Escape to the Movies: Blackhat - Haxxor

Akjosch

New member
Sep 12, 2014
155
0
0
Quadocky said:
josh4president said:
"Doxxing and harrassment are the real dangers of the net."

This was just said by an adult human in the year 2015.
Okay, maybe you don't quite understand. A hacker breaking into your computer and vandalizing it and or breaking it is a one time thing. Get a new computer problem solved.

Its completely different from being a target of a hate mob in which all channels of communication are flooded by insults, threats and harassment. And not just for a day, pretty much 24/7 for YEARS. This also could include literal stalking by individuals in real life or attempts at murder like swatting.
Sorry, but in a world where purpose-built attack tools like Stuxnet [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet] are already used by nearly every major intelligence agency, where budgets for such range in the tens or hundreds of millions (dollars, Euro, whatever), people doing "doxxing and harassment" are small fish.

Real hacking looks different. It also has an impact so much above what you're describing, you'd need a logarithmic scale to show it.
 

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
Was thinking about giving Bob another chance and watch some of his new stuff to see if things changed. Then i stumbled upon this thread. Yeah, im staying away form good this time i guess.

Akjosch said:
Though I heard "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" is pretty good as well. Never seen it to verify, so take it with a grain of salt.
The Girl with the Dragon Tatoo does not do any mistakes about hacking that i remmeber, however it is not a central theme with the film. It is especially removed in the later two movies.

Quadocky said:
josh4president said:
"Doxxing and harrassment are the real dangers of the net."

This was just said by an adult human in the year 2015.
Okay, maybe you don't quite understand. A hacker breaking into your computer and vandalizing it and or breaking it is a one time thing. Get a new computer problem solved.
Its quite clear that you do not know what hackers do. It would be nice if you learned about it before posting this nonsense. Your knowledge seems to be limited to few random viruses on the internet which is nowhere close to what hacking is.

Hackers do not care about your computer. all they care is how much they can ransom it from you. Hacking is not a one-time event, unless you catch the hacker. fighting hacking is a cat and mouse game that is ongoing for decades. and no, "get a new computer" does not solve the problem in any way.
 

Akjosch

New member
Sep 12, 2014
155
0
0
Relevant NYT article on hacking activities between North Korea and USA (and make no mistake - such activities go on similar scale between most major nations and quite a few corporations, even supposedly "friendly" ones):

N.S.A. Breached North Korean Networks Before Sony Attack, Officials Say [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/19/world/asia/nsa-tapped-into-north-korean-networks-before-sony-attack-officials-say.html?_r=0]

Keep in mind: Despite its length, the article barely scratches the surface of what's going on.
 

Lono Shrugged

New member
May 7, 2009
1,467
0
0
No mention of 'Ali' or 'Public Enemies'? Mann is fantastic at what he does, but he is not strange4r to mis-steps
 

Macsen Wledig

New member
Oct 4, 2013
58
0
0
An Ceannaire said:
MarsAtlas said:
You've obvious never had to face the other end of a gun barrel before, so good for you and your privileged life, but that doesn't mean that you get to pretend that sicking heavily armed people on others, with the preface that the other person may be injured, isn't serious. Contrary to what you say, its disgusting how much little value you have for the lives of others.
Oh please. Don't waste my time with your talk of "privilege" and social justice wankery. The only privilege I have is living in a country where the amount of citizens killed by the police per year is often zero.
Which country would that be? Because that sounds like a hard "fact" to back up...
 

C.S.Strowbridge

New member
Jul 22, 2010
330
0
0
I love how you're saying that as though swatting is mutually exclusive to GamerGate supporters. Or as though swatting is only ever used to stop someone from saying things another doesn't like.
If you have to lie to make a point, your point isn't worth making. I never said only GGers Swat.

GamerGaters have used Swatting to stop someone from speaking out against them. That makes them a terrorist organization.

It doesn't matter how many other people have been swatted, or even if they've been swatted themselves. They are still a terrorist organization.

