Final ethics project

Final ethics project

            I have read the article about Hacktivist, there are a lot of story with people that people called “hacker” tried to use their expertise and skill with their believe and ambition in the desire to get attention from people that usually with bad action that result in making negative impact on the target, but indeed they just the people turn back to look at something or problem that people in the social overlook. Sometime people live their life without caring for another people in social, just caring about their own live or their benefit, and because of this sometime Hacktivist want to try to change people’s attitude and aspect that people have for the better social, I think Hacktivist is a powerful movement same like journalist that work with media to play their role for social, but Hacktivist, or known as a hacker that have motivation to do something as activist always use the bad action to get attention to people not like journalist do. So, why Hacktivist have been looked as the entity or group of people with dangerous more than to be looked as a good guy that tried to help for the better social. Many times that Hacktivist tried to hack into some system or cooperate or organize, they are just want to send the message or make it to the public and want people to look back and change in something, not intend to destroy data information, or steal sensitive information for a financial purpose. Nowadays Hacktivism has come to have a lot more impact on social.

            As I read the news about “Swagg Security or SwaggSec” the rising hacker group that hacked Foxconn, iPhone manufacturer on February 8, 2012 to gain access to the system resource and then releasing a sensitive massive amount of data including email logins, server logins, trade-secret document and even more alarming - bank account credentials of large companies like Apple, and distributing information data though public by Bittorrent, a Peer-to-Peer (P2P) protocol for file sharing in decentralize network that mean everyone have can share the content independently over the Peer-to-Peer (P2P) system in the internet. Their intention of Swagg Security is to releasing them to the people and the international media in the world, in the ambition to have the large media organization reveal the fact and want them to put the pressure on Foxconn. Swagg Security stages the attack Foxconn to protest harsh working conditions.

            Because Swagg Security want Foxconn and partner to deal or change in employee’s life quality. As we saw in the news before about “The explosion ripped through Building A5 on a Friday evening last May, an eruption of fire and noise that twisted metal pipes as if they were discarded straws. When workers in the cafeteria ran outside, they saw black smoke pouring from shattered windows. It came from the area where employees polished thousands of iPad cases a day. Two people were killed immediately, and over a dozen others hurt. As the injured were rushed into ambulances, one in particular stood out. His features had been smeared by the blast, scrubbed by heat and violence until a mat of red and black had replaced his mouth and nose.”

            Swagg Security protesting harsh working conditions at iPhone manufacturer Foxconn dumped what they said were a lot of private data will belonging to the outsourcing big company, and the passwords inside these files could allow individuals to make fraudulent orders under big companies like Microsoft, Apple, IBM, and Swagg Security wrote in a message posted to Pastebin "Be careful." The purported contents were made available in a torrent file on The Pirate Bay, the large and popular torrent file hosting website. Several Foxconn servers were reported as offline over the past few day. The stunt coincided with protests planned at a half-dozen of Apple retail stores around the world by demonstrators opposing the conditions of workers who manufacture iPhones and other Apple hardware. A recent series carried by The New York Times documented long hours, low pay, and an explosion that killed several workers at Foxconn, which also makes hardware for Cisco, Dell, Sony, HP, and others.

             As in the end, this attack make Foxconn and partner have to announce to the public about environment in the workplace and try to solve the problem. As in Hacktivist role, this action is a bad activity, but it help the people aware of problem that around them.

Hacktivist and Gadflies: A Final Essay

When many people think of hacktivists, they think of an individual committing cybercrime for a purpose, a cause or a "greater good", or they think of an individual who may venture in ethically, morally or legally gray areas for a similar purpose, cause or greater good. However, not many people consider individuals who stir mental, ethical, emotional and psychological responses from members of society with radical ideology in attempt to bring forth changes towards a purpose, cause or greater good that they believe in. Richard Stallman can be considered a prime example of the latter, because although he is not a criminal or a cybercriminal, he acts as a gadfly in other ways by imparting his radical beliefs on society in a quite unusual way.

