Message-ID: <200211192148.gAJLmb828240@netsys.com>
From: ratel at mailvault.com (ratel)
Subject: Beyond black, white, and grey: the Yellow Hat Hacker

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Ron wrote:

>Oh yes, it's very important to give these kids that sit in efnet
#phrack
>all day discussing the 'glorious' escapades of the DC snipers, or how
they
>can't wait for the next WTC terrorist fiasco to strike.  Giving them
a
>platform to further their rants about an industry that have never had
an
>interest in supporting because it limits their abilities to comit
internet
>mayhem has no merit.


But my posts weren't about "the kids" (sic) at all. What does wanting to
talk about the hypocrisy inherent in putting exploits in the hands of
script kiddies while cashing in on caring about security have to do with
any of that? This is a huge problem and absolutely valid concern no
matter who's bringing it up or why. 

Personally, I don't see the need to subject everyone I come across to
some sort of ideological purity test before I actually deign to hear
what they're saying. And for the life of me, I'll never understand why
anyone would want to turn a blind eye to this kind of profiteering and
rank corruption when it's to the absloute detriment of the very people
the industry is supposed to protect.

And as for #phrack, did you ever stop to think that some of the more
outrageous comments are probably coming from personal
enemies/trolls/agents provocateur out to disrupt and discredit the
group? The incoherent rambling taunts of enraged yellowhats spewing bile
behind anonymous proxies is quite an odious spectacle in itself. 

I've always thought that if you want to see what a person is made of,
put them behind a remailer where they have nothing to lose and see how
they act then. Yellowhats have zero class.


>This, like my last you reposted from private to a public list to
further
>your own agenda 

My only "agenda" was fully spelled out in my posts--i.e. trying to make
a useful contribution toward re-framing the debate so that people who
honestly care about security aren't tarred with the same brush as those
who fit in the contemptible category of what I called "yellowhats"
(those motivated by money while pretending to be something they're not.)
Which in my opinion, every right-thinking person ought to richly despise
no matter what hat they're wearing. 

A little self-contempt can be a healthy thing.


>will be my last response to you son, 

"Son"? The real irony (tragedy?) about this patronizing aside is I know
as sure as I'm sitting here that if you ever met me in a professional
setting--and I trotted out the usual laundry list of degrees and
professional credentials and started throwing the reputation capital of
my employer around--you'd take a different tone and listen to what I'm
saying soon enough. Oh well, that's credentialism for you.

But I have to admit the idea of seeing the look on your face upon your
finding out who I am and what I do for a living amuses me no end.


>I just have no time to waste debating foolishness with you.

The foolishness of putting exploits in the hands of script kiddies while
cashing in on pretending to care about security? Oh well, to each his
own. 


Ratel.


***



"Americans used to roar like lions for liberty. Now we bleat
like sheep for security." - Norman Vincent Peale.








-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: MailVault 2.2 from Laissez Faire City http://www.mailvault.com

iQA/AwUAPdqxhuYNtyh3zif9EQLZxwCglm7N1RRl3dezD3P6nyDuM3R5wJUAnj5E
niW2YMtQbwBO18yLBXDl5h+R
=prMF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Powered by blists - more mailing lists