And as a result, his notion of "the real dangers of internet terrorism"...
In 2001 the Twin Towers were hit in a terrorist attack that killed nearly 3,000 people.

The same year, at least 50,000 people died from air pollution related illnesses.

While the big attacks are showy, there are far bigger threats than terrorism out there.

Like wise, while big cyber attacks are showy, the "the real dangers of internet terrorism" that most people face is losers like GamerGaters doxxing them and Swatting them.
 

Akjosch

New member
Sep 12, 2014
155
0
0
C.S.Strowbridge said:
Like wise, while big cyber attacks are showy, the "the real dangers of internet terrorism" that most people face is losers like GamerGaters doxxing them and Swatting them.
The "big cyber attacks" are things you won't know about until half a century later, fought between people who don't even exist on paper or any publicly available electronic record, hired and paid for by agencies commanding millions to billions of dollars yearly.

They are this century's Bletchley Parks [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bletchley_Park].

They're the polar opposite of "showy".
 

An Ceannaire

New member
Mar 5, 2012
175
0
0
C.S.Strowbridge said:
Oh my god! Thank you for providing a perfect example of a GGer.

Last year alone, the cops killed just over 1,000 people in the United States, 40% of whom were unarmed.

On average, more than one unarmed people a year was killed by cops.

Yet to the average GGers, this is nothing.
That sounds more like a problem with your police force than internet terrorism. Get your shit together, America!
 

An Ceannaire

New member
Mar 5, 2012
175
0
0
C.S.Strowbridge said:
They are swatting people to get them to stop talking about GamerGate in a negative light. So yes, this is 100% terrorism.
You need a severe dose of reality, dude. Anyway, nobody with a shred of common sense would involve themselves in either side of the GG debate because regardless of what intentions each movement previously had, it has just become a shit-slinging competition with no end in sight. And when you get yourself heavily involved in such a retarded event, you leave yourself open to the type of attacks shitstorm's participants are likely to engage in.

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
 

Vigormortis

New member
Nov 21, 2007
4,531
0
0
C.S.Strowbridge said:
If you have to lie to make a point, your point isn't worth making. I never said only GGers Swat.
I lied about nothing. I responded to your specific points and implications.

If that was not what you wanted to imply, perhaps you should be more careful with how you word your posts.

GamerGaters have used Swatting to stop someone from speaking out against them. That makes them a terrorist organization.

It doesn't matter how many other people have been swatted, or even if they've been swatted themselves. They are still a terrorist organization.
Does this mean Feminism is a terrorist organization? Feminists have used swatting in similar ways, so by your own criterion feminists are terrorists as well.

I suppose the same applies to virtually all religious organizations as well, seeing as people from many different religious backgrounds have committed acts of terrorism.

It's nice to know you're willing to paint with such a board brush.


In 2001 the Twin Towers were hit in a terrorist attack that killed nearly 3,000 people.

The same year, at least 50,000 people died from air pollution related illnesses.

While the big attacks are showy, there are far bigger threats than terrorism out there.

Like wise, while big cyber attacks are showy, the "the real dangers of internet terrorism" that most people face is losers like GamerGaters doxxing them and Swatting them.
No. Just...no.

Please do a little research into the reality of hacking and cybercrime. Doxxing and cyberbulling are virtually inconsequential to the dangers people face from real cybercrime. Hell, identity theft is a more significant threat to one's well being than some immature jerks "harassing" someone on Twitter.

http://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/cybersecurity-responding-to-the-threat-of-cyber-crime-and-terrorism

http://resources.infosecinstitute.com/2013-impact-cybercrime/

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/security/cyber-crime-is-worlds-most-dangerous-criminal-threat-20100920-15iej.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/19/world/asia/nsa-tapped-into-north-korean-networks-before-sony-attack-officials-say.html?_r=1

http://www.seculert.com/blog/2013/08/new-uk-gov-report-says-cyber-crime-threats-are-more-dangerous-than-a-nuclear-attack.html


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Next time you might want to actually quote my post instead just copy-pasting what I wrote into your own quote box. That way I'm alerted to your responses.

