Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

DEF CON Advises Feds Not To Attend Conference

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the and-stay-out dept.

Security 250

tsu doh nimh writes "One of the more time-honored traditions at DEF CON — the massive hacker convention held each year in Las Vegas — is 'Spot-the-Fed,' a playful and mostly harmless contest to out undercover government agents that attend the show each year. But that game might be a bit tougher when the conference rolls around again next month: In an apparent reaction to recent revelations about far-reaching U.S. government surveillance programs, DEF CON organizers are asking feds to just stay away: 'I think it would be best for everyone involved if the feds call a "time-out" and not attend DEF CON this year,' conference organizer Jeff Moss wrote in a short post at Defcon.org. Krebsonsecurity writes that after many years of mutual distrust, the hacker community and the feds buried a lot of their differences in the wake of 911, with the director of NSA even delivering the keynote at last year's conference. But this year? Spot the fed may just turn into hack-the-fed."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Uncomfortable Relationship (5, Insightful)

techsoldaten (309296) | about a year ago | (#44248351)

I have never really been comfortable with having the Feds in there in the first place. Anyone in government can potentially serve in a prosecutorial role, and the government has demonstrated over the years they are perfectly willing to demonize hackers if it serves a need. Thinking about Mitnick, Gonzales, and a bunch of other guys who got railroaded here, along with 2600 meetings where we would get interrogated just for showing up to have coffee.

It's a little like inviting the fox into the henhouse to have these guys around. Pretending that they care about the hacker community is a little hard for me to do.

Re:Uncomfortable Relationship (5, Insightful)

FriendlyLurker (50431) | about a year ago | (#44248399)

Pretending that they care about the community is a little hard for me to do.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Uncomfortable Relationship (1)

Cryacin (657549) | about a year ago | (#44249293)

Pretending like they care about their sponsors in the community is easy to do, however.

FTFY

Re:Uncomfortable Relationship (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248559)

Teaching the Feds about the difference in hacking and cracking, blackhat, greyhat and whitehat, seems to me not to be such a bad idea.
Problem with the Feds are they are puppets, and will do anything they're told to do to pocket their salaries.
Too often in such situations, knowledge of right and wrong goes out the window.

The problem with public knowledge and hardened security is that it's against grand interestrates for the 0.01%.

Re:Uncomfortable Relationship (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248733)

I'm pretty sure the blackhats don't need any of the terms explained to them.

lolwhat (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248815)

you want a job dont you? unemployed low computer skills , no original ideas...the fuckin fact is i dont care what the feds know in fact the less the better it would seem yet here you fucking are saying you want htem to know shit...

after all this nsa shit the first crap out of any real hackers mouth is

FUCK OFF

Re:Uncomfortable Relationship (2)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about a year ago | (#44249219)

You can't teach a pig to bark. Well, maybe a really exceptional pig.

Re:Uncomfortable Relationship (3, Insightful)

Steve_Ussler (2941703) | about a year ago | (#44249281)

You have to realize that the 'feds' have good people. If you add up all the extremely smart hackers at the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc., who all work in secret...there are at least 5,000 of them. A formidable team.

Re:Uncomfortable Relationship (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248575)

the government has demonstrated over the years they are perfectly willing to demonize hackers if it serves a need.

Not news. Any government is perfectly willing to demonize and sacrifice anyone in society if it serves any need they perceive.

This has always been true. Modern governments are just a little less willing to murder and the most aggressive ways of sacrificing people only because the principle of the value of life and freedom are in some way partly included in their perceived needs.

but if a stronger need arises they will not stop even on the most aggressive abuses.

Re:Uncomfortable Relationship (1)

mrsquid0 (1335303) | about a year ago | (#44249239)

Not news. Anyone is perfectly willing to demonize and sacrifice anyone in society if it serves any need they perceive.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Uncomfortable Relationship (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248929)

They're not invited, they go every year anyway. Even though it's a private convention and their actions would be illegal if it were a member of the public doing it.

Re: Uncomfortable Relationship (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44249403)

It's not illegal, it's open to the public, they were not asked to leave.

