gulf War? I really wish I had more time to talk about this but I have a demo at 12.
Back to the original topic, you have to ask yourself if you want to play a role in esclating a crisis to a War. My main point is that this tpye of thing should not be taken lightly. I see a lot of posts in here saying "Wow that would be a great job. I'd have so many great toys." But you have to think of these real issues before jumping into something like this and even then you have to contiue to think every day if what you are doing is right.
Re:Right, let me get this straight... (Score:1)
Officers will listen to enlisted men who know what they're doing... especially in the CS field, where the officers usually have business/management degrees and the enlisted guys are the ones who do the coding, tech support, remote hardware installation, etc. It's not Dilbert in uniforms.
Oh well ... Have fun (Score:1)
The pay and benifits packages would be poor, job satisfaction very if'ee.
I hope they realize that a distributed (home-office with 90-120 TDY to locations maybe) group would be the best approach for a robust, reliable, suvivable option in any CVW.
I'm interested, but unqualified.
Re:They just want the funding! (Score:1)
Re:..and look what they did to Turing. (Score:1)
the way Turing was treated by our "Mommy Dearest" country should scare off anyone with both a brain and a concience. Expect the same from the USA. Heck, it's public policy here.
Encruite that Solaris hacker! (Score:1)
(By the way, this should be a story found on ZDNet [zdnet.com], but I couldn't find it).
Re:Where do I sign up ? (Score:1)
troll...sheesh...offtopic if anything...but certainly not a fucking troll...damn pre-pubescent moderating putz.
The average grunt? No such thing... (Score:1)
One thing that I discovered during my tour in the army, and my later time spent as a programmer, is that people are people, no matter what their walk of life is. I've met absolutely brilliant Infantry Sergeants and some pretty lackluster "Software Engineers" proclaiming themselves to be master hackers/crackers.
Our Friend (AC) makes a claim that Hackers "Mentally they're far beyond that, its demorallizing to them". Actually, I believe it takes a certain mental and physical discipline to sit in a foxhole in subzero temperatures (I speak from firsthand knowledge) for days on end.
Just like all Linux users are not "skript kiddies", not all soldiers are brain dead.
Just my $.02. Your mileage may vary.
Re:What color is the sky on your planet? (Score:2)
Unless you have access to info that hasn't been made public, the only nuclear missiles in northern (or any other part of) Canada were Bomarcs and Genies, SAMs and AAMs respectively for shooting down bombers.
The missiles that (in part) prompted the basing of nukes in Cuba were Jupiter IRBMs based in Turkey, which in fact the US quietly withdrew as part of the deal that settled the Cuban missile crisis. (Of course they were largely obsolete by then anyway, with the development of e.g. Titan and Polaris ICBMs).
Re:Right, let me get this straight... (Score:2)
The military does this because they have learned, from millennia of experience, that all plans fall apart once battle is joined. So, tell your soldiers what you want to happen, and then they can make it happen however. One of Murphy's rules of combat: "If it's stupid but it works, it's not stupid." Correllary: "If it's not stupid but it doesn't work, it's stupid."
Also, any soldier is expected to refuse any unlawful order. "Take those P.O.W.'s out and shoot them. That's an order." "With all due respect, sir, that is a violation of the rules of engagement, and I cannot accept that order." The old excuse of "I was only following orders" is not accepted in the military.
A rebuttal to many (Score:2)
Patriotism? I have had five uncles and my grandfather all serve their country in varying wartime capacities. I do have a sense of patriotism and what my country has given me if was using some of the skills that I have learned well I was going to my darnest to help. BTW, getting a Top Secret security clearance and play with things nobody had ever seen was another perk of the job. I wasn't alone though in feeling that way. The others selected for the internships inside the AFIWC and who I talked to were some of the best and brightest America had to offer including a guy who was weened on Unix and had been working with Linux since 94 with a speciality in penetration, a genetics student, a student at Stanford who could blow the doors off coding as well as others. I'll be the first to admit setting up hardware and networks was why I was there and while not glamourous, I do my job very well.
Unfortunantly, if you are in the military you would know this but most do not the agency in charge of background checks the DSS or Defense Security Service has been so backlogged and mismanaged over the past few years none of us who were told we were interning actually did. That's a bitter spot for me and the others but hopefully it will hold out soon. It does make me angry but given the chance I would still like to go back and have that summer at the AFIWC. I think it would have been a very unique learning experience.
One other thing, those that have feeling hacking for the man is wrong. The world is a very ugly and dangerous place. The Chinese have been developing cyberwarfare and we still dont know the extent of their knowledge. Many small 3rd world countries are throwing a bone to cyberwarfare because its the cheapest way of bringing down the U.S.. You don't need guns or missiles you just need a direct modem link into the U.S. power grid. Their are alot of countries that hate the U.S. and would love to do damage to it especially with the anonimity afforded by electronic warfare so dont bash anyone that wants to protect your family whether it be your family dying in a car accident because the power was turned off as they were going through a light, some maniac who thinks it would be fun to grab credit card numbers from an ecommerce site and use them to finance weapons purchases or any other thing your mind can think of or might not think of will happen eventually. Winn Schwauta one of the foremost experts in the security realm has been predicting an electronic Pearl Harbor for a long time. The only questions remain are will the gun implacements on our side be ready and how much damage will someone do when there not isolated to just Hawaii.
If you would like to read about the trials and tribulations of the DSS, you can read the following article in the archives of USA Today
Goto the archives and use the keyword search
security clearance and military and backlog
Goto the 13K document on 06-03-1999 Sorry it only keeps the last search you did in memory
Re:THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS LONG AGO... (Score:2)
Actually, the military is very results oriented. That's why you hear all those bizzare stories about tying explosives to bats and such. They probably put someone in charge of the project who knows SOMETHING about hacking. He will provide the best enviroment that he can for the people under his command, within reason. (No casual fridays.) The people above him don't give a damn about how he gets results as long as it doesn't look bad on the military.
The fact is that they asked for good hackers. Which means they have no idea how to train good hackers on their own.
BTW, I think this this would be a great idea for anyone interested in doing security for a living. Imagine having 'Trained in computer security by the military' on your resume.
Later
Erik Z