Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

boingboing.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 449 posts

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#251

Post by faissaloo »

torified wrote: post #165

The internet promised so much, but is being ruined by corporations and governments. I can't help but feel the ruining is accelerating. I hope the infosec community can come up with some kind of decentralized way to actually share free speech. If anyone is capable, they are. The discovery problem is an illusion. If you build it, they will come.

>The internet promised so much, but is being ruined by corporations and governments.

The only way to fight it is to make sites like we used to, and make sure they have onions

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#252

Post by class4behavior »

fimdomeio wrote: post #218

The thing that bores me the most is that the sentence not event makes sense. "Showing users how to bypass secure computer systems". If you can bypass a computer system, in which way can it be considered secure?

A secure system is a not open system. Think of a door to your apartment, house, etc. It isn't relevant how secure it is but whether it is closed to others or not.

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#253

Post by m0skit0 »

ArchD wrote: post #238
drukenemo wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because every security system is potentially flawed, contain bugs and therefore is vulnerable to hacking.

secure system != security system There is such a thing as an insecure security system.

So if I build a flawed security system, it is not insecure?

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#254

Post by VRay »

wruza wrote: post #217
alltakendamned wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The internet will route around this block, just like it has always routed around other obstacles. Infosec people tend to be crafty (it's a job requirement imo) and quite a lot of the greybeards were part of building the infrastructure from the beginning, so no need to despair yet.

But regular laymen never look beyond youtube (everything non-advertized and popular in general). There is no business model in being underground greybeard publisher.

Considering that you can pull in 100-300k as a security professional at a company, and a multiple of that as a consultant, I don't think that YouTube ad money is that big a deal

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#256

Post by kiallmacinnes »

piokoch wrote: post #201
oceanstone wrote: post #16

> Yesterday, Youtube froze Kody Kinzie's longrunning Cyber Weapons Lab channel Did his channel get unbanned? Kody's website links to this active channel with its first video uploaded in Oct 2017: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgTNupxATBfWmfehv21ym-g edit: Yep looks like the ban was a mistake ️ > In a subsequent comment, a YouTube spokesperson confirmed to The Verge that Cyber Weapons Lab’s channel was flagged by m…

It is always same story. If a problem concerns someone "well known" who is able to attract attention, than Google, Facebook, etc. are stepping back. If it were some random "amateurish" hacker channel, it would be banned and nobody would give a crap. The problem is that many valuable things started as some "amateurish" stuff put together by some clever guys in a garage.

To play devils advocate.. is this really true? Or do we just only hear about bans/reinstatements from people who are "able to attract attention"?

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#257

Post by m0skit0 »

syshum wrote: post #185
userbinator wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he was a bit off with regards to source code/open source, because while having source code helps in understanding and modification, it's not essential; you could similarly imagine a world in which open-source wasn't a huge movement but instead the right to reverse-engineer (or basically, understand ) software was guaranteed, and it would have as great an effect on freedom; perhaps even more so, because now it…

in the US DMCA did infact make alot of Reverse Engineering a violation of Copyright Most EULA's prohibit Reverse Engineering and companies like Oracle have entire legal teams dedicated to prohibiting reverse engineering going as far as prohibiting people from reporting security vulnerabilities discovered using "reverse engineering techniques" Further the wide interpretation the courts have allowed under CFAA can easi…

Unfortunately for Oracle if you prohibit people from reporting security vulnerabilities they will just sell them in the black market.

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#258

Post by bmurphy1976 »

jammygit wrote: post #20
userbinator wrote: post #7

What's next, cracking and reverse-engineering? Debugging? (Anti-authoritarian) programming ? As usual, Stallman tends to be quite prescient: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html (perhaps more like "right to watch" in this context.)

I always think he’s mostly right, but a little too uncompromising, but then everything he says comes true. I don’t know how he predicted so far ahead at the time, it’s humbling. As a software author working at startups, am I part of the problem? I don’t understand how to make a good living without locking down the code to some extent, with few exceptions (it’s hard to found red hat)

We need people like him. He's the anchor that keeps the ship from floating away at sea. If it were entirely left to the more practical people, GNU wouldn't be a thing and the ecosystem would suffer. We would all be worse off.

Re: YouTube's ban on “hacking techniques” threatens to shut down infosec YouTube

#259

Post by heinrichhartman »

The most upsetting thing for me is, that YT acts in both legislative and executive functions here.

It's one thing to make a rule, to ban "hacking techniques".

But there should be an independent party who get's to decide whether a particular video is about "hacking techniques" or not.

> Is teaching kids how to use wireshark(1) already hacking?

> How about the Chrome dev-console?

The current state of things, where:

a) a proprietary algorithm decides if a rule is violated or not and

b) you have no way to appeal decisions taken by YT,

is appalling.

Update: Well, there appears to be a YT-internal process to appeal censoring decisions. But who knows how well that works. In the past, appealing to copyright take-downs was practically impossible.

Post reply on HN