Vast Majority Of Hackers Believe They're Above The Law

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The results of a new survey show that the vast majority of hackers believe they're above the law (at least until they are arrested ;))

When most hackers are infiltrating computer systems, the last thing on their mind is getting caught, according to new data. In fact, despite many highly publicized arrests, 86 percent of hackers believe they will never face repercussions.
Click to expand...
 
Considering how inept cybercrime units usually are, most hackers are right. The Lulzsec guys got caught because they sucked at being covert.
 
Doesn't the law believe they are also above the law?

Crime fighting malware... Etc...
 
Isn't this true of just about any criminal though? I mean sure they know they could be caught, but they don't ever believe they will be caught because if they did why would they do it in the first place since the reward is not worth the repercussion "Hmmm a few hundred for a gas station or 10 years of my life behind bars.... yeah it's totally worth it!"
 
Only two solutions..

1 - More CSI TV shows.. the 15 or so out there just isn't enough!!

or..

2 - Bring back Batman!!

BATMAN_Card_Key_Rev.jpg
 
The worst part is they're probably right. In the US, it takes an act of Congress to get police to do any sort of actual enforcement of hacking laws, meaning it would have to affect their campaign contributors to get any action. In Russia or China, they're rewarded and lauded as heroes for do financial harm to people in the US or Europe. Europe is about the only place where they'd face enforcement. It's pitiful.
 
Stoly said:
The same applies to drug lords, serial killers, rapists, pedophiles, robbers....
Click to expand...

Lawyers, politicians, actors, actresses, producers, directors, NSA, FBI, CIA, police officers, state troopers, mall security guys........
 
The sad reality is you have to be extraordinarily stupid to be caught for a crime. This goes beyond hacking. The fact is the majority of crimes go unpunished Even things like murder, the clearance rate is only like 60-70%. And this doesn't even take into account crimes which are never investigated to begin with.
 
Notoriety is usually one of the biggest driving factors in the real world for that type of person, once they're involved in the scene. * Hat cons, and Defcon wouldn't exist without the personality weight towards notoriety. If by some circumstance they don't get into the scene, and they're loners, hubris eventually wins out and it happens via another avenue.

Most hackers are not worried about getting caught because they're not paying attention to all of the hops between their bounce and target. They all have the potential to be logging the traffic, and not everything along the way is going to be readily exploitable. Meanwhile they're only thinking about local logs and how superior to everyone else they are because they just remoted something. That untouchable feeling is exactly why honeypots are so effective.
 
Ashbringer said:
The ones working for the NSA are certainly above the law.
Click to expand...

No, they haven't broken the law at all.

What makes you think this?

Is it because you don't understand the difference between a Military Intelligence Organization and Law Enforcement Organizations?

I can help you with that if you want.
 
lcpiper said:
No, they haven't broken the law at all.

What makes you think this?

Is it because you don't understand the difference between a Military Intelligence Organization and Law Enforcement Organizations?

I can help you with that if you want.
Click to expand...

Actually it has more to do with the NSA's admitted abuse of such information that some of their employees have used to spy on their significant others or exes. There has been no punishment for this abuse so far, and I don't expect there to be. Most others don't expect it either.
 
Aren't a large number of hackers in their teens and early twenties ... with the latest studies indicating that the brain doesn't fully mature until the mid twenties this isn't surprising ... lots of teenagers have a limited comprehension of the consequences of their actions (which is why so many die in auto accidents and drinking/drug fatalities) ... for hackers that are older than the mid twenties there is a certain arrogance of that crowd ... but ultimately your quote sums it up best ... "everyone thinks they are above the law, until they are caught" ;)
 
dgingeri said:
The worst part is they're probably right. In the US, it takes an act of Congress to get police to do any sort of actual enforcement of hacking laws, meaning it would have to affect their campaign contributors to get any action. In Russia or China, they're rewarded and lauded as heroes for do financial harm to people in the US or Europe. Europe is about the only place where they'd face enforcement. It's pitiful.
Click to expand...


Actually you are wrong about the enforcement thing.

Here are the challenges;

1st You have to know a crime was committed.

2nd Depending on the crime and the "value of damages or theft" the crime has to be reported to the correct Law Enforcement Agency. Doesn't do any good to report a crime, that isn't a Federal Offense, to the FBI.

