full-disclosure

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: aliver at xexil.com (aliver@...il.com)
Subject: =;->

On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Matthew Murphy wrote:
> Wasn't intending to group you and them together in any way, just to
> point out how ridiculous their motivations are.

As far as I can tell it's unclear if it's one or many individuals, and due
to this fact it'd be premature to conclude you understand their
motivations. This doesn't seem to keep you from assuming you understand
their motivations.

> WHY?  Their entire view makes absolutely no sense -- they propose to say
> that stopping the flow of information will somehow help the problem?

I can't speak for all hackers or blackhats, it's a diverse group with a
lot of different skill levels and backgrounds. However, I for one don't
propose to "stop the flow of information". However, I do propose that
corporations don't get the benefit of free "vulnerability research" from
blackhats who are their open-enemies. Now speaking for myself, I can say
that I'll be sure that my personal tools, scripts, and libraries don't
easily find their ways into the hands of those who I despise. If they do
eventually end up on the laptop of a whitehat, then hopefully it'll be too
late to do much with the information or code.

> <rant> By stopping the flow of information, they are simply leaving
> people less secure, and this is how they propose to fix the problem of
> poorly secured products?

Who ever suggested that they (or any blackhats) were trying to fix this
problem? Corporate greed is the enemy in my mind, and poor security is a
side effect.

> Their view seems to be "Withhold information from the un-informed so
> that they cannot act".

You've got the wrong impression, IMO. The view is "keep your work out of
the hands of the people you hate and will take advantage of you to make
money, even though they hate you too."

> This just further shows the character of our friends at "phrack" --
> selfish, childish, irrational loner wannabes. </rant>

I don't know the #phrack guys. I don't really think sending porn pics to
the list will achieve their goals, but since I understand the concept of
mail filtering it doesn't really make a difference to me. However,
slapping labels on groups of people whom you have little knowledge or
experience doesn't really garner my respect, either.

aliver