To understand Stallman, one would have to understand Stallman's beliefs, his dedication to his cause, and the extent to which he would go to free humans from the vices of the copyright. He has sacrificed much in his life to attempt to rid the world of proprietary software, excessive non-free software, software licensing, and the proliferation of software that did not freely contribute to the open source/free software movement. This movement, of which Stallman's name is at the forefront, advocates individuals being able to freely modify, distribute and promote the development of software, while requiring that any derivatives of free/open source software be released with the same terms and conditions. One of his most prominent brainchildren, the GNU project, specifically embraced this ideology, bringing forth large amounts of open source and free software geared towards the *nix/Linux operating systems. Without this free development, redistribution and collaboration, a large amount of the success of operating systems that exist today would not be possible, including Microsoft and Mac OS X, which have large amount of code that were derived from Linux and BSD.

In addition to the numerous foundations that Stallman has created or supported that help proliferation of the Open Source movement, Stallman has spent much time extensively traveling the world in attempt to not only spread these ideologies, but to get various organizations, governments, schools and other entities to move all their computer and computing needs to be wholly comprised of products of the Open Source movement. Some places of note where such efforts were made include India and Venezuela.

The fundamental ideology behind Stallman's movement is that he believes that there should be no such thing as intellectual privacy, copyright and other such entities that restrict or deny individuals completely free and open access to software and other kinds or works. In direct relation to this, there should also be no such things as piracy, or copyright and trademark infringement. He has worked hard to create such terms and ideas as the copyleft (which is the opposite of copyright, and promotes the redistribution, duplication and transmission of works) and the GNU Public License (GPL), which is a well drafted license that helps users be sure that they can be legally covered when producing material under the GPL, while still allowing their material to be openly viewed, disseminated and proliferated.

The extremism in which he carries out his beliefs can be seen in his one and only computer being a Lomote Yeelong netbook, which he chose because it can run free software, even at the BIOS level, which is virtually unheard of. Even among other people who have similar beliefs or who have contributed to the free software movement is it almost impossible to find an individual who possesses a machine that can run free software at the BIOS level. In addition to these extreme beliefs, Stallman has been known to be obnoxiously loud and vocal about his beliefs, and is quick to disagree and go separate ways with those that differ in their views, even if only slightly. After Steve Jobs (president, CEO and visionary in Apple's widely known company) died, because Stallman was diametrically opposed to everything Jobs/Apple had ever believed and because they had spent a larger portion of their existences at odds with each other, Stallman said, “Steve Jobs, the pioneer of the computer as a jail made cool, designed to sever fools from their freedom, has died. As Chicago Mayor Harold Washington said of the corrupt former Mayor Daley, 'I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone.' Nobody deserves to have to die — not Jobs, not Mr. Bill, not even people guilty of bigger evils than theirs. But we all deserve the end of Jobs' malign influence on people's computing. Unfortunately, that influence continues despite his absence. We can only hope his successors, as they attempt to carry on his legacy, will be less effective.”

One could contend that his extremism and his refusal to yield ground on the issues and the ideologies that he believes in is counterproductive, and ridiculous. In fact, a journalist named Andrew Leonard went so far as to once say about Stallman: “There's something comforting about Stallman's intransigence. Win or lose, Stallman will never give up. He'll be the stubbornest mule on the farm until the day he dies. Call it fixity of purpose, or just plain cussedness, his single-minded commitment and brutal honesty are refreshing in a world of spin-meisters and multimillion-dollar marketing campaigns.” However, who can argue with Stallman's track record? Despite all the numerous conflicts, difference of opinions, separation of ways with colleagues with similar views, etc., Stallman has been the recipient of numerous awards, acknowledgements, accolades, and recognitions because of how far and wide his works, his ideologies and derivatives of both have spread. Other detractors from his work argue that his ideologies would lead to chaos and an impossible life, due to the fact that people would no longer have intellectual property, and people would not be able to make money to live off of their works. However, Stallman's attitudes toward this concept can be adequately summarized in a statement he made to a public mailing list saying, “I think it is ok for authors (please let's not call them creators, they are not gods) to ask for money for copies of their works (please let's not devalue these works by calling them content) in order to gain income (the term compensation falsely implies it is a matter of making up for some kind of damages).”

