It has been a fairly common story, and part rumor, that intelligence agencies like to recruit young people active in the cyber criminal scene, and that the IT security industry also adapted this approach. They basically becomes part informer and part subject expert, especially since IT security expertise seems to be a difficult subject matter to teach in universities. When I studied IT security in university, about 1…
Equating script kiddies to some genius cyberhackers worth recruiting is laughable when we literally have PHDs and 6 figure salary professionals willing to be recruited legally with zero baggage. Why are the top digital safety institutions hiring the very bottom of the barrel?
I don't know anything about "The Com" or top digital safety institutions.
But I do know that historically, some parts of hacker culture have drawn heavily from political theories of anti-authoritarianism, anarchism, and libertarianism.
If the authorities and rules intend that I not have access to something, and I have a fascination with bypassing that and getting access anyway, am I not subverting power structures in the most literal sense?
If large corporations believe they alone should control the software that runs on my printer, so that they can ensure only authentic supplies are used and premium features are only available on premium devices, while I believe every user should be able to modify their printer's software and behaviour without limit, including to bypass such restrictions - is this not an anarchist stance, opposing coercion and mechanisms that perpetuate control?
If the exploit-discovering side of cybersecurity is inherently anti-authority, recruiting people who've never defied an authority in their life might not be the best move.