Is it possible that this post is a message to many who work for the government to evaluate what they are doing and decide whether they are comfortable with what their job involves. After all there's a huge spectrum of possible actions between whistle-blowing and unthinkingly following procedures. And you can work for change from within... perhaps.
Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
101–110 of 260 posts
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#102As hackers we have an ethical obligation to refuse service to tyrants and dictators. Like mercenaries who profiteer off war, we should ostracize those who act against humanity.
Exactly: Stay away from North Korea
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#103This is going to be my tenth (?!) year at DEF CON. The culture of DEF CON, and especially its evolution, is a very interesting one. When I first attended DEF CON, it was a bunch of seemingly scary hackers. Fortunately, it turns out most of them were amazing people. As the conference grew (and changed venues several times), the culture began to evolve. The barrier to entry--in terms of being "accepted" into the subcul…
>many, though, actually do work for defense and intelligence contractors. Should they be banned because of their affiliation? Absolutely. The hacker community should not contribute to the knowledge of those who work to undermine privacy and feed the surveillance-industrial complex.
I think you are confusing the current social/political issue (overreaching surveillance) with the mere fact that surveillance technology exists (a neutral thing, in and out of itself). This would be like speaking out against police in general, because police can be corrupt. It is understandable, but not realistic; we still want those robberies, murders and break-ins solved.
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#104Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
>How do you decide if it's okay or not to discriminate against employees when the employer in question is legal? What is legal and what is ethical are not necessarily the same thing, hence laws changing to make slavery illegal, etc. Ethical considerations often result in the changing of laws.
So ethical things can be illegal, unethical things can be legal. Would discrimination against the employees of a legal employer in one's own state (country) ever be unethical?
>Would discrimination against the employees of a legal employer in one's own state (country) ever be unethical?
Of course. Feel free to skip the leading questions and make whatever point you're working towards.
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
If one doesn't want to be besmirched by the dealings of an employer that profits from supplying mass surveillance tech then one should work elsewhere.
So discrimination against employees is okay if you don't like the employer?
I don't see how this can be in question, if the employees chose their employer freely. How can one seriously oppose a corporate entity if one may not oppose the people who comprise the corporate entity.
"Corporations are people, my friend".
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#107The "feds" in cooperation with silicon valley invented the Internet going back to the late 60's, so it should be no surprise that every technology from the bottom of the stack to the top is completely insecure.
Although the exploitation of it on a mass scale as we are seeing is a scurrilous, scandalous practice, we as folks who pretend to know what we are talking about, need to realize that.
If we are committed to righting the ship many things have to go out of the window.
TCP/IP, DNS, proxies forward or reverse, CA Certificate authorities, MAC addresses, software based kernel extensions.
Feeling up to it?
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
>many, though, actually do work for defense and intelligence contractors. Should they be banned because of their affiliation? Absolutely. The hacker community should not contribute to the knowledge of those who work to undermine privacy and feed the surveillance-industrial complex.
I think you are confusing the current social/political issue (overreaching surveillance) with the mere fact that surveillance technology exists (a neutral thing, in and out of itself). This would be like speaking out against police in general, because police can be corrupt. It is understandable, but not realistic; we still want those robberies, murders and break-ins solved.
Overreaching surveillance has been an open secret since ECHELON was revealed. The idea of mass surveillance tech existing without being abused is great, theoretically, but may not work in practice. Yes, we want intelligence organizations to do their jobs ethnically, but there is currently no reason for them to do so. Therefore, until there is a reason for these organizations to behave, it is entirely rational to do everything possible to lessen their currently excessive power.
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#109This is going to be my tenth (?!) year at DEF CON. The culture of DEF CON, and especially its evolution, is a very interesting one. When I first attended DEF CON, it was a bunch of seemingly scary hackers. Fortunately, it turns out most of them were amazing people. As the conference grew (and changed venues several times), the culture began to evolve. The barrier to entry--in terms of being "accepted" into the subcul…
>many, though, actually do work for defense and intelligence contractors. Should they be banned because of their affiliation? Absolutely. The hacker community should not contribute to the knowledge of those who work to undermine privacy and feed the surveillance-industrial complex.
I completely agree with your argument.
However, this seems to imply that all American hackers/entrepreneurs/etc.need to move to remote cabins in Montana and stop contributing to society, because anyone who contributes to society in America is directly supporting this system (albeit, 1 degree removed from those working directly for the government).
I currently don't know a way around this problem, and I don't actually want to stop being productive. I've had this on my mind for a while. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
>many, though, actually do work for defense and intelligence contractors. Should they be banned because of their affiliation? Absolutely. The hacker community should not contribute to the knowledge of those who work to undermine privacy and feed the surveillance-industrial complex.
So you're saying we shouldn't have open source? Shouldn't publish information from conferences?
Not publishing information would harm legitimate community. What is published, however, isn't the entirety of the value a conference provides. Anyone who attends conferences knows that much of the useful information is gained outside of talks. Malicious organizations personally attend conferences not simply to watch the talks in person, but to gather intelligence on infosec and target attendees and to create employee/CI relationships.