Finally, as hacktivists go, although Richard Stallman may not conventionally fit the stereotypical image of a hacktivist, he has all the qualities of one. He has a moral and ethical stance, he believes in his stance, and he means well for society in his beliefs and his ideologies. He has produced much free, useful and helpful works in compliance with his ideology, and does so at no cost. He believes what he does makes the world a better place, and places emphasis and priority on freedom and bettering the world, rather than financial or other types of selfish gains. He is constantly challenging the world, himself, and society to adopt and embrace the movement, and to see the benefits of his movements while moving away from the flawed, selfish and restrictive ways that society currently lives in. And lastly, he doesn't care about what people think of him; his focus is on ridding the world of what he believes is an injustice and a detrimental cycle. Because of these reasons, and many others, by Socrates's or anyone else's definition, Stallman embraces all a gadfly is comprised of, and is beyond reproach as far as gadflies are concerned.

Hacktivism and Ethics

Anonymous is a large loosely affiliated group of internet super heroes.
They are split off into several factions; the main groups being the People's Liberation Front, whom are the skilled organizers of collaborators of attacks and the Low Orbit Ion Cannon, which is comprised of thousands of novice computer hobbyists who offer their computer's resources as a "zombie attacker". Anonymous' exploits over the years include DDoSing racist websites, exposing internet child porn traffickers, hacking into political pundits emails and even hacking government run websites. The hacking group has faced punishment for their offenses; several members have/are spending time in jail. This jail time is deserved, however, IMHO (as they say), they commit completely righteous crimes. This editorial will focus mainly on Anonymous' stop-SOPA campaign and cooperatively their influence on the majority of internet users.

Anonymous functions as a gadfly in several ways:
They not only impede certain targeted parties but at the same time they make more of the general public aware of said parties' actions. In addition they cohesively explain their actions and their purpose. A primary example is Anonymous protest of SOPA and PIPA. SOPA (stop online piracy act) was introduced in May 2011. Supporters of SOPA promised it would almost entirely put an end to internet piracy. If SOPA were to pass it would effectively censor and block many aspects of the internet that would reduce the overall usability and our freedom as users. PIPA offered a way to track copyright offenders online and then proceed to remove their content from the internet and prosecute these offenders. Anonymous set out to spread the word on sites like 4chan, reddit and youtube. They distributed informative image macros, copypasta and videos. The flow of legalese free SOPA information spread across the web. In January 2012 the US Department of Justice shut down a popular file hosting service called MegaUpload, the owner Kim Dotcom was arrested and incarcerated in a New Zealand prison. This prompted a series of DDoS attacks against websites of the involved organizations: The Department of Justice, and Federal Bureau of Investigation, The MPAA(Motion picture Association of America), the RIAA(Recording Industry Association of America) and BMI(Broadcast Music Inc.). All of the websites were disabled for several hours. Anonymous' information campaign had reached millions, in defiance of the Department of Justice a massive online protest began on January 18th: 10 million petition signers, 3 million emails
to congress and 100,000+ calls to congress. 4chan, Reddit, wikipedia, google, IMGur et. al. posted anti-SOPA messages on their websites. They received over one billion views in one day. On this day thirteen senators had retracted their support of SOPA. 

