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

Full-disclosure – Administrivia: The End

marc.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 142 posts

Re: Full-disclosure – Administrivia: The End

#121

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #119
lawnchair_larry wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're taking it too literally, I wasn't referring to anyone. I explained the point in my previous post. If your comment reflects sincerely held beliefs that accurately represent the scene as it was, I think it's safe to say you were not a part of it. Your derision of that culture is either out of dishonesty or ignorance.

You're willing to accuse me of being dishonest or ignorant, so I think you should be willing to be specific about what you're talking about. Which cool kids are you referring to?

[deleted]

Re: Full-disclosure – Administrivia: The End

#122

Post by jff »

jessaustin wrote: post #91
znowi wrote: post #60

Instrumental in this message for me was this part: There is no honour amongst hackers any more. 10-20 years back a term hacker had a close relation to a certain moral conduct emphasizing freedom of knowledge. Today with a mass market of startups, that was largely popularized by Hacker News, this perception has changed. A hacker now is a founder. He must be good at raising money, monetizing a product and the greatest…

HN folks have taken an interest in ESR recently, so here's his recent take on this topic wrt Weev: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=5492

Good lord, that man is full of himself.

Re: Full-disclosure – Administrivia: The End

#123

Post by lawnchair_larry »

tptacek wrote: post #119
lawnchair_larry wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're taking it too literally, I wasn't referring to anyone. I explained the point in my previous post. If your comment reflects sincerely held beliefs that accurately represent the scene as it was, I think it's safe to say you were not a part of it. Your derision of that culture is either out of dishonesty or ignorance.

You're willing to accuse me of being dishonest or ignorant, so I think you should be willing to be specific about what you're talking about. Which cool kids are you referring to?

I don't know how to make it more clear that I wasn't actually referring to any specific "cool kids" and that my statement was not intended to be taken literally.

Claim: for any given period of the hacker scene, saying it largely amounted to nothing more than things like carding and harassment is false, and this statement would only be made by someone who either: (a) was not exposed, or exposed only to a poor sample, and therefore doesn't understand the culture (ignorance); or (b) was exposed, but intentionally wishes to misrepresent the situation (dishonesty)

So I guess the possibilities are either that your statement was ignorant, dishonest, or my claim is wrong and the hacker scene (during whatever time period you intended) was in fact nothing more than dishonorable carders and trolls.

If nothing else, you must know that rming a compromised unix box was not the norm.

Re: Full-disclosure – Administrivia: The End

#124

Post by steele »

znowi wrote: post #60

Instrumental in this message for me was this part: There is no honour amongst hackers any more. 10-20 years back a term hacker had a close relation to a certain moral conduct emphasizing freedom of knowledge. Today with a mass market of startups, that was largely popularized by Hacker News, this perception has changed. A hacker now is a founder. He must be good at raising money, monetizing a product and the greatest…

The hackers referred to in the post and the hackers you're referring to... well, tramps aren't always tramps.

Re: Full-disclosure – Administrivia: The End

#125

Post by amuntner »

tptacek wrote: post #119
lawnchair_larry wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're taking it too literally, I wasn't referring to anyone. I explained the point in my previous post. If your comment reflects sincerely held beliefs that accurately represent the scene as it was, I think it's safe to say you were not a part of it. Your derision of that culture is either out of dishonesty or ignorance.

You're willing to accuse me of being dishonest or ignorant, so I think you should be willing to be specific about what you're talking about. Which cool kids are you referring to?

tptacek is exactly right. Not to put words in his mouth, but "nothing more than" is your characterization of what he said as opposed to what he actually said. The history tptacek is describing goes back to the 1980s: use your favorite search engine to look for the name "Richard Sanzda" for a poignant example.

Re: Full-disclosure – Administrivia: The End

#126

Post by jessaustin »

jff wrote: post #122
jessaustin wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN folks have taken an interest in ESR recently, so here's his recent take on this topic wrt Weev: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=5492

Good lord, that man is full of himself.

That's part [most?] of his appeal! b^)

Re: Full-disclosure – Administrivia: The End

#127

Post by lawnchair_larry »

amuntner wrote: post #125
tptacek wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're willing to accuse me of being dishonest or ignorant, so I think you should be willing to be specific about what you're talking about. Which cool kids are you referring to?

tptacek is exactly right. Not to put words in his mouth, but "nothing more than" is your characterization of what he said as opposed to what he actually said. The history tptacek is describing goes back to the 1980s: use your favorite search engine to look for the name "Richard Sanzda" for a poignant example.

Do you understand why it's not valid to pick a single anecdote that aligns with your narrative and use it to draw conclusions about a large group of individuals?

I'm not mischaracterizing tptacek's comment. Nor am I suggesting that there were no bad actors.

tptacek said: "The "hackers" FD's moderator is talking about are the ones I'm talking about.", those being "teenagers breaking into phone switches and harassing people, buying Pantera CDs on stolen credit cards, stealing ESNs from other people's phones to make calls on someone else's bill, and rm'ing Unix boxes".

Obviously, this is not who the FD moderator was talking about, making tptacek's comment unfair.

Re: Full-disclosure – Administrivia: The End

#128

Post by f- »

znowi wrote: post #60

Instrumental in this message for me was this part: There is no honour amongst hackers any more. 10-20 years back a term hacker had a close relation to a certain moral conduct emphasizing freedom of knowledge. Today with a mass market of startups, that was largely popularized by Hacker News, this perception has changed. A hacker now is a founder. He must be good at raising money, monetizing a product and the greatest…

I've been active in the infosec community for ~18 years, probably as one of its more prolific members at times - and similarly to Thomas, I'm not really sure I buy this argument. I don't want to cross-post the entire thing, but here are my thoughts in response to similar posts on /r/netsec:

http://www.reddit.com/r/netsec/comments/20sxd2/full_disclosu...

Re: Full-disclosure – Administrivia: The End

#129

Post by alukima »

nly wrote: post #10
aidos wrote: post #4

Can someone from the security community explain exactly what the list is? Is it a mailing list where researchers disclose exploits that have been found (after doing their best to responsibly notify the developers of the effected systems)?

Snippets from the mailing list charter[0] and listinfo[1] which simply say briefly: About Full-Disclosure Unlike bugtraq, this list serves no one except the list members themselves We don't believe in security by obscurity, and as far as we know, full disclosure is the only way to ensure that everyone, not just the insiders have access to the information we need to survive. We will try to operate this list without mo…

> We will try to operate this list without moderation, as we >feel moderation is an impediment to communication.

I feel like everyone wants to hate moderation but it's one of those things, that when used correctly, make a community good.

I'm on several mailing lists that have grown significantly over 3-7 years. I, along with most other founding members, left lists that didn't have any moderation as they inevitably grew into a community similar to what's described in this announcement.

But the mailing lists/forums that had moderate moderation, removing furry porn for example, have continued to grow and continue their initial cause. Good moderation is not censorship, I would even say that people disrupting the core purpose of a community censor more than a good moderator by burying worthwhile content below shit posts.

Post reply on HN