26 Jul
2001
26 Jul
'01
1:06 a.m.
I must say I was a bit surprised at how well done the show was. It wasn't
over-sensationalized at all. On the contrary, I thought it was very well
researched and did a good job of telling the stories and explaining the
technical stuff.
I was glad that they had more quotes from Jonathan Littman than from John
Markoff. Littman told Mitnick's story closer to what really was going on,
while Markoff stuck to his agenda of vilifying Mitnick, which he's spent
the better part of the last five years of his career doing. Markoff is
the kind of reporter I despise; one who attempts to make the news or mold
it in his view rather than simply report it.
But I don't think Mitnick's story is as rosy as he paints it either, and I
think he's spinning some revisionism on it. He's certainly got some
skeletons in his past that he's not owning up to.
Anyhoo, Draper's story is pretty much how I've heard it told before. He
really was just an unfortunate fall guy of sorts.
The warehouse where they filmed Draper is where my computers used to be
stored (well, a few still are, I'm not quite done moving yet :) There
were some shots of me typing on an Apple ][ (you may have noticed the
"CALL -151" on the screen at one point :) but you couldn't tell who it
was, just hands. The display of 1's and 0's that showed periodically was
generated on an Apple ][ as well (that is, by far, the acme of my career).
There was also some other stuff, like 6502 assembler scrolling by, and of
course the computers they showed rotating were all mine ;)
Well, that was fun. One to the next show: I'm providing some Altair
footage for a National Geographic special on computer history.
I'm also in the process of developing a documentary on the F14 flight
control computer, but that's a slow-going affair. Once the VCF's are over
for the year then I hope to kick that up into full gear.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
26 Jul
26 Jul
4:42 a.m.
Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap!
How would YOU feel if someone broke into your computer system and took
YOUR files to do whatever he felt like with? Or hacked your voicemail
system and listened to your messages?
I know your knee-jerk reaction... I don't have anything I care about
on my computer...
If your name, DOB, and SSN are ANYWHERE on your computer, a hacker can
steal your identity. A credit card number (perhaps from an letter you
typed in and FAXed to purchase something because you didn't want to
send your CC# across the internet)? Bank account numbers? ETrade
account numbers?
People who break into computers are criminals.
People who launch DDOS attacks are criminals.
Kevin Mitnick is a CONVICTED criminal, and has ADMITTED criminal
behaviour. I don't get teary-eyed thinking about the time he spent
in prison before the trial. He was a proven flight risk (he ran
away once, and hid out in Denver).
I wonder how Littman would react if someone broke into HIS system.
Clint
PS I daily have probe attacks on my DSL system from script kiddies
looking to add another machine to their DDOS attack farm.
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
I must say I was a bit surprised at how well done the show was. It wasn't
over-sensationalized at all. On the contrary, I thought it was very well
researched and did a good job of telling the stories and explaining the
technical stuff.
I was glad that they had more quotes from Jonathan Littman than from John
Markoff. Littman told Mitnick's story closer to what really was going on,
while Markoff stuck to his agenda of vilifying Mitnick, which he's spent
the better part of the last five years of his career doing. Markoff is
the kind of reporter I despise; one who attempts to make the news or mold
it in his view rather than simply report it.
But I don't think Mitnick's story is as rosy as he paints it either, and I
think he's spinning some revisionism on it. He's certainly got some
skeletons in his past that he's not owning up to.
Anyhoo, Draper's story is pretty much how I've heard it told before. He
really was just an unfortunate fall guy of sorts.
The warehouse where they filmed Draper is where my computers used to be
stored (well, a few still are, I'm not quite done moving yet :) There
were some shots of me typing on an Apple ][ (you may have noticed the
"CALL -151" on the screen at one point :) but you couldn't tell who it
was, just hands. The display of 1's and 0's that showed periodically was
generated on an Apple ][ as well (that is, by far, the acme of my career).
There was also some other stuff, like 6502 assembler scrolling by, and of
course the computers they showed rotating were all mine ;)
Well, that was fun. One to the next show: I'm providing some Altair
footage for a National Geographic special on computer history.
I'm also in the process of developing a documentary on the F14 flight
control computer, but that's a slow-going affair. Once the VCF's are over
for the year then I hope to kick that up into full gear.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
7:11 a.m.
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Clint Wolff (VAX collector) wrote:
How would YOU feel if someone broke into your computer
system and took
YOUR files to do whatever he felt like with? Or hacked your voicemail
system and listened to your messages?
I know your knee-jerk reaction... I don't have anything I care about
on my computer...