You can't just define an arbitrary access list in your head and call something private. It is or isn't.
Like opening your back yard gate for a party, anyone can crash it, cops or neighbors, strangers etc., until you ask them to leave.

This explains all the confusion regarding email surveillance I guess... " but but I only gave google permission to read my mail"
Yah... They never needed your permission, they were just telling you. You don't have legal recourse if they accidentally share your account with a 3rd part, or intentionally allow it.

Re:Uncomfortable Relationship (1)

Steve_Ussler (2941703) | about a year ago | (#44249273)

Good point...

Wrong way to go about it? (5, Insightful)

kennethmci (1472923) | about a year ago | (#44248355)

I imagine after being asked NOT to attend, they will be FAR more interested in attending.

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (5, Insightful)

ciderbrew (1860166) | about a year ago | (#44248365)

I don't think being asked not to attend will stop them.
This time they should know are not welcome and more importantly why.

And what will happen if they do (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248465)

Rather like the laws say what will happen if you do commit theft or whatever, the proposition here is that since you know that you're going to get hacked if you turn up, you can't complain it was unauthorised access and damaging: you should have thought of that before turning up.

Re:And what will happen if they do (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248519)

Just because you "know" you'll get beaten when walking around in a Ku Klux robe in Queens, New York at night (which is perfectly legal afaict), this doesn't mean beating you up is allowed, and that it isn't a crime that should be prosecuted.

Re:And what will happen if they do (1)

spottedkangaroo (451692) | about a year ago | (#44248535)

huzzah! This is 100% true. Still, if someone phones in that there's a credible threat (bomb, beating, whatever) to the speaker, the protestors won't be allowed on campus.

Re:And what will happen if they do (2)

Cryacin (657549) | about a year ago | (#44249355)

By attending this conference, you consent to having your systems hacked, and to have your mouth sewn to the anus of another user, whilst possibly having another user's mouth sewn to your anus to form a human centiPad.

You didn't read the agreement?!? It can't read!

Re:And what will happen if they do (2)

kennethmci (1472923) | about a year ago | (#44248565)

does this law exist in America? i know we have it here in the UK - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incitement_to_ethnic_or_racial_hatred [wikipedia.org]

Re: And what will happen if they do (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248677)

No. The First Amendment right to freedom of speech applies to hate speech, so long as it isn't treating.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States

Re:And what will happen if they do (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248717)

This link, Hate Speech: United States [wikipedia.org] , is two clicks from your link.

Re:And what will happen if they do (1, Troll)

DarkOx (621550) | about a year ago | (#44248695)

You are right of course. There is however practical justice, legal justice, and moral justice. They don't all demand the same outcome for the situation you describe.

Personally I still feel that anyone working at NSA is a collaborator is tearing down our Constitutional freedoms. Until they leave their employment there they absolutely deserve to be shunned by the rest of society. Note I don't say attacked or harassed.

Re:And what will happen if they do (0)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about a year ago | (#44248731)

Note I don't say attacked or harassed.

Why not? They are attacking and harassing the rest of us as part of their job. If I run into someone working for the NSA they're getting an earful at the very least. They should be ashamed of themselves, their children will be ashamed of them, they are the secret police of our generation.

Re:And what will happen if they do (3, Insightful)

dywolf (2673597) | about a year ago | (#44248935)

Are they? Do you actually have any inside knowledge of the NSA and what they do, beyond what you read int eh papers and hear on /. ? Like any fed agency it's largely ordinary civil service just doing a day to day job to feed their family. Most of them are ordinary people no more deserving of your hate (and yes, it is bigoted hate, oriented around their job instead of race or creed) than anyone else. Most of them are probably doing harmless innocuous work, or actually tracing workable intelligence leads towards the bad guys. the few actually involved in "the bad stuff" we all hate are probably the same ordinary civil service workers who just "doing their job" and give no more thought to the moral rightness of what theyre doing than a Chevy worker does as he tightens the same nut 50k times a day as the line moves past.

Your unreasonably unlimited hate and vitriol only helps fuel the problem.
Beleive it or not the intelligence community does serve a useful purpose, and the scandal is only one facet of them.

