81–87 of 87 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Other way around. I have heard people seriously claim that Shimomura framed Mitnick, though I won't speak to how likely that is.
A pretty hard claim for him to make himself at this point: https://www.mitnicksecurity.com/about/kevin-mitnick-worlds-m...
> Defence lawyers said although the hack attacks were carried out using a computer owned by Mr Warg, he was not the person that used it to steal the files. Instead, they said, an unnamed hacker took over this machine and used it to carry out the attacks. Given the circumstances, this claim seems obviously true. People who break into computers usually use broken-into computers as proxies.
> People who break into computers usually use broken-into computers as proxies. That's possibly [1] true, but aren't those broken-into computers almost always the computers of ordinary users? How often do the people breaking into computers use broken-into computers belonging to a computer security expert who knows how to protect their systems from such break-ins? [1] Not sure about the "usually" part.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"North Korea" Citation please.
31 sources on this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisons_in_North_Korea Though I don't see anything definite on prison rates. Hard to get precise info out of N Korea. This absolute dismal circumstances the prisoners suffer is clear though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there was no jail time, then everyone would try to do that (What could be the worst scenario - just losing all your stolen money). That wouldn't work.
> If there was no jail time, then everyone would try to do that Really? Have you any studies to back that up or did you just extract it from your arse?
Seriously, this "do you have studies" BS is getting out of hand. He made an argument (which btw includes more context than what you quoted), and stated his opinion of what would happen in a hypothetical situation. And it's also obvious to everyone who has ever casually conversed that "everyone" in this context means "many people", not literally everyone.
You can disagree and say "That's not what's going to happen because ...", or even "Study such and such shows that this not necessarily happens...".
Asking for studies to back up his thinking is BS. This is not some peer reviewed journal, nor is he writing a thesis. This is a simple conversation. And even if he gave 4-5 studies there would be absolutely no guarantees that those studies aren't crap, aren't invalidated by subsequent studies, aren't only describing what works in some specific cultural context, etc.
This is sociology and human behavior, not physics or math to have some be all end all studies answering specific questions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>> What's the longest anyone's actually served in custody for breaking into computers in the US, and what's the median sentence actually served? Here's a list for you: http://www.fierceitsecurity.com/story/hackers-chains-13-bigg... Up until this week it was Albert Gonzalez for got 20 years for his role in the TJX retail break in. Remember, these are federal sentencing guidelines so no time off for good behavior. You…
You're totally right, I forgot about the credit card rings. I stand corrected.
Even for completely BS stuff due to the "3 strikes" thing. So in general his fears are not unsubstantiated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would not wish a prison sentence on my (personal) worst enemies. Locking someone up for years should be an absolute last resort. I can't really imagine a worse thing than essentially becoming a slave to some prison for years. No freedom. This is the main issue I have with "jail the bankers!" narratives: Just take away their money, putting them in jail doesn't accomplish anything. This seems to be a big issue with A…
If there was no jail time, then everyone would try to do that (What could be the worst scenario - just losing all your stolen money). That wouldn't work.
Think about that for a bit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Easy: breaking into computers is very, very fun, and when something feels like a game, it's easy to treat it that way. If you have a hard time believing anyone would do something like this, look at the 1990s: we got a book practically every year about one hacking group or another breaking into phone switches, credit reporting agencies, government and military networks, and financial institutions. If you can do it, an…
> Plenty of smart people did stuff like this. I know, I know a couple of them. I just don't understand them. Why cross that line? Why risk jail, your career, a whole pile of hardship? The real life consequences is what I'm wondering about, it's as if there is some kind of disconnect there between action and subsequent consequences. If it is only because it is 'unlikely that you're ever going to get caught' then that'…
I think part of it is age, maybe. Or rather life-experience, if you will.
I remember back in my early 20s what always stopped me was basic paranoia about getting caught. But that's just how I'm wired personally (and I was probably slightly irrational about the odds). I love breaking, bending and toying with the rules, but too chicken to pull through if it involved anything more serious than a silly prank on friends.
Nowadays (mid-30s), the first thing that stops me is a much more solid sense of what's right and wrong. I prefer it that way, because unlike fear of getting caught, it's a much more solid foundation to depend on.