Not at all, I wasn't defending Mitnick's behvaiour at all, and if you'll
recall, in a previous message I referred to him as a "criminal thug" and
in the message you are replying to I did say he was spinning some
revisionism on the story.
People who break into computers are criminals.
If their intent is criminal then yes, they are criminals.
People who launch DDOS attacks are criminals.
Sure.
Kevin Mitnick is a CONVICTED criminal, and has
ADMITTED criminal
behaviour. I don't get teary-eyed thinking about the time he spent in
prison before the trial. He was a proven flight risk (he ran away
once, and hid out in Denver).
Me either. But then you forget just how badly the US Gubment violated his
civil rights. I don't know who's the bigger criminal in this case:
Mitnick or the Government. And believe me, I fear the Government WAY
more than I fear Mitnick. The Government is everywhere, and much more
powerful.
I wonder how Littman would react if someone broke into
HIS system.
I'm sure he would not be happy, but at least he was honest and truthful
about the whole affair.
PS I daily have probe attacks on my DSL system from
script kiddies
looking to add another machine to their DDOS attack farm.
Yeah, me too, but I don't obsess over it. I just make sure my security is
tight and worry about more important things.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
5:08 p.m.
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Sellam Ismail wrote:
What civil rights were violated? Mitnick violated the terms of his
supervised release, fled to Denver when he realised they were coming
for him (from his illegal monitoring of voice mails and hacking into
FBI computers). If a drug dealer did the same, I would hope they
would lock her up too.
Clint
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Clint Wolff (VAX collector)
wrote:
If their actions are criminal, they are criminals. It may be a
lesser crime to merely violate someones privacy, but it is still
a crime. No less than someone walking into your house and browsing
through your closets.
People who break into computers are criminals.
If their intent is criminal then yes, they are criminals.
Kevin Mitnick
is a CONVICTED criminal, and has ADMITTED criminal
behaviour. I don't get teary-eyed thinking about the time he spent in
prison before the trial. He was a proven flight risk (he ran away
once, and hid out in Denver).
Me either. But then you forget just how badly the US Gubment violated his
civil rights. I don't know who's the bigger criminal in this case:
Mitnick or the Government. And believe me, I fear the Government WAY
more than I fear Mitnick. The Government is everywhere, and much more
powerful.
7:56 p.m.
It was thus said that the Great "Clint Wolff (VAX collector)" once stated:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Sellam Ismail wrote:
Technically yes it is a crime. But while physical trespassing is often a
misdemenor, virtual trespassing (on a computer) is a Federal offence.
Trespassing is trespassing, right?
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Clint Wolff (VAX collector)
wrote:
If their actions are criminal, they are criminals. It may be a
lesser crime to merely violate someones privacy, but it is still
a crime. No less than someone walking into your house and browsing
through your closets. People who break into computers are criminals.
If their intent is criminal then yes, they are criminals.
What civil rights were violated? Mitnick violated the
terms of his
supervised release, fled to Denver when he realised they were coming
for him (from his illegal monitoring of voice mails and hacking into
FBI computers). If a drug dealer did the same, I would hope they
would lock her up too.
Held without bail for four years until his trial. Information critical to
his defence was withheld from him (several hundred megs to possibly a gig
worth of encrypted files) or severely limited (one hour of supervised
computer use per week to scan his private files or some such silly
nonsense). And because of the hype over his activities, he can't use any
computer or anything *with* a computer for three? four? years of his
probation. That means phones, microwaves, CARS! It's totally insane given
that Mitnick isn't even all that technically savvy.
And then there's the little matter of his capture. Let's see---a computer
scientist with no degree or even a high school diploma uses blatently
illegal methods such as cellular phone scanning (using his own hacked up
equipment!) to track Mitnick down and ends up telling the FBI what to do.
Um, excuse me but he wasn't a duly deputized agent of any police force and
yet HE'S telling the FBI what to do? Oh, and having a reporter from the New
York Times along for the bust.
Mitnick is a criminal yes. But he certainly got the short end of the
stick on this one.
-spc (Not trying to be a Mitnick apologist here ... 8-)
9:20 p.m.
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Clint Wolff (VAX collector) wrote:
Perverts aside, have you ever known anyone to break into other peoples'
houses so they can learn something about their closets?
Many people used to break into computers to learn about the system, but
abided by a principle that nothing should ever be intentionally damaged.
I used to be one of those people (in my younger days). I'm not trying to
justify it. Sure I may have been breaking some laws. But I didn't try to
"steal" data or snoop around in anyone's private life (unless I
accidentally stumbled across it). I was just interested in exploring and
learning.