Better to narrow your focus only towards the ones actually responsible, the ones in charge, politician and appointee alike, who decided they needed to violate our rights to "keep us safe". Hating them all is unreasonable and no different than any other unreasonable guilt-by-association based hatred through history.

Re:And what will happen if they do (5, Funny)

Dins (2538550) | about a year ago | (#44248969)

I think I've Spotted a Fed. Do I win something?

Re:And what will happen if they do (3, Insightful)

Bucc5062 (856482) | about a year ago | (#44249075)

Actually, you lose. What you spotted was a reasonable person with a brain.

Sometimes, in rare moments, these ordinary people do extra ordinary things (Mr. Snowden) to help shine a light on a corrupt system; corrupt from the top down, not so much the bottom up. Most times they come to work like most people, processing paper work, managing information, and trying to make it to the end of the day so they can enjoy life. As the GP said, save the vitriol for those that make policy or even better, if you don't like the current batch of policy makers, work to get rid of them in the next round of elections.

If that was your attempt at humor...try again.

Re:And what will happen if they do (0)

tgd (2822) | about a year ago | (#44249137)

Actually, you lose. What you spotted was a reasonable person with a brain.

Unfortunately, that's a rare breed around these parts ... if you're looking for a population of people who fit that billing, Slashdot is not the place to look, any more than among the support base of Fox News. The two are nearly identical -- "media" communities pushing a narrow minded, ignorant agenda on a narrow slice of the population that is seeking out justification for their beliefs, and feeding tripe to them like an addiction to drive ad revenue.

I suspect the person you replied to was just joking, but it says something about Slashdot that you just can't be sure anymore.

Re:And what will happen if they do (1)

Dins (2538550) | about a year ago | (#44249255)

I suspect the person you replied to was just joking, but it says something about Slashdot that you just can't be sure anymore.

How could anyone read the summary with its "time-honored 'Spot-the-Fed' tradition" and then NOT conclude I was joking?

Re:And what will happen if they do (1)

oldredlion (1663421) | about a year ago | (#44249139)

If you blow the whistle on them, you win a shit load of trouble for yourself.

Re:And what will happen if they do (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44249159)

I agree with this to an extent, but "just following orders" generally doesn't cut it. Of course this case is more nuanced than genocide, but the principal is the same.

Re:And what will happen if they do (5, Insightful)

Vintermann (400722) | about a year ago | (#44249241)

Are they? Do you actually have any inside knowledge of the NSA and what they do

No of course not. That's the problem.

You could use the exact same defense for the Stasi. East Germans had no nice and official documentation about what they did, unless they worked for them. Were they therefore not entitled to have an opinion about it?

Most of them are probably doing harmless innocuous work, or actually tracing workable intelligence leads towards the bad guys.

Are they? Do you actually have any inside knowledge of the NSA and what they do?

Beleive it or not the intelligence community does serve a useful purpose

I'm not convinced. I've not seen conclusive evidence. Oh sure, I'm sure they stop a terrorist now and then, but the question is whether the threat they themselves pose to liberty is worse than the threats they deal with.

History suggests it is: people have vastly overestimated external threats compared to the threat from people nominally tasked with defending them.

Re:And what will happen if they do (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44249247)

Yeah, if it's routine for them to do evil I guess that makes it alright.

Re:And what will happen if they do (1)

oreaq (817314) | about a year ago | (#44249393)

Why not?

Because we are not them.

That isn't unauthorised access (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248813)

And moreover you can't take your face off to walk around in an area where you may be hurt.

So your analogy doesn't apply.

Re:And what will happen if they do (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248571)

This is the government we're talking about here, such disclaimers won't work against them, they either win in court or when they don't, they ignore the court anyway with complete impunity.

Did our ancestors really fight for this? I begin to wonder why they fought at all just so you can sit on your ass watching American Idol whilst having complete apathy to politics. The public deserve the government they get, in this case, the inaction of said people deserve to be ruled by a totalitarian government with an iron fist.