3rd If the crime is not a Federal Offense then you have to hope the correct LE Agency is staffed and capable of dealing with it. Some are, some are not, some have their hand's full with other problems. And sometimes, although the crime doesn't qualify as a Federal Offense, the bad guys live far outside of a local LE Agency's jurisdiction making it very hard for them to pursue the case.

These are just some of the issues.

As for these hackers, one part of the problem is that they actually start believing their own bullshit about being little "Cyber Robinhoods" and that they are really doing good things and helping company's identify their security issues. Maybe if they took some time to get the Company's OK first before they started "testing" a site with SQL injection scripts then they wouldn't piss people off so much.
 
I believe this. I once hacked the Gibson and still haven't been caught.

#hacktheplanet
 
By dgingeri;
Actually it has more to do with the NSA's admitted abuse of such information that some of their employees have used to spy on their significant others or exes. There has been no punishment for this abuse so far, and I don't expect there to be.
Click to expand...

I read the same article, the LOVEINT report, actually I studied that article very carefully.
Only ONE Employee actually improperly gained access to the information of a US Person and she did it by mistake while investigating the relatives of a Non-US Person who was a designated intelligence target. this NSA Employee was demoted, retrained to a new position, bared from promotion for a significant period of time and the Letter of Reprimand in her file ensures she will probably not advance to a Senior position in the NSA.

The others who tried to access US Person Information failed to get it, were caught and fired.

The ones who gained access to information on foreign nationals all were either fired or quit before they could be fired. Their misdeeds were all forwarded to the DoJ for action. Since these were things done against foreigners in overseas postings I am sure it was deemed best to let it slide and not prosecute because that would risk divulging what we are able to do. These people all were removed or removed themselves from positions where they could cause future harm so then it becomes an issue of is it worth it to pursue them criminally when the crime they committed was a crime against the US Government. Remember, these people were foreign nationals not protected by US Law so accessing their info isn't the crime, the crime is misusing NSA Surveillance Authority for personal reasons.

So make sure you got your numbers straight. That LOVEINT Article sounded damning the way the reporter wrote it. But if you understand and care enough to really read it you find out that it's actually complimentary and shows the NSA does a pretty good job at keeping their house clean.
 
kbrickley said:
Aren't a large number of hackers in their teens and early twenties ... with the latest studies indicating that the brain doesn't fully mature until the mid twenties this isn't surprising ... lots of teenagers have a limited comprehension of the consequences of their actions (which is why so many die in auto accidents and drinking/drug fatalities) ... for hackers that are older than the mid twenties there is a certain arrogance of that crowd ... but ultimately your quote sums it up best ... "everyone thinks they are above the law, until they are caught" ;)
Click to expand...

I agree fully with your assessment kbrinkley.
 
The ones that get caught are the ones that want to be in the papers. The other 99%? I'm not sure they are above the law, but they aren't getting caught any time soon.
 
Well, I think I like the Russian/Eastern European hackers the best, at least we know their motivations are all about the Benjamens. The Chinese are mostly all military cyberwarfare types and in the US we have our pathetic "hacktivists" like Anonymous. They make the Russians look better at every tern.
 
kbrickley said:
Aren't a large number of hackers in their teens and early twenties ... with the latest studies indicating that the brain doesn't fully mature until the mid twenties this isn't surprising ... lots of teenagers have a limited comprehension of the consequences of their actions (which is why so many die in auto accidents and drinking/drug fatalities) ... for hackers that are older than the mid twenties there is a certain arrogance of that crowd ... but ultimately your quote sums it up best ... "everyone thinks they are above the law, until they are caught" ;)
Click to expand...

And why the NSA loves to hire young kids who show promise. They don't think of the ethical consequences.
 
DigitalGriffin said:
And why the NSA loves to hire young kids who show promise. They don't think of the ethical consequences.
Click to expand...

Young people are uniquely moldable for many purposes ... which is why the military prefers 18 and 19 year old recruits as well ... there was an excellent documentary made back in the 80's called "Anybody's Son will do" that discussed how the young can be molded into good soldiers during basic training (and why basic training is set up the way it is)
 
DigitalGriffin said:
And why the NSA loves to hire young kids who show promise. They don't think of the ethical consequences.
Click to expand...

