0vercat

Hacker ~ Cracker

24 posts in this topic

Im new - been up for 24 hours reading non-stop - will need 12 step group soon if this keeps up.

I don't want to offend anyone in #binrev.

Someone told me that Crackers have the same ideals but a different approach then do Hackers ~ paraphrasing.

Could I get some feedback on that concept please?

I came accross in - http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html

that just by me having a nick - ie. Overcat - to some will be viewed in a not so positve light to say the least - Im not trying to please everyone don't get me wrong, but is that an outdated comment?

Thanks much

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was I who said that. It's mostly just a big generalization. This has\is(?)\was a big thing awhile ago. ;)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Real world comparison:

If hacker discovered you forgot to lock your door they would make a note of it and tell you. If you do not react it is you own fault (White)

A cracker would walk in and take all of your shit.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the nick, yeah that one of the stupider things esr said in the doc. Most of it is "right" in my opinion, that however is just stupid in this day and age. The paper isn't really that old, just some of his opinions ;)

Most places a handle is nescessary. Some places (like a LUG meeting, you'll be looked at like a clown). Online though, my rule is handles are the way to go.

As for hacker/crackers one way to put it, what most people are saying when they say one or the other...is hackers find things, work on things, even security circumvention. The big difference in the two is hackers do things mostly with a good intention and good morals, crackers do things that classify them as criminals.

I kind of look at it a different way. Both are hackers. Some are hackers and good people, some are hackers and criminals. Just like stock traders, doctors, baseball players and priests. Both have the spirit, insticts, interest and all the things that make one a "hacker", Some just fall victim to greed, pride, ego, or fame desires. Or something along those lines.

There are 15 opinions on this for every 20 people you'll ask really. Myself, and most people in this particular community are fairly ethical. With good ethics as your guide, you rarely have to worry about falling on the wrong side of the law.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Real world comparison:

If hacker discovered you forgot to lock your door they would make a note of it and tell you.  If you do not react it is you own fault (White)

A cracker would walk in and take all of your shit.

|0| thats a great comparison!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me put a different perspective on what Nemasket and Evolve have all ready said. I feel the difference between a hacker and cracker is all about intention. Are you learning just to learn (hacker), or are you learning to steal/extort/rape/pillage (cracker)? At least hacker in the truest sense.

Unfortunately, the media has put a negative connotation on the term hacker. I can't even talk to my wife about computer stuff, not just because she zones me out, but because she keeps on telling me I'm going to get in trouble for hacking a Gibson. I did get my wife to watch the movie Hackers with me. hehe... so maybe she is coming around.

And handles are important online because of the anonymity of the internet. It only becomes cheesy if you are a sys admin and run around your work telling people to call you "The Plague"

-un

Edited by unsupported
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch Hackers. It will explain it. However If you get your hands on a copy of the anachist cookbook or jolly rogers handbook. one or the other I dont remember, but it has the hackers motto or what not. Not a good place for the hackers motto to be sourced with. Hackers the movie on the otherhand is a better place for it to be.

word.!!!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The short answer: who cares.

They're both too general to use. Why do people care so much about labels?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Labels are what help to define stereotypes and general ideas. That's why it's called a "label" or a "stereotype"

PS: Stereotype is not a defamatory stigma as most believe.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They at one point and time were a fuzzy line that many feared to exploit. For over 15yrs that line has been more clearly drawn out. In media rarely has it made it clear. Hackers <---- bad example of defining the line between haxor and crackerz and phreakers (for that matter.) But through the use of internet and communication amongst the masses, these stereotypes are being seperated as some want to fall under this catagory and some want to fall under tat category. Hackers aren't there to harm just there to share vulnerable exploits and crackers just want to fuck your shit up. I think the line is rather clear today versus 1995 to 1999. any who you tell me what you think

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again; how does adding a label help? I'm sure there are people that abuse exploits to do people harm that consider themselves hackers; what's the point of all this?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again; how does adding a label help?  I'm sure there are people that abuse exploits to do people harm that consider themselves hackers; what's the point of all this?

Does someone labeling you as a caucasian male help to define who you are? I highly doubt it but you're labeled for stereotypical and psychological reasons. It helps to make the connection between A and B. Whether you want to be called a caucasion male, short of painting yourself another color and getting your penis inverted to a vagina, there's nothing you can do to escape that label.

The same is true for the hacker/cracker quandary.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Real world comparison:

If hacker discovered you forgot to lock your door they would make a note of it and tell you.  If you do not react it is you own fault (White)

A cracker would walk in and take all of your shit.