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (5, Interesting)

jythie (914043) | about a year ago | (#44248435)

I am kinda curious if they can enforce it in a legal way. 'hack the fed' would be one thing, but it would be terribly amusing to see security escorting federal agents out of the building. It is a private convention and they are free to prohibit anyone they like.

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (1)

KiloByte (825081) | about a year ago | (#44248635)

But how do you make sure that guy is indeed an undercover federal agent? You can be 99% sure, but, baring gross incompetence, you can't prove it.

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (4, Funny)

Sockatume (732728) | about a year ago | (#44248649)

Obvious joke: gross incompetence and Federal agents, those things don't overlap often.

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (5, Funny)

Mister Transistor (259842) | about a year ago | (#44248703)

Apparently, you only need to be 51% sure. ;)

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248707)

They only need to be 51% sure about it. If it's a good enough margin for the NSA to determine if someone is a citizen or a foreigner, then should be good enough for the DEF CON organizers, right? ;)

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248725)

Do you need to? If they are free to prohibit anyone they like a mere suspicion of federal agent could be enough.

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (5, Funny)

10101001 10101001 (732688) | about a year ago | (#44248747)

Engage in massive, illegal surveillance then hold a secret court to decide their "guilty".

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (2)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#44249383)

Followed by a drone strike at his family barbecue.

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248763)

They don't need to prove it - it's like with with witches and terrorists, "i call thee a fed", done, you're out.

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248711)

but it would be terribly amusing to see security escorting federal agents out of the building

Terribly amusing in the fact that the federal agents would probably be the one making arrests and escorting the security out of the building.

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | about a year ago | (#44248897)

Terribly amusing in the fact that the federal agents would probably be the one making arrests and escorting the security out of the building.

... thereby settling the difficult question "how to prove a fed"...

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248983)

thereby settling the difficult question "how to prove a fed"...

but how would the security themselves know that they were feds to begin with, the arrests by the federal agents just proves to the skeptics within the hacking group that feds are present.

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (1)

somersault (912633) | about a year ago | (#44249129)

How do you know that security aren't also the feds? :p

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (1)

mysidia (191772) | about a year ago | (#44248887)

It is a private convention and they are free to prohibit anyone they like.

They may be able to get their secret court to issue a warrant to have officers present, or to eavesdrop on the convention.

They just have to have one person suspected of a crime -- or persuade a judge of reasonable suspicion that illegal activities may be planned at this convention.

You can ban people by name, but there's no legal mechanism that allows you to select "No law enforcement activity on the premises"

They should have the Feds there! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248827)

And instead of playing "Spot the Fed" they play "Jeer at the Fed".

"Hey Fed, came hear to spy?! Here have a look!" And then moon him.

"Hey Fed, I got a one reason why you shouldn't spy!" Then flip him off.

"Hey Fed, I almost went into the NSA, but I wasn't eligible because my mother wasn't paid to have sex with my father."

You get the picture.

Re:Wrong way to go about it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44249033)

Maybe that's the point. What fun would hack the fed be without feds?

Welcome to DEFCON, I love you. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248357)

DEFCON Greeter: [Greeting every user] Welcome to DEFCON, I love you. Welcome to DEFCON, I love you. Welcome to DEFCON, I love you. Welcome to DEFCON, I love you.

DEFCON needs a PARTY VAN! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248393)

Just like in an Indiana Jones movie, where the entry way to a back door of a truck was obscured, and in another IJM where a plane door was open and the bad guy's name was hidden from view until it closed.

CALLING ALL PARTY VANS!

We need more of you at:

http://clsvtzwzdgzkjda7.onion/ [clsvtzwzdgzkjda7.onion]

For those civilians not attending (non-DEFCON related):

http://www.spyparty.com/ [spyparty.com]

MIBs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248397)

Never been to Def Con so have no idea how the feds look like, but I wonder if the federal agents attending Def Con wear black suits and stuff? :)
"GFTO fool! I ain't no fed! I just look good in black!" that's their typical excuse? :)

Re:MIBs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248449)

Never been to Def Con so have no idea how the feds look like, but I wonder if the federal agents attending Def Con wear black suits and stuff? :)
"GFTO fool! I ain't no fed! I just look good in black!" that's their typical excuse? :)

One thing hackers and people for TLAs have in common: They know their abbreviations.
Based on your "GFTO", I guess you're neither.