Otherwise it just seems like you don't want me to know of your response. That makes it look as though you don't want to face any counter-points to your argument, which in turn makes your argument seem....shaky.

And yes, Bob's still clueless on the topic. Laughably so.

And no, I'm not dismissing or ignoring the dangers of cyberbullying. Not even remotely. (I've been on the receiving end of such things) I am, however, trying to point out how absurd it is to call cyberbullying "the real threat of internet hacking and terrorism".
 

C.S.Strowbridge

New member
Jul 22, 2010
330
0
0
An Ceannaire said:
C.S.Strowbridge said:
They are swatting people to get them to stop talking about GamerGate in a negative light. So yes, this is 100% terrorism.
You need a severe dose of reality, dude.
And you need to read a dictionary and stop defending terrorists.

An Ceannaire said:
C.S.Strowbridge said:
Oh my god! Thank you for providing a perfect example of a GGer.

Last year alone, the cops killed just over 1,000 people in the United States, 40% of whom were unarmed.

On average, more than one unarmed people a year was killed by cops.

Yet to the average GGers, this is nothing.
That sounds more like a problem with your police force than internet terrorism. Get your shit together, America!
The GGers know this is happening, yet they still do it.

Just today GGers Swatted someone and the family pet was killed.

Why do you defend this terrorists?
 

pacmonster

New member
Jan 17, 2015
7
0
0
C.S.Strowbridge said:
GamerGaters have used Swatting to stop someone from speaking out against them. That makes them a terrorist organization.
I see you subscribe to the X person is a part of Y organization. X person commits Z crime. Therefore everybody in Y organization must be a part of Z crime. That's some hefty generalization there. While I don't condone the gamergate movement as it has mostly been co-opted into an excuse for people to attack women in gaming, I also understand it isn't an "organization". It has no centralized structure, no leaders, or any official status which would grant it worthy of the term "organization". It's like anonymous in that anybody could claim to be a "GGer" as long as they use a hashtag and rant about shit. As such any extreme action taken by any individual member of a disorganized group cannot be attributed to an entire group but just to the individual. It's like saying all Muslim people are terrorists because a small handful commit terrorist acts.

To be honest with you, this is the first time I'm even hearing about swatting having any relation to gamergate people. The general case is usually some asshole online does it to some popular streamer or youtube personality for no motive other than they think it is funny. While I don't deny that there are probably cases where gamergate supporters were involved in swatting incidents it's another matter entirely to assume they are the predominant group responsible for them.


C.S.Strowbridge said:
Like wise, while big cyber attacks are showy, the "the real dangers of internet terrorism" that most people face is losers like GamerGaters doxxing them and Swatting them.
This is a different matter than hacking. What you're talking about is cyberbulling and is its own issue. It has nothing to do with "showy" attacks whatever that means. You say it like attacks compromising the security of governments, companies, and people is no big deal. Doxxing is the closest thing you're talking about to hacking in that it involves getting information on people that might be behind personal networks or company networks in the case of cloud data. However, the high profile iCloud breach was due to people having predictable, weak passwords. Or people have a website and don't whois guard it which tells people basic address and contact information about whomever registered the domain.

C.S.Strowbridge said:
Vigormortis said:
I lied about nothing.
You flat our lied about what I said. Therefore, nothing you say matters.
You are like a walking collection of logical fallacies. He lied therefore nothing he says matters?
 

Vigormortis

New member
Nov 21, 2007
4,531
0
0
C.S.Strowbridge said:
You flat our lied about what I said. Therefore, nothing you say matters.
Ah, I see. Is this how this is going to go? Dodging counterpoints and ignoring demonstrable examples of how patently absurd and incorrect your assertions are? The quintessential 'sticking ones fingers in their ears' and chanting, "Nuh-uh! Nuh-uh!"