More like the hacker finds a way in your house, the cracker just breaks the door down.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let me put a different perspective on what Nemasket and Evolve have all ready said.  I feel the difference between a hacker and cracker is all about intention.  Are you learning just to learn (hacker), or are you learning to steal/extort/rape/pillage (cracker)?  At least hacker in the truest sense.

Unfortunately, the media has put a negative connotation on the term hacker.  I can't even talk to my wife about computer stuff, not just because she zones me out, but because she keeps on telling me I'm going to get in trouble for hacking a Gibson.  I did  get my wife to watch the movie Hackers with me. hehe... so maybe she is coming around.

And handles are important online because of the anonymity of the internet.  It only becomes cheesy if you are a sys admin and run around your work telling people to call you "The Plague"

-un

I have to agree with UNSUPPORTED. It's not about what you know, it's about how you use it that defines you. In this case a hacker or a cracker.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

In evolves post he put

"With good ethics as your guide, you rarely have to worry about falling on the wrong side of the law"

and other people have used the example of

"More like the hacker finds a way in your house, the cracker just breaks the door down"

to find out if you have a hack surely you are going to have to carry out exploit out urself?

And also you might have good ethics but if you are found out and taken to court how are you going to explain yourself? Also because you have brought awarness to an exploit that company is going to have to spend time and money to fix it? do you think they are going to right that money off?

i hope i am making sense

tom

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trident...MAKE YOUR FUCKING SIG PICTURE A SHITLOAD SMALLER, THERE ARE DIAL-UP USERS!.

thank you.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hacking is exploiting vulnerabilites on computers remotely'

cracking is exploiting the code that the program was written in

why are you guys saying a cracker is a bad evil hacker

Edited by K.H.O.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cracker is also used for other things, like someone who 'cracks' license key algorithms, encryption algorithms, etc. Those aren't necessarily bad things, especially if you are doing it to find holes in certain things.

It only becomes cheesy if you are a sys admin and run around your work telling people to call you "The Plague"

You left out riding a skateboard to work :D

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I think that we need labels to differentiate between different types of hackers (for communication purposes. You don't call all automobiles "cars". Instead you classify them by type, brand, etc) I don't like the whole hacker/cracker duality. First of all it's too simplified, an either/or situation. Also, "cracker" had a lot of other meanings in the H/P/A/C/V community before it became a connotation for "evil hacker."

The white/grey/black hat labelling scheme makes more sense but seems a little unclear on the definitions. It seems to deal with the legality of one's actions instead of the intent.

Uhm..yeah.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off I'd like to clarify that I wouldn't suggest the catb tutorial for anybody. It's much too simplified in it's labeling, and if you read really close you can see the author's ignorance on many subjects. Especially when he started talking about Linux. From reading his article, I don't think he has much grounds to be teaching anyone. Secondly, I have yet to find any labeling system that truly fits. I think the problem is that the attitude of such things has shifted over to a pro-IT security feel. You can look at the shift of topics in Phrack to see how that shift was made overtime. Like according to the hacker-cracker definition any geek with some programming experience can be labeled as a hacker, while anyone who breaks into systems is not only a cracker and thus a despised criminal, but is further made to believe that this action leads to the destruction of everything in sight. Then you move over to the white hat/grey hat/black hat system. A white hat hacker is apparently someone who works in the field, and either does pen testing as his/her profession, or sends the administrator a nice memo telling him to patch up whatever way they got in. Then a grey hat hacker is from everything I've read someone who "sometimes" notifies the administrator. Then a black hat hacker is someone who breaks in with no notification, and is usually classified as being there to cause damage to the system. These are as a couple of others on this thread said over-generalizations. I personally think things were a whole lot easier a couple of decades ago. When you were a hacker if you broke into systems, regardless of your intent, and if you were a really good programmer, well, you were a really good programmer. The politics of it all has really caused a lot of confusion. So to the thread-starter, don't worry about the labels. Don't worry about any of it. Regardless of what anybody pegs you, you are your own person. You know what you want to do, and you know what kind of person you are. To hell with the labels, just be yourself.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You got it wrong, mate. A few decades ago if you broke into systems you broke into system. If you wrote creative, innovative code you were a hacker.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I was referring to the 80s (notice I said a couple of days, as in 2, now open up your hand and count to two, now subtract that from our current decade, good boy), not the MIT days. There weren't that many people breaking into computer systems back in those MIT days so there was no argument about what it meant back then. Today there is much argument about it, because every nerd who knows only the basics about computers suddenly thinks they have the right to be called a hacker, and therefore is trying to force the media to acknowledge them as hackers.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now