T.M Scanlon's position on consequentialism can offer an explanation of how Anonymous acted justly: Congress took on the idea that digital copyright must be protected on the internet. Taking this as their primary goal gives the idea extra weight in the bill writing process. What trade offs in freedom are lawmakers prepared to make in exchange for more control over digital copyright? Scanlon uses the example of a tennis game. If the you win a match you may hurt your opponent's feelings; you can choose to lose, but is it worth losing the match to protect these feelings? Do the ends justify the means? If congress were to pass these SOPA and PIPA would it be worth the loss of our rights?

Anonymous is a prime example of a gadfly. Their efforts against SOPA influenced and eduacated millions. In this scenario they were not punished for their efforts, but embraced. Their millions of supporters expressed their distaste with SOPA and were heard by congress. The bill did not pass.

Socrates would approve of Anonymous because, much like himself, they work for the pursuit of knowledge and the freedom of knowledge. He would agree with Anonymous' dissent in the face of tyranny.



Helpful image that explains SOPA: http://www.techjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/sopainternet-1.png

Mr. Orchid signing off.

The Utilitarian: Kevin Mitnick

My hacker of choice, Kevin Mitnick, was one of the most successful and well known hackers ever. Some of you may consider my choice a no brainer considering his notoriety and the wealth of information available. It’s also possible you were expecting me to condemn the man because he had his way with telecomm networks, hacked numerous corporations, and socially engineered his way to reams of private information. At the height of his notoriety a New York Times article claimed he, “allegedly had access to trade secrets worth billions of dollars. He was a very big threat.” After some basic research it would be easy to form an opinion that Kevin Mitnick was an enemy of privacy; a digital pirate of the worst kind.

                I believe however that Mr. Mitnick’s actions were moral and largely ethical. After reading his book Ghost in in the Wires, it is evident that Mr. Mitnick is a prime example of Jeremy Bentham’s utilitarianism doctrine. He didn’t hack for personal gain (money, notoriety, etc), but because it gave him pleasure. According to Bentham, this is referred to as “maximizing utility”, something our subject did from an early age. We are talking about a young man who tested for his GED so that he could leave high school behind and have more time for his hacking endeavors.  This same ethos, not academic goals, led him to college; to get access to mainframe computers.

                My use of the word “success” in the first sentence must be clarified:  not one of fast cars, wads of cash, or throngs of beautiful woman. This was the thrill of the hunt. Mitnick himself says of his beginnings, “The truth was, I broke into the phone system for the same reason another kid might break into an abandoned house down the block. The temptation to explore and find out what’s in there was too great.” In Bentham’s mind, hacking was just another way for this man to serve his “sovereign masters” of pleasure and pain.

                The doctrine of Utilitarianism doesn’t quite fit perfectly here because the pleasure vs. pain struggle is usually looked at from a large group standpoint (pleasure of many vs. the suffering of a few). How can we examine this hacker maximizing his utility vs. society as a whole? An excerpt of Michael Sandel’s book Justice provides us with a great starting point, “consider the way utilitarianism logic is applied in cost benefit analysis, a form of decision making that is widely used by governments and corporations.”

                What was the cost? Some would argue that hacking itself is “bad” or “not doing the right thing”. This is the virtue argument: stealing is a bad thing to do to others. Thievery exploits others and does not contribute to a societies greater good. This would be a credible argument, but despite the assertion by government prosecutors that he caused hundreds of millions of dollars in damage, there is no evidence of personal gain or profit from his activities.  No secrets were sold, money stolen, or lives ruined.  The man himself states, “Of course, the Feds had also found Netcom’s customer database that contained more than 20,000 credit card numbers on my computer, but I never attempted to use any of them; no prosecutor would ever be able to make a case against me on that score. I have to admit, I had liked the idea that I could use a different credit card every day for the rest of my life with ever running out. But I never had any intention of running up charges on them, and never did. That would be wrong.”