And yet, despite this, and despite your sanctimonious attitude and double standards, I'm still willing to discuss the topic and hear your side of the argument.

I think that speaks volumes about the disparate rationale each of us has brought to the discussion.

So, I'll leave you with a question, the response to which will determine where this goes from here:

Are you willing to leave the logical fallacies behind and actually address the points being made (and thus, have a real discussion)?

If so, I look forward to continuing the discussion. If not, then I bid you good day.
 

RenegadeDuck

New member
Oct 9, 2014
25
0
0
ForumSafari said:
RenegadeDuck said:
I mean, like Bob pointed out, someone who has devoted their life to mastering computer systems and learning the ins and outs of coding is probably more likely to be... shall we say, a little lower on the sexual attraction ladder?
Daaaah Whoosh said:
You can't have brains and brawn at the same time, that's not how life works.
I really don't understand this. I work as an admin and practically everyone I've ever worked with has been in fair to great shape. Hitting the gym seems to be a big thing with them.
Don't get me wrong, if I came across an admin that buffed themselves up in their off-hours, I wouldn't be confused as to how that's possible. People can do several things, including being fit and smart at the same time. Heck, I like to box and I'm studying to be a physicist, the geekiest of all occupations.

All I'm saying is that, statistically speaking, someone who has submerged themselves almost entirely in the world of hacking, to the extent that you're basically the best in the world at it, is probably more likely to be a little underdeveloped in the muscle and attraction territories. And it also has to do with the kind of person that typically goes for that sort of thing in the first place. It might sound like generalizing, but geeks and social misfits usually are the ones with the intimate knowledge of computer systems and the drive to do something with that knowledge.

Just think about real-life hackers. You think the annoying douche who hacks into a developer's database and leaks information about movies or games looks like a young Arnold Schwarzenegger?
 

pacmonster

New member
Jan 17, 2015
7
0
0
RenegadeDuck said:
All I'm saying is that, statistically speaking, someone who has submerged themselves almost entirely in the world of hacking, to the extent that you're basically the best in the world at it, is probably more likely to be a little underdeveloped in the muscle and attraction territories. And it also has to do with the kind of person that typically goes for that sort of thing in the first place. It might sound like generalizing, but geeks and social misfits usually are the ones with the intimate knowledge of computer systems and the drive to do something with that knowledge.

Just think about real-life hackers. You think the annoying douche who hacks into a developer's database and leaks information about movies or games looks like a young Arnold Schwarzenegger?
Statistically speaking? Hackers are no different then any normal person who's job it is to sit in front of a computer. Hacking is generally not a day job either. These people work as programmers, network security experts, or government contractors / employees. There's a broad spectrum between big muscle bound weight lifting gym rats and scrawny Revenge of the Nerds cliche weaklings. Hackers like any other technical profession have people all over that spectrum but like all bell curves the majority is in the middle. Not beefcake level but not weakling level either.
 

webkilla

New member
Feb 2, 2011
594
0
0
Vigormortis said:
Ah, I see. Is this how this is going to go? Dodging counterpoints and ignoring demonstrable examples of how patently absurd and incorrect your assertions are? The quintessential 'sticking ones fingers in their ears' and chanting, "Nuh-uh! Nuh-uh!"

And yet, despite this, and despite your sanctimonious attitude and double standards, I'm still willing to discuss the topic and hear your side of the argument.

I think that speaks volumes about the disparate rationale each of us has brought to the discussion.

So, I'll leave you with a question, the response to which will determine where this goes from here:

Are you willing to leave the logical fallacies behind and actually address the points being made (and thus, have a real discussion)?

If so, I look forward to continuing the discussion. If not, then I bid you good day.
Don't bother dude - CS is a anti-gamergate SJW. Nothing you say will make him budge. Leave him in his little hugbox and pursue more interesting goals.