Publication : loser hackers think they are smarter than others

Article Publishing

~ loser hackers think they are smarter than others

There is this feeling a hacker gets when he hacks in or breaks in to a system. This feeling is superiority. If he can hack in to the system then he must be smarter than the owner of the computer, because the owner of that computer never was able to break into the hackers system. But what if the guy being hacked simply has better things to do, and is much smarter than the hacker, but doesn't care to hack nor care to waste his life doing such activities? I.e. a hacker could have an I.Q. of 120, and break in to a nuclear scientist's computer who has an I.Q. of 180 and has won 3 Nobel prizes.

This absurd fallacy that a hacker is smarter than the victim, can be debunked as follows: often the victim of hacking or cracking hasn't spent a single moment of his life hacking into other people's computers, and simply doesn't care to even if he had the time. He could possibly be a nuclear scientist, restaurant owner and millionaire, or an extremely skilled programmer that's simply never had interest in hacking or cracking but could do so if he spent the time. If this person, the victim, spent a few months becoming interested in hacking or cracking he could easily break in to the criminal's computer that hacked into his, but why would he waste his life doing such trivial (creepy stalker) nonsense when he could be doing something more important with his life such as nuclear physics, programming (hacking is not programming), mathematics, hiking, skiing, etc.

I.e. just because a hacker or cracker gets in to a system, does not in any way mean that he is superior or smarter than the victim. It just means that the hacker has no life, and the victim has a life. It's basically like saying bank robbers that figure out ways to break in to the building without setting alarms off, must be smarter than the mutual fund manager that makes 5.3 million in profits on only 2 personal accounts. Not necessarily. It's just the mutual fund manager has never had any interest in the alarm system of the building he works on; that doesn't make him stupid.

It's all about time consumption and time use, and dedicating resources to certain areas of expertise.

In fact one big mistake hackers could indeed make, is to break in to a system, thinking the people are stupid who own the system, and then that "stupid" person ends up educating himself about the subject and then releases hell fire back on to the person who hacked his system. But, only if he has the time to waste on such trivial criminal activities and privacy invasions.

Indeed the best hacker/cracker is one who breaks a system, but then tries his best not to use it for illegal purposes, but instead informs the person and offers a source patch to fix the error/vulnerability. However, security is such a massive task that there seems to be always at least one more bug/error/vulnerability left that no one thought of, so it is like climbing Mount Everest and never making it to the top because someone keeps raising the height of the mountain a few meters every time you get closer.

And there is always the case of a super secure system, that almost no one can break in to, up until the point where someone simply walks in to their room with their cell phone that hasn't hit the sleep mode yet, picks it up, and the web browser is logged in to their database - and the hacker doesn't even have to enter a password because the cell phone is already on, not asleep yet, and therefore no password is even needed. Some hackers aren't even hackers at times, they just take advantage of situations where you don't even need a password - because they are clever losers that spend all day thinking up such schemes. Or the case of social engineering: call someone up on the phone and get their password by pretending you are the owner of their hosting account, spoof the caller ID name. Or the sex method: get a girl to call up someone on the phone and talk sexy, pretend they are the account manager, and bingo.

All of these tricks make hackers and crackers think they are smarter than most all other people - they have a superiority complex. However, some people simply do not have the time to waste on such trivial mental masturbations.. they have lives to live. There is simply no time in the world to really secure any system down 100 percent, as the minute you install some application from ports or not part of the standard audited secure system (if your system is even audited), that is the moment you are in danger, which is literally 99.99 percent of all people. A secure way to run an operating system may be to use a Live CD that is read only, up until the point you start using the internet, in which case you have all the risks of all your online data being fucked with. Or someone can simply look over your shoulder when you are typing in a password to some internet site, whether or not you use a Live CD.

Basically, thinking about super secure systems is a huge stress, because it is near impossible, and some little turdfaced loser with time on his hands will always find a way in. Often, the easiest way in to a system is not even through the computer itself, but through a telephone with some social engineering, or even just physically breaking in to their building and looking for their passwords on paper, or even just becoming their friend (pretend friend, that is) and building up some fake trust with them, then on to the social engineering. Kind of like a partner (boyfriend, girlfriend) who's using you for ulterior motives. Or there is always peeking over their shoulder, probably the oldest trick in the book... peeking over the keyboard and watching them type their password, at a library, ATM machine, debit card terminal, coffee internet cafe, etc. Then there is always spoofing router to make it look like it is their router even though it's a custom spoofed one.