                What was the benefit? The wide spread attention this one man garnered woke the country and the world up to the need for greater digital security. This is undoubtedly one of the reasons why your online accounts ask, “What is your favorite color?” or the representative on the phone asks fifteen questions to verify your identity. Ghost in the Wires is choc-a-block with humorous stories of a society unprepared to deal with digital threats. On such story involves cops frantically searching our subject’s car for a logic bomb. I want to believe that as a population we have moved forward; have met at least some of the threats that the digital world throws at us. Hacking offenses still occur every day, but not everyone is totally oblivious any longer.

FINAL HACK

My final hack is directed to prof l'heureux and prof poole, in a form of an intimidating virus prank, which would capture the screen till theyve answered all its question.But in actual sense its not a real virus. its just another programming language thats created to behave like

Lulzsec by Public Enemy

Lulzsec

These days the computer news media uses the terms hacker and cybercriminal more or less interchangeably. That can be misleading. While their meanings overlap, they are not exactly the same thing in all contexts.

The Difference 

A cybercriminal is just what the name implies, a person who uses computer technology to commit a crime for which that person can be prosecuted. The crime usually involves illegally gaining access to one or more computer systems to steal information, take them offline or both, either for malicious purposes or financial gain. Breaking into computer systems involves hacking, so a cybercriminal can be considered a type of hacker.

A hacktivist is "a computer hacker whose activity is aimed at promoting a social or political cause," much like a traditional activist. The term isn't new. (The Oxford English Dictionary dates it to at least 1995.) But a group of hacktivists called Anonymous stole headlines all year, to great approval and simultaneously great criticism. Anonymous released IP addresses of alleged pedophiles and forced child-pornography sites offline. It launched a website called Anonymous Analytics, dedicated to exposing "corrupt companies." It attacked websites like PayPal in a protest to show support for WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange. It even set its electronic crosshairs on NATO after targeting Sony and the Church of Scientology. In short, the Anonymous hacktivists have been very busy little bees in the bonnets of many, many people.

My Hacktivist 

Lulz Security, commonly abbreviated as LulzSec

 Some of the most notable targeted websites include Sony Pictures’ internal database, CIA website and FBI’s contractor InfraGard among others. Although the group officially announced its retirement in June 2011 and suspect members of Lulzsec have been taken into police custody numerous related attacks have been reported by its affiliated groups since then.

Background

The group periodically releases stolen information from websites. They post the stolen data on their website in .txt files, on the web app pastebin or in torrents on their page on The Pirate Bay. Releases often are posted on Fridays and thus they made a hash tag called “#fuckfbifriday” that they use to tweet with. They have been known to use Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) attacks and SQL injections to take down websites. The group appears to be mainly motivated by political causes related to economic and social justice, but also seem to appreciate hacking for pure entertainment 

Contribution to Society 

On June 23rd, Lulzsec also released a new set dubbed “Chinga La Migra,” a Spanish phrase meaning “fuck the border patrol,” which reveals hundreds of private intelligence bulletins, personal information of police officers and confidential documents including training manuals and personal email correspondence. In the press release, the group cited the legislation of SB1070 (Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act), a controversial anti-immigration law that was passed in the state of Arizona in April 2011, as their primary motive behind targeting the Department of Public Safety.

The documents classified as “law enforcement sensitive”, “not for public

distribution”, and “for official use only” are primarily related to border

patrol and counter-terrorism operations and describe the use of informants to

infiltrate various gangs, cartels, motorcycle clubs, Nazi groups, and protest

movements. 

functioning as a "gadfly"? 

The latest in a string of attacks by a hacker group known as Lulz Security (LulzSec) targeted the Arizona police today. The hackers exposed user names and personal information of law enforcement officers as well as sensitive documents housed on their servers.

While rumors surfaced about a supposed kingpin of LulzSec being arrested by New Scotland Yard this week, their intimidation tactics continue, and we have no idea who the next target will be.