Or so you want me to think. Nice try, Fed!

Re:MIBs (4, Funny)

Thanshin (1188877) | about a year ago | (#44248461)

You can't use that to recognize the feds. All hackers wear black. And sunglasses the whole day long.

However, feds burn. And why do feds burn? ... Because they're made of wood.
How to know if one's made of wood? ... Because it floats.
And what also floats? ... A duck!
So, if the guy weights like a duck, he's a fed!

Re:MIBs (2)

mysidia (191772) | about a year ago | (#44248723)

You can't use that to recognize the feds. All hackers wear black. And sunglasses the whole day long.

The resolution to this is; hack everyone. If they were a fed, you'll be able to figure that out by the contents of their e-mail account and their My Documents folder.

If they didn't turn out to be a fed, you just scribble a quick apology and leave it as a note on their desktop; after you phinish bragging.

Re:MIBs (3, Funny)

Shoten (260439) | about a year ago | (#44249391)

The resolution to this is; hack everyone. If they were a fed, you'll be able to figure that out by the contents of their e-mail account and their My Documents folder.

If they even *have* a My Documents folder on a laptop at Defcon, you're most of the way to proving they're a fed...

Re:MIBs (4, Insightful)

C0R1D4N (970153) | about a year ago | (#44248481)

I am guessing they are generally physically fit with short cut hair.

Re:MIBs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44249061)

and pause like they're receiving instructions during your communication with them - especially when you ask them specific questions about themselves.

that's dumb (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44249361)

I enjoy "adventures in technology" as much as the next civvie but there's no reason to be fat or slovenly, and that certainly doesn't make me a fed.

You're the type to get popped by narcs, so busy are you looking for superficial indicators.

yes! wrongway to go about it (1)

df-smokes (2971929) | about a year ago | (#44248423)

I don't like this type of relationship.

Defcon is a freakshow (3, Interesting)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about a year ago | (#44248445)

Defcon hasn't been about Defcon for a long time now. Since, what, Defcon 5 or 6? Ever since they moved out to that dumb Alexis hotel.

The REAL conference is Blackhat Briefings, which goes on during the week and is attended by serious people. Then, on the weekend, we bring the freaks out for your amusement and cap off Blackhat with Defcon. It's all about $$$$$ for Darktangent.

Re:Defcon is a freakshow (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248531)

hah I remember being at defcon in 2002 and some crew from Japan public radio or something started interviewing me, went something like this:

interviewer: Why did you come to DefCon?

me: I'm totally here to hang with my friends and party.

interviewer: You didn't come here to share information?

me: d00d, we do that every day, it's called the In-ter-net.

Hi, I'm Sea Bass, Looking for a date @ DEF-CON (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248467)

I'll be the one dressed as a lumberjack, covered in salt.

Re:Hi, I'm Sea Bass, Looking for a date @ DEF-CON (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248615)

They missed your obscure Dumb and Dumber reference:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yab9fyO3M14 [youtube.com]

They say: "Do it!" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248501)

Is it just me who misunderstands this or did DEF CON just instruct certain non-lawful attendees to "hack the fed" (whatever that means)?

It is like "Do not eat the cookies" when you know you want the child to eat the cookies so you can later scold them for it. I do not think they should have announced something like this, it just gives people dumb ideas.

Re:They say: "Do it!" (2)

lxs (131946) | about a year ago | (#44248523)

So before you joined the agency, did you see yourself more as a Dale Cooper or as a Fox Mulder?

Re:They say: "Do it!" (1)

aliquis (678370) | about a year ago | (#44248547)

"hack the fed" (whatever that means)?

Yeah, that seem like a real challenge .. ;) huhum :)

Re:They say: "Do it!" (1)

Torvac (691504) | about a year ago | (#44248563)

"hack the fed" (whatever that means)?

Yeah, that seem like a real challenge .. ;) huhum :)

sure, but bring your own axe.

