The Linux backdoor attempt of 2003 (2013) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Linux backdoor attempt of 2003 (2013)

#101

Post by epcoa » Sat, Dec 30, 2023, 6:09 PM UTC

joncrane wrote: post #90

p-e-w wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The clearest evidence that it was not an NSA attack is that it was not very good. I suspect you are being sarcastic, but in case you aren't, you may want to reexamine your assumptions. The colossal incompetence that is synonymous with government work doesn't magically stop at three-letter agencies. The FBI/CIA communication fuckups before 9/11 are just one famous example. The idea that the NSA is staffed with "uber…

Not to mention it being extremely difficult to travel internationally, and not being able to have close personal friendships with many people who live in other countries. Not being able to partake in THC consumption EVER, much less any other recreational substance besides alcohol. The list goes on. I understand that it pays very well and there's decent work/life balance in terms of hours. But you have to essentially…

This thread is already full of silly archetypes and over generalizations not borne out by the reality. With that in mind: When you say drug using, “curious hacker mentality” all I can think of is Eric Raymond and the implication that this wizard of fetchmail is just too smart to work with the boring likes of von Neumann, Turing and Shannon, Tao, etc.

> Not being able to partake in THC consumption EVER

The all caps tickles me. I don’t think this is a huge sacrifice outside some limited circles. Some of the smartest people are ethical vegetarians.

Re: The Linux backdoor attempt of 2003 (2013)

#102

Post by epcoa » Sat, Dec 30, 2023, 6:43 PM UTC

shzhdbi09gv8ioi wrote: post #97

epcoa wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Geez, this crowd. The clearest evidence that it was not an NSA attack is that it was not very good. It modified a CVS mirror. At no time was the source of truth (the bitkeeper repo) in any danger. Anybody that knew how this stuff worked at the time would have known it would be caught immediately. Not very state level expertise, pretty sad if it was the NSA.

I'd trust grugq over you any day of the week, lol. It's funny when you don't understand who you are replying to.

I replied to their comment because it was related, but where do you get the impression it is not supportive? I’m responding to the idiots poking holes in that claim.

It's funny when you don't read carefully.

Re: The Linux backdoor attempt of 2003 (2013)

#103

Post by philistine » Sat, Dec 30, 2023, 11:07 PM UTC

p-e-w wrote: post #88

stevehawk wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe 10x the salary (probably not) but also a correlated increase in hours instead of a contractually mandated maximum of 40 hours, combined with the legal inability to do work from home, discuss work at home, and a lot of related perks.

Also "perks" like having your life put under the microscope at regular intervals, going to prison if you talk about what you do, etc. And I strongly doubt that agencies that are known to routinely violate the law, the constitution, and human rights care about "contractually mandated" 40-hour workweeks.

Knowing Silicon Valley, the NSA and CIA are full of minorities who can’t get hired there because of the latent racism.

Re: The Linux backdoor attempt of 2003 (2013)

#104

Post by deaddodo » Mon, Jan 01, 2024, 7:52 AM UTC

p-e-w wrote: post #85

epcoa wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Geez, this crowd. The clearest evidence that it was not an NSA attack is that it was not very good. It modified a CVS mirror. At no time was the source of truth (the bitkeeper repo) in any danger. Anybody that knew how this stuff worked at the time would have known it would be caught immediately. Not very state level expertise, pretty sad if it was the NSA.

> The clearest evidence that it was not an NSA attack is that it was not very good. I suspect you are being sarcastic, but in case you aren't, you may want to reexamine your assumptions. The colossal incompetence that is synonymous with government work doesn't magically stop at three-letter agencies. The FBI/CIA communication fuckups before 9/11 are just one famous example. The idea that the NSA is staffed with "uber…

> The idea that the NSA is staffed with "uber hackers" is a Hollywood fantasy.

Inversely correlative, the idea that the NSA/CIA/FBI are staffed by incompetent technologists (hackers, devs, etc) is a Hacker News fantasy.

Re: The Linux backdoor attempt of 2003 (2013)

#105

Post by stevehawk » Tue, Jan 02, 2024, 10:57 PM UTC

p-e-w wrote: post #88

stevehawk wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe 10x the salary (probably not) but also a correlated increase in hours instead of a contractually mandated maximum of 40 hours, combined with the legal inability to do work from home, discuss work at home, and a lot of related perks.

Also "perks" like having your life put under the microscope at regular intervals, going to prison if you talk about what you do, etc. And I strongly doubt that agencies that are known to routinely violate the law, the constitution, and human rights care about "contractually mandated" 40-hour workweeks.

> And I strongly doubt that agencies that are known to routinely violate the law, the constitution, and human rights care about "contractually mandated" 40-hour workweeks.

lol they 100% do.. because they're all contractors bidding for the work.. so if one company bid X man hours for a cost plus contract and won as the lowest bidder and then put in 3x the time, either the winner would sue for being underpaid or, if they were paid, the loserss would sue because of impropriety.