Your closet analogy does not hold up. People have used this argument
before. It didn't make sense then, it doesn't now.
But all that aside, see my previous message: security, physical or
virtual, is YOUR responsiblity. If you don't want anyone coming into your
house or your server, LOCK THEM UP! Did they still get in? You didn't
use good enough locks. Try again.
Do the research. Read the stories. Come to your own conclusion.
http://www.2600.com
Their information will obviously be biased, but you can read John
Markoff's accounts to balance it all out. Somewhere between 2600 and
Markoff is the truth. The fact is, the US Government often violates the
very laws it is charged to uphold, and has no remorse over it.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
If their
intent is criminal then yes, they are criminals.
If their actions are criminal, they are criminals. It may be a lesser
crime to merely violate someones privacy, but it is still a crime. No
less than someone walking into your house and browsing through your
closets. Me either.
But then you forget just how badly the US Gubment violated his
civil rights. I don't know who's the bigger criminal in this case:
Mitnick or the Government. And believe me, I fear the Government WAY
more than I fear Mitnick. The Government is everywhere, and much more
powerful.
What civil rights were violated? Mitnick violated the terms of his
supervised release, fled to Denver when he realised they were coming
for him (from his illegal monitoring of voice mails and hacking into
FBI computers). If a drug dealer did the same, I would hope they
would lock her up too. 
27 Jul
27 Jul
8:33 a.m.
At 11:20 PM 7/26/01 -0700, Sellam wrote:
But all that aside, see my previous message: security,
physical or
virtual, is YOUR responsiblity. If you don't want anyone coming into your
house or your server, LOCK THEM UP! Did they still get in? You didn't
use good enough locks. Try again.
This kind of works and kind of doesn't. I can certainly agree that I am
responsible for putting locks on my private spaces, however I also believe
that entering someone else's private space without their permission is, at
a minimum, extremely rude, and at most a criminal act. Further, the "crime"
aspect of trespassing goes up when you are clearly aware that your presence
is not invited (i.e. posted signs, a log-on banner that says keep out, a
door that is closed to my house). If you purposely violate an area asking
you not to, than YOU, the trespasser, have to take responsibility for
whatever happens to you, and whatever damage you do. So you go where you
don't belong and you get killed that is your own dumb fault, not the owner
of the place where you illegally entered.
As to Jeff's question about why computer crimes are treated more severely
than local crimes, it turns out that only the FBI can investigate crimes
that cross state boundaries and computer crimes invariably do. Then federal
law establishes punishments based on getting the FBI involved and typically
its a much higher bar then getting the local sheriff involved. Thus the
punishments are invariably higher. Thus the apparent disproportionate
severity associated with computer crime is actually a structural issue
within the law enforcement structure rather than a mis-matched parity issue
of "high tech" vs "low tech." There are folks in our government who
would
like to nationalize the police departments of the states to "fix" this
problem for you, don't let them.
--Chuck
6:23 p.m.
On Fri, 27 Jul 2001, Chuck McManis wrote:
If you purposely violate an area asking you not to,
than YOU, the
trespasser, have to take responsibility for whatever happens to you,
and whatever damage you do. So you go where you don't belong and you
get killed that is your own dumb fault, not the owner of the place
where you illegally entered.
Totally agreed. This works both ways.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
26 Jul
26 Jul
12:18 p.m.
It was thus said that the Great "Clint Wolff (VAX collector)" once stated:
Kevin Mitnick is a CONVICTED criminal, and has ADMITTED criminal
behaviour. I don't get teary-eyed thinking about the time he spent
in prison before the trial. He was a proven flight risk (he ran
away once, and hid out in Denver).
I wonder how Littman would react if someone broke into HIS system.
Somebody did. And it was Mitnick, of all people 8-)
-spc (Littman's reaction? Write a book 8-)
5:30 p.m.
At first I thought this was spam, but then I saw Clint's name on it...
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Clint Wolff (VAX collector) wrote:
How would YOU feel if someone broke into your computer system and took
YOUR files to do whatever he felt like with? Or hacked your voicemail
system and listened to your messages?
...
If your name, DOB, and SSN are ANYWHERE on your computer, a hacker can
steal your identity.
...
People who break into computers are criminals.
People who launch DDOS attacks are criminals.