Re:They say: "Do it!" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248783)

It's not just you that misunderstands, a lot of feds misunderstand as well. Thus the reason for this request.

Some are not unreasonably afraid the feds will begin shooting the messengers once again, imprisoning people who not only committed no crime but attempted to prevent the crimes of others.

Comments such as yours combined with a long past history of doing exactly that, both recently and stretching far back in the past, are the proof of that fear.

"We aren't invited eh?!" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248557)

"We aren't invited to your silly hacker conference eh?! Well terrorists just heard that there are muslim traitors at this conference, see how that holds out for you!"

But really, you guys are being overly mad at things in the comments above.
Quite a few of these people have found employment and purpose at these conferences. Even if they became a dirty stinking... yeah.

Can they extend to non-invitation? (5, Insightful)

c0lo (1497653) | about a year ago | (#44248577)

Please... would DEFCON organizers be so kind to ask the spooks to stay out not only of the conference but out of the entire citizens life? Thanks.

Re:Can they extend to non-invitation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248915)

Thanks for saying it, it needed to be pointed out that the feds make shit up and the rest of the world seems to just have one choice: to follow.

The fact that the hacker community that attends (manages?) DEFCON feels that there's enough comradery between them and the feds is only one way to point out a serious flaw in the hacker's way of thinking, and that the feds have a lot more power over them than I thought.

I mean, what we're dealing with here is a bunch of guys that get to use tax dollars to point the spotlight on themselves, using any color they like. Also they can point it at you, again, any color they like. Just let the feds show up, play your silly little game 'spot the fed' and feel superior, because that's what DEFCON is all about.

Re:Can they extend to non-invitation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248951)

Please... would DEFCON organizers be so kind to ask the spooks to stay out not only of the conference but out of the entire citizens life? Thanks.

I feel like if any comment were ripe for demonizing Slashdot out of context, it would be this one.

Not the Feds you should worry about (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248587)

The Feds who show up and identify themselves as Feds aren't the Feds you need to worry about anyway.

Re:Not the Feds you should worry about (4, Funny)

Thanshin (1188877) | about a year ago | (#44248647)

The Feds who show up and identify themselves as Feds aren't the Feds you need to worry about anyway.

While saying that those weren't the feds we need to worry about... Did you wave a hand?

When you dance with the Devil, (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248603)

When you dance with the Devil, the Devil doesn't change - you do.

Look up Smedley Butler. He joined for patriotism, he was decorated for bravery and then he was used to murder civilians for agribusiness. Here we are a century later and the game is the same. Young men join for patriotism and end up murdering civilians for the profits of the 1%

Re:When you dance with the Devil, (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248961)

Recycling an outworn meme (2)

nojayuk (567177) | about a year ago | (#44248613)

In USA, Fed hacks YOU!

In an alternate universe the Def Con membership includes somebody by the name of Snowden... is he considered a Fed or not-Fed?

Re:Recycling an outworn meme (5, Funny)

mdragan (1166333) | about a year ago | (#44248641)

He is clearly well fed, but considering going hungary, or maybe Venezuela.

Defcon needs rave girls (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248699)

Nuff said. Slutty, promiscuous girls seem to be the norm for conference attractions anymore.

uhmmmmm i call bullshit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248785)

the guy who used to run l0pht now runs the Cyber Insider Threat program.

hackers have a nebulous grasp on morality..... so do the feds. thats who hires them.

i wouldnt be surprised if some of these cons, and especially these websites, were funded by the government.

Re:uhmmmmm i call bullshit (1)

cffrost (885375) | about a year ago | (#44249143)

My Slashdot friend PopeRatzo directed my attention to the following article, which provides a good overview for those unfamiliar with the Obama administration's "Insider Threat Program;" if any doubts remained regarding "the most transparent administration in US history," prepare to be even more disgusted:

Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S. [2013-06-20] [mcclatchydc.com]

as one of those top hackers (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248801)

ive never been nor shall i go for that very reason they do go.
anyone that thinks they are a hacker why the fuck would you out yourself so badly to them...
unless your a nsa type.
THATS what it has become a nsa recruiting ground for jerks.

