magore@watdcsu.UUCP (07/01/87)
Hello Kurt, In article <1173@sputnik.COM> kurt@tc.fluke.COM (Kurt Guntheroth) writes: [munch] >Password hacking is an unethical activity that violates property rights, >privacy rights, and often results in monetary damage. The fact that it is >an activity that does not require an investment in tools, and that can be >practiced without actually damaging anything does not make it ethical. I am >surprised that a university would endorse such unethical activity, but money >talks, and this is not the first university to become a moral prostitute. [munch] I agree with what you are saying but _only_ _if_ the issue is of criminal intent and _not_ that of learning under controlled conditions to help aid in understanding how to better protect people. First off we don't toss people with forensic science degrees in jail for knowing how to be better criminals as a result of their education just as we don't toss law enforcement people in jail when they attempt to learn more about weaknesses in the system. We don't [ often :)] toss national security agents in jail when they learn of methods to break national security when the sole effort is to make the nation a safer place [ except those who go bad ]. An attempt must be made to consider the virtue of these activities but to distinguish possible motives of criminal intent. What I object to is that a few people are equating a desire to learn how to protect people, from their own ignorance [???], with moral prostitution and unethical activities. If someone suggested that people in forensic sciences were actaully moral prostitutes because they could be better criminals I feel many people would laugh at the implication - but why is it that when universities attempt to educate people in detecting weeknesses in computer security they are being called money grabbing moral prostitutes? A premiss that is _not_ being addressed is an assumption that people in this area are being treated guilty until proven innocent. I also see a tendency here to equate people who would want to better inform people how to protect themselves with those exact kind of criminal activities in question! [ Aside: Kurt, I'll consider this likely not what you are saying but bear with me while I add my 2 cents worth into this issue by adding balance to the manner of your expressed concerns...] If password hacking is of criminal nature then toss them in jail else if it is under _controlled_ educational guidelines with an eye towards making this word a safer place give them a medal! I do think 'hacker' is a poor choice of words it tends to bring images of non professional people using bubble gum to fix a crack in something but for others it doesn't carry this implication at all. I feel the word is _not_ mature in the market place and often tends to confuse many people. It should not have been used because of it's tendency to be used in various present day movies as an image of a young teenager bent on breaking into a system for kicks. Whereas the image once was that of a semi-respectable hobby sometimes offering rather unique and impresive results... Best Regards, # Mike Gore # Institute for Computer Research. ( watmath!mgvax!root - at home ) # These ideas/concepts do not imply views held by the University of Waterloo.
magore@watdcsu.UUCP (07/01/87)
>making this word a safer place give them a medal! I do think 'hacker' is
oops ^^^ world :)
Best Regards,
# Mike Gore
# Institute for Computer Research. ( watmath!mgvax!root - at home )
# These ideas/concepts do not imply views held by the University of Waterloo.