Honestly, you're a little too paranoid. I think that there certainly is a
grey area in which lie the practices of 'breaking into' systems, launching
DDOS attacks, etc. Most activities like that probably ought to be illegal
in some way; in today's world, one cannot subscribe completely to the
belief that all (h|cr)ackers follow an ethic that forbids damage to
others. However, it is equally wrong to assume that all (h|cr)ackers will
do damage, that the damages are actually as high as have been assessed in
past cases, and that current computer crime laws are just.
The problem with people getting paranoid (e.g., fearing Mitnick could
start a nuclear holocaust from a payphone) is that it causes opressive law
to be generated. What we're seeing now is not only law that punishes (at
an unusual severity) the actual act of 'breaking in', but law (e.g., the
DMCA) which forbids one to know how to do so or even to *tell* others how
to do so. It scares me that there is any debate over the
constitutionality of such laws.
It's really weird. You can go to a number of sites and learn about the
Teller-Ulam Configuration and other aspects of how to build a hydrogen
bomb, but... finding out how to de-ROT13 your DVDs? Sorry buddy, that's
illegal.
Kevin Mitnick is a CONVICTED criminal, and has
ADMITTED criminal
behaviour. I don't get teary-eyed thinking about the time he spent in
prison before the trial. He was a proven flight risk (he ran away
once, and hid out in Denver).
Yeah, Kevin did some stupid stuff, and he should expect to be punished for
it. The problem here is that what he got was just a little (ok,
extremely) 'unconstitutional'.
--
Jeffrey S. Sharp
jss(a)subatomix.com
5:47 p.m.
How about letting this drop before it becomes yet another regrettable
forgettable off topic pissing match.
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Jeffrey S. Sharp wrote:
At first I thought this was spam, but then I saw
Clint's name on it...
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Clint Wolff (VAX collector) wrote:
>
> How would YOU feel if someone broke into your computer system and took
> YOUR files to do whatever he felt like with? Or hacked your voicemail
> system and listened to your messages?
> ...
6:01 p.m.
Getting into YOUR computer is no different from getting into YOUR house. If
someone does that to you, don't you call the police regardless of whether they
steal your assets or just a bottle of beer? Do you think it's tolerable for
someone to gain entry to your house and watch your wife or daughter dress or
bathe? Do you think it's tolerable for someone to gain unlawful entry into your
puportedly private space and film you making love with your spouse/partner and
then share that with whomever he/she sees fit?
If you caught someone skulking about your house with all the necessary
arms/tools to do you harm, wouldn't you defend yourself? Don't you think you
have the right to presume that someone who pries into your personal space has
evil intent?
The problem with allowing people such "rights" is that the ones least likely to
consider the right and wrong of exercising them are the ones most likely do it.
It's the old business of worrying the question of whether he could without
considering at all whether he should.
Another problem, of course, lives within the obvious fact that he'll be defended
by others who also would if they could.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeffrey S. Sharp" <jss(a)subatomix.com>
To: "Classic Computers Mailing List" <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 8:30 PM
Subject: Re: Hackers: Computer Outlaws revisited
At first I thought this was spam, but then I saw
Clint's name on it...
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Clint Wolff (VAX collector) wrote:
How would YOU feel if someone broke into your computer system and took
YOUR files to do whatever he felt like with? Or hacked your voicemail
system and listened to your messages?
...
If your name, DOB, and SSN are ANYWHERE on your computer, a hacker can
steal your identity.
...
People who break into computers are criminals.
People who launch DDOS attacks are criminals.
Honestly, you're a little too paranoid. I think that there certainly is a
grey area in which lie the practices of 'breaking into' systems, launching
DDOS attacks, etc. Most activities like that probably ought to be illegal
in some way; in today's world, one cannot subscribe completely to the
belief that all (h|cr)ackers follow an ethic that forbids damage to
others. However, it is equally wrong to assume that all (h|cr)ackers will
do damage, that the damages are actually as high as have been assessed in
past cases, and that current computer crime laws are just.
The problem with people getting paranoid (e.g., fearing Mitnick could
start a nuclear holocaust from a payphone) is that it causes opressive law
to be generated. What we're seeing now is not only law that punishes (at
an unusual severity) the actual act of 'breaking in', but law (e.g., the
DMCA) which forbids one to know how to do so or even to *tell* others how
to do so. It scares me that there is any debate over the
constitutionality of such laws.
It's really weird. You can go to a number of sites and learn about the
Teller-Ulam Configuration and other aspects of how to build a hydrogen
bomb, but... finding out how to de-ROT13 your DVDs? Sorry buddy, that's
illegal.