Losers do have time on their hands, but it doesn't make them smart. It just makes them focused on a special area of interest. Again, if someone has spent all their life cooking, it doesn't make them smarter if someone comes in the room who has only cooked 5 times in their life... That person could be just as smart, but more focused on other things.

Personally I have lost a lot of interest in security, not because I can't think about it, but because thinking about it is extremely stressful: it's basically a never ending climb of Mount Everest that literally never ends, will never end, and does never end. The safest websites, are obviously static site generators that make plain HTML: but obviously they are only secure, up until the point that someone simply gains your ftp access and can create whatever static or dynamic files they wish. And, the most secure method of computing, or using a computer, is to simply log off the internet and only do offline work: that's no fun. Buying a copy of the internet from archive.org and using only a local copy, never hooking up a wifi or internet connection, is a little bit extreme - but is really the only way to remain secure. Up until the point that someone has a wifi chip soldered in to your computer that you never knew about, and they can connect to your computer any time they want without you knowing - or up until the point that they simply bug/microphone your house or stalk you and follow you.

Indeed there is no true security, and it is saddening. Especially when the people interested in securing their own systems, often hypocritically go off and break in to other systems, which makes little sense if they value privacy and security: because if you value it, you wouldn't be doing violations of other people's security and privacy - unless you were purposely breaking in to a system to report it and fix it.

Indeed there is a thrill to finding a vulnerability of a system, but it's also likely a criminal act and something you'd never want done to yourself, but for some odd reason you feel it is okay to do it to other humans. Now, if that human that is being hacked is a very bad person, and needs to be hacked, then there are all sorts of lines one can draw: i.e. if a terrorist just so happens to be planning his next strike, and one is able to hack in to his system and gather data to prevent the strike, then it gets very interesting ethically, as if one does not hack the system then an entire city could be destroyed. AFAIK, though, not many hackers actually prevent massive crimes from happening.. but I haven't done enough research. They might simply hack into someone's system because they are butthurt that the person isn't on their political side, or because they have a grudge against them, or because they want to set them up and try to frame them, or to use their computer as a proxy for illegal purposes, or for some petty reason. It would be very interesting to know how many hackers actually do good work and break into systems purposely to help the planet. If the percentage of those white hat hackers is high, I'd be surprised. And there is always the case of a white hat hacker thinking he is white hat, when in fact he is not - another superiority complex.

Just as an example of what could really be done, if someone wanted to spend the time: I found a web server vulnerability that affects millions of servers and, if I really wanted, could engineer a virus that replicates across web servers through the vulnerability, using javascript as the replication system. I found this vulnerability because I am smart and am capable of finding vulnerabilities due to my old long interest in security (which now, kind of bores me). It affects mostly the closed source linux hosting accounts that use a cPanel management (yes, linux is closed source, didn't you know.. at least in this particular case cPanel is very much a huge part of linux, and is closed source). But, I have a life, and time, so I really don't have any need, desire, or want, to write a virus that replicates through linux servers - I don't consider myself black hat. I could also just avoid using the virus method and write a system that gathers people's passwords, but doesn't replicate. This is all criminal activity that I have zero interest in. The point is, that if I spent the time, I could do it, and it does not make me smarter just because I dedicate time to writing code that makes a virus or cracks a million systems over a period of a few days. Why waste my time on such nonsense if I have better things to do? I.e. just because I found a vulnerability doesn't make it worth attacking.. Instead, I'll likely just report the vulnerability carefully, before it is attacked by someone else (you have to be careful how you report things, as someone else could simply use your information to break in).

There are so many vulnerabilities out there, that literally anyone with an I.Q. of over 100 could break in if they wanted, to many systems, so as long as they spent time on it - which people simply don't have, as time is limited. Even if the universe is eternal and time is not limited, why waste eternity doing nonsensical tasks? The joke about eternity is that if you had eternity, you could get more done and complete any task... and the punch line being that why would you waste eternity doing stupid tasks when you could be doing better things for all eternity? I.e. eternity doesn't give you more free time, it gives you more time to waste...

But another lesson is that be careful who you tick off, because, if someone really ticked me off, I could write some nasty server viruses... I just don't see the point of wasting time on such tasks to try to wreck other people's lives: similar to gangstalkers who have no life who waste their entire lives obsessed over writing real world viruses: fucking with people's heads and playing mind games, instead of, say, eternal shoulder sucking, or writing neat parsers that are constructive rather than destructive.