Security Vs. Hackers

I worked in security consulting. I learned many thinks and red many books about it. At some moment I understood hackers strategy, but i never saw something special in their attacks. I saw good ones and bad ones.
to be continued....

You mean: security vs. criminal crackers, don't you?
I assume you are not under the misguided media attacks on the very people who have brought this whole industry (well yes, somewhat accidently) to where it is from Arpanet on. You may want to visit the disussion here:

https://www.techrepublic.com/forumdiscuss/thread_detail.jhtml?thread_id=45153

to learn more about "The Hacking Lexicon".

If this is what you meant, neither wins. It's more work for everyone. Personally, I like to lay around in the sun more than making security increasingly insane.

the way it stands at the moment the hackers win hands down but...

the future looks very interesting as hackers are turning to security administration. it will be hackers versus ex-hackers. that should be a much more even contest.

funny no one posted anything else after you said that....

geez its just a place that sell sunglasses...
http://www.defconoptics.com

Duke *grin*

well hackers are security freaks.
they spend their time looking for security holes, and so do admins.
All the admins I know are hackers. However, none of them are crackers.
I think the debate is kinda pointless as someone pointed out. The number of "black hats" outweighs that of the "white hats" at least 10 to 1.

I thought you were comparing black hats versus white hats. I'm not an administrator, or else, that isn't in my job description. I'm an architect (whatever that means) But within the past two days I've found several pieces of information on security flaws and distributed them to the people who are, oficially, administrators. I also work on security at the server level. I'm also a hacker: my latest hack is a small video camera on a little cart to play with dogs on their level. So, I think the white hat crowd is bigger than you think.

However, even if limited to only system administrators, I'm not convinced. How many serious break-ins does a system administrator have happen per year? If the ratio were as high as you say, they'd be doing nothing else. I can remember about five break-ins in as many years at a university, and universities are notably lax in security.

Definition of a hacker:

1. A person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and how to stretch their capabilities, as opposed to most users, who prefer to learn only the minimum necessary.

2. One who programs enthusiastically (even obsessively) or who enjoys programming rather than just theorizing about programming.

3. A person capable of appreciating hack value.

4. A person who is good at programming quickly.

5. An expert at a particular program, or one who frequently does work using it or on it; as in "a Unix hacker". (Definitions 1 through 5 are correlated, and people who fit them congregate.)

6. An expert or enthusiast of any kind. One might be an astronomy hacker, for example.

7. One who enjoys the intellectual challenge of creatively overcoming or circumventing limitations.

8. (Deprecated) A malicious meddler who tries to discover sensitive information by poking around. Hence "password hacker", "network hacker". The correct term is cracker.

individuals are often malicious and have many means at their disposal for breaking into a system.

While it is expected that any real hacker will have done some playful cracking and knows many of the basic techniques, anyone past larval stage is expected to have outgrown the desire to do so except for immediate practical reasons (for example, if it's necessary to get around some security in order to get some work done).

Contrary to widespread myth, cracking does not usually involve some mysterious leap of hackerly brilliance, but rather persistence and the dogged repetition of a handful of fairly well-known tricks that exploit common weaknesses in the security of target systems. Accordingly, most crackers are only mediocre hackers.

Thus, there is far less overlap between hackerdom and crackerdom than the mundane reader misled by sensationalistic journalism might expect. Crackers tend to gather in small, tight-knit, very secretive groups that have little overlap with the huge, open hacker poly-culture; though crackers often like to describe *themselves* as hackers, most true hackers consider them a separate and lower form of life, little better than virus writers. Ethical considerations aside, hackers figure that anyonewho can't imagine a more interesting way to play with their computers than breaking into someone else's has to be pretty losing.

A hacker whether black or white has to be a cracker as well, either for educational or malicious purposes. Any SECURITY Administrator has to be both a HACKER & a CRACKER, he needs to make sure that he can test his system and apply a SECURITY that will be strong enough to withstand an attack by an ousider. The truth is there is not much to learn here, you can become a HACKER & a CRACKER by getting some tutorials and the tools necessary to perform SECURITY TESTING.

HACKERS are usually teenagers who enjoy challenges and have the time to RESEARCH, GET THE TOOLS & IMPLEMENT... as simple as that.....

Security versus hackers.
Well the hackers of this day and age are getting more smart with every patch and update that companies release to fix loopholes.
But in the end it comes down to this: just how much do you trust the people you work with? How well do you know them? If your lucky, a white hat willcome along and show the holes in the company network and they will help you try to fix them.
But, if a black hat comes along with cruel intentions then look out.
The best rule of thumb is to always be safe in the first place.