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

The White Hat's Dilemma

docs.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 115 posts

Re: The White Hat's Dilemma

#61

Post by mr_spothawk »

icebraining wrote: post #52
mr_spothawk wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fuck it, I'll go ahead and say it: First, thanks for coming clean. You're a human being who's made a really bad decision. You should feel terrible for this. "They" are not merely your possible friends, or your relative's relatives, or your neighbors' cousins... "They" are other human beings who might someday decide to stand up for their human rights. "They" are millions of people you sold out for easy "dinner" & "ren…

What did you hope to accomplish with this post? "Here's someone who did something bad, who can't undo it, and who feels bad enough to come clean - let's rub it in so as to discourage others from doing so"?

I was very very clear about what I hoped to accomplish: a repentance from the actor in this case, and to highlight their stupidity to others.

And I wish more people would stand up and say it to their friends and relatives when those people graduate college and start talking about working for the Military Industrial Complex, "Cyber" anything, or various other companies who build bombs, agents of war, or devices used to subjugate other humans.

I hope this person will work hard to redeem what he's wrought. Nothing else can redeem him, his work won't just disappear for his remorse.

>Too bad your behavior is not undoable and you'll have to live with it for the rest of your life. Maybe you can do something to recover for it in the future. Hopefully your ethical failure can serve as an example of what not to do.

I hope that others will send the message loudly and clearly to those that would create bomb parts or fragments of code necessary for snooping tools or facilitate those who would like to usurp peaceful human behavior.

Re: The White Hat's Dilemma

#62

Post by badman_ting »

clicks wrote: post #27
tptacek wrote: post #20

Here's an alternative vantage point, my vantage point, one I think makes these kinds of ethical quandaries easier to navigate: * I'm not a "white hat" or a "black hat" * I'm not deliberately involved in any kind of "cyber" conflict * I don't do what I do because I'm battling the forces of evil, or organized crime, or anything else Instead: I do engineering. The same way a contract driver developer does, or a Rails de…

Reading what you just wrote reminded me of the famous Edmund Burke quote: "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing". If it had not been for the acquiescence of engineers who took part in the creation of PRISM, XKeyscore, etc. we... well, we would not have PRISM, XKeyscore, etc. Increasingly there is no such thing as an "amoral" position when it comes to a lot of these things -- you're…

I just don't see what this has to do with what tptacek posted. Seems to me he is indeed advocating refusing to take part.

Re: The White Hat's Dilemma

#63

Post by [deleted] »

mr_spothawk wrote: post #60
amirmc wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it's a lot of people's 'decision' to bury their heads in the sand about the implications of Snowden's leaks. In that light, why isn't it also directed at everyone who doesn't care, rather than one guy who does? Edit: What about the employer's choices to go ahead with it? No anger directed that way? This guy should have fallen on his sword but his company gets a pass?

Yeah, every person in the chain needs to wake the f* up. Please don't mistake my lack of attention to Blizzard's complicity as a 'pass'. I actively campaign against folks who would bury their heads in the sand. In the past decade I have spent huge effort (preaching?) to convince my peers not to accept work in these Military Industrial jobs and to leave them if they're already there. I've had quite a bit of success in…

[deleted]

Re: The White Hat's Dilemma

#64

Post by wslh »

throwaway3902 wrote: post #8

I used to work for Blizzard. The Chinese government requested that we modify the WoW client so that they could intercept all chat. As far as I know, no-one said anything, including me - and Blizzard, of course, was more than happy to comply, given the size of the market and the risk of being forbidden to do business there. There were plenty of other MMOGs happy to play ball and eat that cake. I didn't say anything. I…

I was asked by government agency to protect (even from other government agencies) specific individuals information that were probable involved in corruption cases. I was vocal and fought against it and was ready to publicize it once finished. At the end the project was cancelled.

So... I don't believe in neutral ethical engineering decisions when the outcomes are crystal clear. I am not talking about ethical decisions on working at Zynga, at the end people can decide if they play their stupid games or not.

Re: The White Hat's Dilemma

#65

Post by AnthonyMouse »

PavlovsCat wrote: post #50
mdt wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If it had not been for the acquiescence of engineers who took part in the creation of PRISM, XKeyscore, etc. we... well, we would not have PRISM, XKeyscore, etc. Oh, come on, man. If you think this is true in the fullest sense, you are not a thinking individual. Mere technological feasibility is 99% of the battle; implementation is the last, most inevitable step. >the famous Edmund Burke quote: "All that is necessar…

Mere technological feasibility is 99% of the battle; implementation is the last, most inevitable step. Inevitable? As in, happens all by itself? How is that thinking?

The argument is presumably that if you won't do it, they'll find someone else who will.

That's a pretty shit argument for being the one who folds. If everyone does refuse then it doesn't get built. If you refuse and they find someone else, that person may not be as good as you and may create a less effective surveillance apparatus which is easier for white hats to neutralize or dismantle.

Engineering has practical consequences. If you build something that gets democracy activists killed, you're the one who has to live with that. There are plenty of cool problems to solve that don't involve the construction of a surveillance state.

Re: The White Hat's Dilemma

#66

Post by [deleted] »

[deleted] wrote: post #63
mr_spothawk wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, every person in the chain needs to wake the f* up. Please don't mistake my lack of attention to Blizzard's complicity as a 'pass'. I actively campaign against folks who would bury their heads in the sand. In the past decade I have spent huge effort (preaching?) to convince my peers not to accept work in these Military Industrial jobs and to leave them if they're already there. I've had quite a bit of success in…

[deleted]

[deleted]

Re: The White Hat's Dilemma

#68

Post by [deleted] »

[deleted] wrote: post #63
mr_spothawk wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, every person in the chain needs to wake the f* up. Please don't mistake my lack of attention to Blizzard's complicity as a 'pass'. I actively campaign against folks who would bury their heads in the sand. In the past decade I have spent huge effort (preaching?) to convince my peers not to accept work in these Military Industrial jobs and to leave them if they're already there. I've had quite a bit of success in…

[deleted]

[deleted]

Re: The White Hat's Dilemma

#69

Post by [deleted] »

mr_spothawk wrote: post #60
amirmc wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it's a lot of people's 'decision' to bury their heads in the sand about the implications of Snowden's leaks. In that light, why isn't it also directed at everyone who doesn't care, rather than one guy who does? Edit: What about the employer's choices to go ahead with it? No anger directed that way? This guy should have fallen on his sword but his company gets a pass?

Yeah, every person in the chain needs to wake the f* up. Please don't mistake my lack of attention to Blizzard's complicity as a 'pass'. I actively campaign against folks who would bury their heads in the sand. In the past decade I have spent huge effort (preaching?) to convince my peers not to accept work in these Military Industrial jobs and to leave them if they're already there. I've had quite a bit of success in…

[deleted]

Re: The White Hat's Dilemma

#70

Post by alan_cx »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #46
throwaway3902 wrote: post #8

I used to work for Blizzard. The Chinese government requested that we modify the WoW client so that they could intercept all chat. As far as I know, no-one said anything, including me - and Blizzard, of course, was more than happy to comply, given the size of the market and the risk of being forbidden to do business there. There were plenty of other MMOGs happy to play ball and eat that cake. I didn't say anything. I…

But much like with the US government spying, China's laws permit them to spy. It was all legal. So what's the big deal? ;)

"Legal" does not equal "ethical" or "moral", in any country.
Post reply on HN