1992-11-17 - Re: Hackers, Crackers

Header Data

From: fnerd@smds.com (FutureNerd Steve Witham)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 25a9c83bfb8f93ccb646a5347e18c48785ff48870c57bd5ff563ad9df296dd88
Message ID: <9211171542.AB00557@smds.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1992-11-17 16:16:02 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 08:16:02 PST

Raw message

From: fnerd@smds.com (FutureNerd Steve Witham)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 08:16:02 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Hackers, Crackers
Message-ID: <9211171542.AB00557@smds.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>Let's cut out this elitist "crackers" crap altogether.  

Well, I don't know about this guy, but there's something similar that 
occurred to me during the hackers conference.  Some of the people on this
list heard me express it badly, and I wanted to clarify.

We always used to distinguish hackers from crackers.
But cracking reveals the cracks in a way that nothing else does.  
It makes them real, sometimes laughably or painfully so.
Electronic privacy is currently a joke.  It's bad.
You need to know what kinds of attacks you're trying to defend against.
I used to think those arguments were rationalizations.  
Now I'm glad there are people who know this stuff, who are actually doing it.
Some of "them" are on what I think of as the good side, and "we" need that
kind of knowledge, if only as an occasional splash of cold water, a spur
(to switch metaphorical, er, horses in mid, um, stream).

-fnerd
quote me
fnerd@smds.com (FutureNerd Steve Witham)






Thread