Re:as one of those top hackers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44249175)

You couldn't hack around your own dick.

Feds probably go there to recruit, too... (1)

Bearhouse (1034238) | about a year ago | (#44248841)

Although (as seen here on /.) that's not been going too well for them lately, at least publicly.

But time, and the "law" is on their side.
And of course, they don't even have to physically go there to find out what's going on.

Showcase something smart, but borderline legal, and maybe you'll get a call after the conf. "inviting" you to join the team.

Spot the Government Contractor (3, Informative)

lemur3 (997863) | about a year ago | (#44248865)

Would it be any more difficult to spot one of the vast numerous contractors that work at the behest of the feds?

Brazilian? (1)

quenda (644621) | about a year ago | (#44248869)

Spot the fed may just turn into hack-the-fed

I hope you are not suggesting DEFCON might go Brazilian on them?

Who knows? An Orwellian surveillance state is a lot more serious than soccer.

Re:Brazilian? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44249431)

Yes! Brazilian is good!
( not the country...)

Federal restrictions will give them what they want (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44248907)

The conference organizers will likely get their wish, one way or another. For various reasons (Congressional budget fights, sequestration, a few high-profile wastes of taxpayer money, and an overarching effort to look austere) the administration has clamped down hard on all kinds of meetings and official travel, even in support of the agency mission. See Executive Order 13589 for more details. Lengthy approval processes, limits on number of Federal attendees at conferences, and restrictions on weekend travel will keep the Feds away from this conference. The irony is that the administrative cost of policing federal travel, combined with the missed opportunities for buying cheaper airfare and early conference registration, could be costing more money than it saves.

Re:Federal restrictions will give them what they w (1)

Dins (2538550) | about a year ago | (#44249021)

Lengthy approval processes, limits on number of Federal attendees at conferences, and restrictions on weekend travel will keep the Feds away from this conference.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!1!

Insufficiently paranoid, actually (4, Insightful)

argStyopa (232550) | about a year ago | (#44248995)

If you think the Feds you knew were there were the only Feds there, you're an idiot.

Personally, were I an FBI wonk, I'd have long-ago made penetrating DEFCON a priority on so many levels and so long ago that I'd have deep-penetration spooks in the leadership today, guiding policy. That's practically Machiavelli 101.

Hell, I'd have even doubled-up, and sent honeypot Feds to BE hacked/cracked/busted, so the Defcon kids would feel like they were winning, ala:
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/8581/4puc.jpg [imageshack.us]

(SFW aside from PG13 language).

semantics (4, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about a year ago | (#44249019)

Does "Fed" include all the people in that room who are contractors for various federal agencies?

Does anyone believe that being once removed by virtue of a private company makes you any less part of the police state?

Not ALL bad (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44249155)

Some federal agencies are still the good guys. Or at least are necessary. And the IT security folks in those agencies want to be able to defend the data, paid for or supplied by U.S. citizens, from the bad guys (criminals, other governments). There's an old saying (or maybe it was a song) that one bad apple doesn't spoil the whole bunch. There's another one about throwing out the baby with the bath water.

I understand and concur with the desire to protest the current surveillance state. But is it really a good idea to deprive NOAA or the IRS of the tools they may need to protect the integrity of climate or weather data, or to keep your tax returns out of the hands of identity thieves? Don't forget, we still have common foes out there. And not everyone in the U.S. government was complicit in the domestic surveillance.

Re:Not ALL bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44249437)

It's a good idea to deprive the IRS of all funds before it's used as a hammer again.

Simple hack: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44249199)

Presumably everyone going to the conference has an email address. So attach leaked classified documents to email notifications about the conference. This will put actual feds and contractors into a red-tape nightmare.

while we are at it (1)

cod3r_ (2031620) | about a year ago | (#44249367)

Please stay off my phone records and phone calls, and stay out of my internet logs, and all that noise..

They'll still be there. (1)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#44249369)

They just won't be having any fun, and will have to keep a lower profile this year unless their goal is to literally destroy the event. Which is a distinct possibility. The threat this poses to our freedom of association is more deeply concerning to me than any specifics of what they might do.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?