Plato's Apology of Socrates

For some reason, it seems that the government considers hackers who are out to line their pockets less of a threat than those who are trying to make a political point. Consider the case of Andrew Auernheimer, better known as “Weev.” When Weev discovered in 2010 that AT&T had left private information about its customers vulnerable on the Internet, he and a colleague wrote a script to access it. Technically, he did not “hack” anything; he merely executed a simple version of what Google Web crawlers do every second of every day — sequentially walk through public URLs and extract the content. When he got the information (the e-mail addresses of 114,000 iPad users, including Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Rahm Emanuel, then the White House chief of staff), Weev did not try to profit from it; he notified the blog Gawker of the security hole. This can be compared to Around 400 B.C., Socrates was brought to trial on charges of corrupting the youth of Athens and “impiety.” Presumably, however, people believed then as we do now, that Socrates’ real crime was being too clever and, not insignificantly, a royal pain to those in power or, as Plato put it, a gadfly. Just as a gadfly is an insect that could sting a horse and prod it into action, so too could Socrates sting the state.

In my conclusion I believe hactivist should never be prosecuted

Final Ethics Project.

Julian Assange

Julian Paul Assange is an Australian editor, activist, publisher and journalist. He is best known as the editor-in-chief and founder of WikiLeaks, which publishes submissions of secret information, news leaks and classified media from anonymous news sources and whistle blowers. Wikileaks website was initiated in 2006 in Iceland by the organization Sunshine Press.  According to the WikiLeaks website, its goals are to bring important news and information to the public by publishing original source material, alongside news stories so readers and historians alike can see evidence of the truth, and to ensure that journalists and whistleblowers are not jailed for emailing sensitive or classified documents.

When I was growing up as a kid, I was hyper sensitive about the things that my parents used to hinder me from doing, without explaining to me why. This would make me more inquisitive and curious about them, and I would either persist until they would explain them to me, or until I would figure it out by myself. Now, this issue of “classified information” always triggers anxiety and the need to know more about it. We as ordinary people have no idea what goes on around us that is termed as classified. A lot more times than not, it always turns out not to be what it should. There are lots of dubious dealings that happen underground in the pretext of classified information.  This is what persons like Julian P. Assange want the public to know. The one thing about his belief is that no one should be left in the dark. Information should be accessible to anyone, as long as it is not adulterated. We elect leaders not to conceal information from us, but to actually avail it, as openness clears and washes away any doubt of wrong doing, and illicit conduct.

This brings me to Socrates. In the apology of Socrates, he attempted to defend himself and his conduct rather than to apologize for it with honesty and directness. He believed in the concepts of good and justice. Having divergent ideas and different perceptions on particular issues should not make one an enemy of justice. One should be given a platform onto which one can air out ones views. The only difference between Socrates and Julian is the era in which they have existed. My guess is that if Socrates then had had access to modern communication like the internet, he would have done exactly what Julian has done best all his life.
When i was a kid, my parents taught me how to share. Sharing is good. It is no crime. The only time sharing has been considered a bad thing is when whatever is supposed to be shared is actually bad, or when someone will take advantage of it and harm you. I believe in sharing. It is through sharing that we get the best out of every one. Take an example of open source code. A lot of computer programs have been greatly improved by sharing source code and making it available to anyone who can improve on it. Information should be equally shared and available to whoever wants it. No one should at any one time be victimized for accessing information. The files retrieved by wikileaks had a lot of bad stuff done back doors. No ordinary person would have known that if it was not for the good work of the gadfly Julian and team.
People should own up to their mistakes and crimes, other than unjustly victimizing those who expose their weird characters.  We are all equal and so should we be before the law and any other justice system, and the laws should be redefined to accommodate all free thinkers for the good of society. This leads me to John Rawls.  
John Rawls, considered the most important political philosopher of the 20th century, was an American political and ethical philosopher, best known for his defense of egalitarian liberalism. In his major work “A Theory of Justice”, Rawls defends a conception of “justice as fairness.” He holds that “An adequate account of justice cannot be derived from utilitarianism, because that doctrine is consistent with intuitively undesirable forms of government in which the greater happiness of a majority is achieved by neglecting the rights and interests of a minority”. Utilitarianism is in direct contrast to egoism, which is seeking own self-interest, even at the expense of others, with disregard to eventual consequences. Individuals would be led by reason and hence, self-interest to agree to a number of issues like equal liberties and social and economic equality.
I may not agree with him on economic equality because I believe that whoever works hard should be rewarded for his or her efforts, but I am in unison with him when it comes to equal liberties, because it all comes back to who should own one’s freedom of choice, expression and sharing.

