The Hacker Matrix
spectrum.ieee.org
The Hacker Matrix
1–10 of 10 posts
Re: The Hacker Matrix
#2Since they're looking for feedback, I'd suggest changing either of the "Simple" or "Innovative" labels, as those words are not necessarily antonyms.
Perhaps "Simple" and "Complex" if that's what they're going for. Or "Traditional" and "Innovative" if they are referring to the novelty of the method.
Re: The Hacker Matrix
#3Since they're looking for feedback, I'd suggest changing either of the "Simple" or "Innovative" labels, as those words are not necessarily antonyms. Perhaps "Simple" and "Complex" if that's what they're going for. Or "Traditional" and "Innovative" if they are referring to the novelty of the method.
Along the same line, the "Good, Bad, or Murky" value judgements are dependent on the POV, so it would be nice to see them explain how / why certain attacks got labelled one way as opposed to the others.
Re: The Hacker Matrix
#4The 'high impact' hacks are mostly 'bad', the 'low impact' ones are mostly good.
This may of course be accurate; it's easier to destroy things than to improve them.
Re: The Hacker Matrix
#5The 'high impact' hacks are mostly 'bad', the 'low impact' ones are mostly good. This may of course be accurate; it's easier to destroy things than to improve them.
There's also so many diffrent kind of impact. Like albedoa and codeodor said, the graphic is poorly labeled and the data poorly categorized.
Re: The Hacker Matrix
#6Since they're looking for feedback, I'd suggest changing either of the "Simple" or "Innovative" labels, as those words are not necessarily antonyms. Perhaps "Simple" and "Complex" if that's what they're going for. Or "Traditional" and "Innovative" if they are referring to the novelty of the method.
Perhaps a third dimension? Certainly there are simple and innovative hacks. Certainly there are complex, traditional hacks.
Re: The Hacker Matrix
#7Since they're looking for feedback, I'd suggest changing either of the "Simple" or "Innovative" labels, as those words are not necessarily antonyms. Perhaps "Simple" and "Complex" if that's what they're going for. Or "Traditional" and "Innovative" if they are referring to the novelty of the method.
Perhaps a third dimension? Certainly there are simple and innovative hacks. Certainly there are complex, traditional hacks.
You mean fourth. The third dimension is good/bad/murky.
Re: The Hacker Matrix
#8> Note: If you're using Internet Explorer 7, the dots on the chart will not appear in the correct place.
Go figure.
Re: The Hacker Matrix
#9Re: The Hacker Matrix
#10They definitely have things wrong here, for example LulzSec is way on the Simple side where as Gary McKinnon is on the Innovative side, Gary looked for blank passwords whereas LulzSec did much more complex cracks. So while the IEEE do lots of good work which I respect, here they have at best made a mistake and at worst are taking a political position which is contrary to the facts to help get Gary extradited. If it is the former, I hope they swiftly correct the error and if it the later, then they have lost me as a customer forever.