What ethical consequences?

there are no ethical consequences for hacking a foreign governments systems, or the systems of any potential enemy, or people who have turned on their own country.

The ethical consequences are not nearly as bad as those of a Soldier who has to pull the trigger or drop the bombs.

The NSA is a Department of Defense intelligence Service. Jesus you are slow to get it.
 
kbrickley said:
Young people are uniquely moldable for many purposes ... which is why the military prefers 18 and 19 year old recruits as well ... there was an excellent documentary made back in the 80's called "Anybody's Son will do" that discussed how the young can be molded into good soldiers during basic training (and why basic training is set up the way it is)
Click to expand...

Why is it you are under the impression the Military prefers young recruits?

How about you consider some new facts.

http://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/join-the-military-basic-eligibility.html
The US military is a volunteer force and accepts new recruits as young as 17 and depending on the branch of service, from 29 to 39. AirForce is 27, Army 34, Coast guard 39. So the Military doesn't pick'em, but they do prefer to get them a little younger.

Now let's explore why;
Certainly the younger ones can learn a little quicker, their bodies adapt quickly, and frankly, they ask fewer questions which speeds training. But the Military is a professional force and takes many years to achieve real mastery of your job skills. Like starting in any business they begin at the ground level and "work their way up".

I began as RADAR Intercept Operator, I worked as part of a small team, deployed our equipment to mountain tops and such and listened to enemy RADARs reporting the technical details of what I collected. After a couple of years I was promoted to Sergeant and ran my own team, later I worked in the Divisions Analysis shop receiving the reports that I used to send and looking at other info to see what else we could learn. Still later on I was assigned to a position where I instructed new soldiers as I had once been at the school. As I was again promoted I was assigned to some more unique positions, I began training Officers and even traveling to train entire Analysis Teams on how to use new computer systems to do their jobs with greater speed and accuracy. At one point I was recognized for my work by the Secretary of the Army himself, Togo West, but that was a long time ago.

I am not telling you this to wow you or to toot my horn. I am telling you this so you can get an understanding on just how many years it takes for Soldiers to gain the depth of knowledge and experience that the Army needs from even mid grade leaders. It takes 10 years just to get a clue what is going on and it takes 15 or more to really become a serious asset. This is the real reason the Army likes them young, it's so they have time to actually become a serious and dedicated professional soldier who can get the job done.

You know this isn't unique, it's pretty much the same everywhere. It usually takes many years for a person to really gain a true understanding of whatever profession they chose to make their career and the military isn't any different.

The reason the US Military is such a deadly force isn't just because we get such neat toys, it's because we take the time to really learn how to use them. That's why conscription won't work for us, if we only signed folks on for a couple of years and turned them loose we wouldn't be able to fight any better then Iraq's Republican guard did. We ate them up so bad in the first war they didn't even try to stand up to us the second time.

Let that one sink in awhile.
 
lcpiper said:
Why is it you are under the impression the Military prefers young recruits?

How about you consider some new facts.

http://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/join-the-military-basic-eligibility.html
The US military is a volunteer force and accepts new recruits as young as 17 and depending on the branch of service, from 29 to 39. AirForce is 27, Army 34, Coast guard 39. So the Military doesn't pick'em, but they do prefer to get them a little younger.

Now let's explore why;
Certainly the younger ones can learn a little quicker, their bodies adapt quickly, and frankly, they ask fewer questions which speeds training. But the Military is a professional force and takes many years to achieve real mastery of your job skills. Like starting in any business they begin at the ground level and "work their way up".

I began as RADAR Intercept Operator, I worked as part of a small team, deployed our equipment to mountain tops and such and listened to enemy RADARs reporting the technical details of what I collected. After a couple of years I was promoted to Sergeant and ran my own team, later I worked in the Divisions Analysis shop receiving the reports that I used to send and looking at other info to see what else we could learn. Still later on I was assigned to a position where I instructed new soldiers as I had once been at the school. As I was again promoted I was assigned to some more unique positions, I began training Officers and even traveling to train entire Analysis Teams on how to use new computer systems to do their jobs with greater speed and accuracy. At one point I was recognized for my work by the Secretary of the Army himself, Togo West, but that was a long time ago.