Kevin Mitnick is a CONVICTED criminal, and has
ADMITTED criminal
behaviour. I don't get teary-eyed thinking about the time he spent in
prison before the trial. He was a proven flight risk (he ran away
once, and hid out in Denver).
Yeah, Kevin did some stupid stuff, and he should expect to be punished for
it. The problem here is that what he got was just a little (ok,
extremely) 'unconstitutional'.
--
Jeffrey S. Sharp
jss(a)subatomix.com
9:12 p.m.
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Richard Erlacher wrote:
The problem with allowing people such "rights" is that the ones least
likely to consider the right and wrong of exercising them are the ones
most likely do it. It's the old business of worrying the question of
whether he could without considering at all whether he should.
We're in agreement. I don't believe there should be any 'right' anyone
has to perform the act of breaking in where they shouldn't, whether it be
in a computer system, someone's house, or whatever. What I disagree with
is that the punishment for 'computer crime' is so relatively severe
(because people are scared), and that there are laws against discussing
how to commit computer crime. You and I know (judging from your post)
that breaking into a computer system is not much different than breaking
into someone's house; why are 'computer criminals' treated so differently
than a common thief?
Suppose I break into your house, photograph your wife taking a bath, steal
your toaster, and get caught. I go to court, lose, and serve a jail
sentence. Yay. Now, suppose that common thieves were punished as
severely as their 'computer criminal' counterparts -- solitary confinement
("he might rob something!"), total lack of due process, a sentence longer
than many murderers, and being prohibited from ever touching or entering a
building for a long time. How do you like sleeping outside?
Suppose I tell someone how to break into houses, or I build a tool that
can be used to facilitate entry to your house. Hey, it's a free country!
Now, suppose again that I tell someone how to break the security of a
computer system, or write a program that could be used to do so. Uh-oh,
time to say hello to Bubba in cell 72!
We surely have improved on civil rights since 1960. Maybe, once all the
people die off that are scared of computers and scared of those who can
control their magic powers, things will be better for technology as well.
But right now, things really, really suck.
People are tiring of this, but I'm having fun. Let's take it off-list!
--
Jeffrey S. Sharp
jss(a)subatomix.com
9:28 p.m.
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Jeffrey S. Sharp wrote:
The problem with people getting paranoid (e.g.,
fearing Mitnick could
start a nuclear holocaust from a payphone) is that it causes opressive law
to be generated. What we're seeing now is not only law that punishes (at
Very good point. And this is done purposely. We have some seriously
deluded control freaks in power in our government who will take every
opportunity to limit our personal freedoms to bolster their own misguided
agendas.
As malicious a guy like Mitnick has the potential to be, I don't believe
he or anyone else should have their rights violated as he did, and I would
sooner lend my support to his plight than let the government run amok over
his (and ultimately my) rights. That's what this is about.
an unusual severity) the actual act of 'breaking
in', but law (e.g.,
the DMCA) which forbids one to know how to do so or even to *tell*
others how to do so. It scares me that there is any debate over the
constitutionality of such laws.
Yep. They keep piling laws onto the books that will soon make criminals
of us all. At the rate things are going, we may as well just send our
paychecks to the big corporations and just sit at home in the dark
twiddling our thumbs. That's what they want anyway.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
10:53 p.m.
On 26-Jul-2001 Clint Wolff (VAX collector) wrote:
Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap Crap!
How would YOU feel if someone broke into your computer system and took
YOUR files to do whatever he felt like with? Or hacked your voicemail
system and listened to your messages?
That's not hacking.
-Philip
27 Jul
27 Jul
1:52 a.m.
VAX collector skrev:
People who break into computers are criminals.
Well, but I'd rather have a curious hacker than someone into credit card fraud
or blackmail. Or someone who's just into typing Format SYS:.
People who launch DDOS attacks are criminals.
What's more important, they're utter bastards.
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6a.
I installed 7.6.1 on my Color Classic too. It has 6mb ram now, and no FPU
yet. Things really slowed down when I installed the Appearance extention and
control panel. But now the GUI is OS8ish! ;) That little creep is so cute,
I'll probably leave instructions to have it made my urn. It'll hold my ashes,
and still continue to function as a computer ;)
iVan
8377
days inactive
8378
days old
15 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
cmcmanis＠mcmanis.com -
edick＠idcomm.com -
foo＠siconic.com -
gwynp＠artware.qc.ca -
jss＠subatomix.com -
optimus＠canit.se -
spc＠conman.org -
thompson＠mail.athenet.net -
vaxman＠qwest.net -
vcf＠siconic.com