I am not telling you this to wow you or to toot my horn. I am telling you this so you can get an understanding on just how many years it takes for Soldiers to gain the depth of knowledge and experience that the Army needs from even mid grade leaders. It takes 10 years just to get a clue what is going on and it takes 15 or more to really become a serious asset. This is the real reason the Army likes them young, it's so they have time to actually become a serious and dedicated professional soldier who can get the job done.

You know this isn't unique, it's pretty much the same everywhere. It usually takes many years for a person to really gain a true understanding of whatever profession they chose to make their career and the military isn't any different.

The reason the US Military is such a deadly force isn't just because we get such neat toys, it's because we take the time to really learn how to use them. That's why conscription won't work for us, if we only signed folks on for a couple of years and turned them loose we wouldn't be able to fight any better then Iraq's Republican guard did. We ate them up so bad in the first war they didn't even try to stand up to us the second time.

Let that one sink in awhile.
Click to expand...

Sorry, the documentary was from the 80's when we were still in the height of the cold war and just starting to seriously analyze our role in Vietnam, so it could have been a little slanted ... it was certainly more targeted at how you train a person to kill (which is usually much easier for the young) ... but I would agree that the modern military is a much smaller professional organization where age is likely not as important as when we needed waves of privates to use as ground forces ... no slight to our many talented professional soldiers was intended :cool:
 
Oh, I didn't take it as a slight, and I did enlist in 1981, I was 21 years old. And most of the guys were younger then me. But I got to see the full transition from that post-Vietnam Army through the buildup to the very height of the Professional US Army circa 1990. I say 1990 because this is when the Army went to fight Iraq the first time and we all learned just how superior we had become at Air-Land Battle as it was called. Following this conflict there was a big draw down similar to today, big moral problems, and the Army coined the saying "Do more with less". For the next 5 years the Army suffered as they finally came to grips and acknowledge that you can't really do more with less, but you can do better at what's important and contract the rest or just let it go if it's not that important. And then we came around to 9/11, Afghanistan and Iraq itself.

And some might not think this is valid, but I know a guy who used to fly the first Combat Drones from out of that Airbase in Las Vegas, I never can remember it's name. But I can tell you that guy certainly has his demons, the video screen might make it easier at the time but I think it only postpones the reality and weights on the soul just as hard as if you had pulled the trigger of a rifle.
I will admit, I was in for 16 years and never had to do that, and I am thankful for it.
 
Insula Gilliganis said:
Only two solutions..

1 - More CSI TV shows.. the 15 or so out there just isn't enough!!
Click to expand...

Hmmm... Good idea. I'd love to see a show similar to CSI, but created by technical people. It wouldn't be too entertaining for regular people, but for the others - it'd be more of an educational type of show. Maybe some kind of tutorial series set in a CSI style.

Learn (CEH or white hat stuff) security topics while being entertained.

Maybe just a technically accurate CSI: Network division or something. I hate those shows, but do something like that and it'd make it much more interesting to me. Probably not 100%, you'd need to save some time (dramatize the time needed for doing things - like cooking shows!).
 
You know it would just turn into hackers exploding people's PCs and cell phones, unfortunately.
 
kbrickley said:
Aren't a large number of hackers in their teens and early twenties ... with the latest studies indicating that the brain doesn't fully mature until the mid twenties this isn't surprising ... lots of teenagers have a limited comprehension of the consequences of their actions (which is why so many die in auto accidents and drinking/drug fatalities) ... for hackers that are older than the mid twenties there is a certain arrogance of that crowd ... but ultimately your quote sums it up best ... "everyone thinks they are above the law, until they are caught" ;)
Click to expand...

That'd be the _male_ brain which is an important thing to remember. Women in their late teens are already lots more mature than men in their late 20s. Then again, most hackers and other people who aspire to commit crimes or violent acts are also male so it makes perfect sense that there are developmental problems on the stinky, hairy side of the gender divide.
 
It's not just hackers, so do many in the enthusiast community and even average computer users. they feel they can pirate as they wish and the legal consequences are meaningless.

The truth is we have an entitlement mentality in this generation that has run rampant and they feel they can do as they wish because they are owed something. Hackers and pirates are both criminals and both often feel the law does not apply to them because they do not like it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top