It is my belief that no one should control one’s self in line with freedom of choice, expression, what to share, and who to share with, not forgetting access to information. Just like John Rawls advocated for fairness, so was Socrates, and Julian. Julian has been able to put everyone in power at a check point, the reason they wanted him prosecuted. If the accessed files were not bad files (files containing bad or dubious deals or clandestine undercover work), trust me no one would bother. Bad people pretend to be good and hide under the cover of the law, so that they can pass off quietly as innocent beings. This should stop hence forth. Change should be first implemented with redefinition of a number of laws, which suppress gadflies and all those who criticize evil. A lot more times, the minority and the poor suffer a lot because the flamboyant and draconian laws protect mostly the rich. Long live all gadflies.

I rest my case.

Got a Free Tee Shirt.

During that cook out on the grass, the volunteers were wearing shirts that said "I am a community college success story." .... Awesome
Naturally I had to have one. So I pretended that I was a volunteer and asked where I cold get one. I eventually made my way down to the student activities room, and said that I was a volunteer and that I was sorry that I was late.
They gave me one. Not a crazy hack, but I'm sure that getting free stuff is a large part of social engineering.

Adrian Lamo

Adrian Lamo is a Colombian-American threat analyst and "grey hat" hacker.
He first gained media attention for breaking into several high-profile computer
networks, including those of The New York Times, Yahoo!, and Microsoft,
culminating in his 2003 arrest. In 2010, Lamo reported U.S. serviceman Bradley
Manning to federal authorities, claiming that Manning had leaked hundreds of
thousands of sensitive U.S. government documents to WikiLeaks. Manning was arrested
and incarcerated in the U.S. military justice system.
Lamo was born in Boston, Massachusetts to Mario Lamo-Jiménez and Mary Lamo-Atwood in 1981.
Popularly called the "homeless hacker" for his transient lifestyle, Lamo spent most of his
travels couch-surfing, squatting in abandoned buildings and traveling to Internet cafes,
libraries and universities to investigate networks, and sometimes exploiting security holes.

I chose Adrian Lamo to be my favourite hacker because he was did the right thing to the society
which is morally good and and he doesnt deserve to be be prosecuted when he broke the law.
Because he did a lot of good thing many well known companies in the United States of America.
 
Earlier on in his hacking career, Adrian Lamo was something of a good Samaritan,
known by the moniker "the homeless hacker" because he sometimes took up residence
in abandoned buildings. As a hacker, Lamo broke into the networks of a number of
major companies -- Excite@Home, MCI WorldCom, Yahoo, Microsoft and Google --
After cracking through the companies' security systems, Lamo informed them of their
vulnerabilities, and helped them close the holes, free of charge.
In some cases, he also helped them fix these holes without accepting any compensation.
Apperently, he is helping these companies and even the society by telling the companies
how they were hacked and helping them fix it.

He was arrested for unauthorized access to networks belonging the New York Times and Reed Elsevier's Lexis-Nexis' site in violation of 18 U.S.C.1030(a)(5)(A)(ii) and 1029(a)(2). Included as 'relevant conduct' in the complaint (conduct that is alleged and may be used to show that the defendant is generally a bad guy, but need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt) were allegations that defendant Lamo had additionally compromised other corporate networks. These allegedly included Excite@Home, Yahoo, Microsoft, MCI Worldcom, SBC and Cingular... In the ultimate proceedings in USA v. Lamo, a conviction was secured only for the intrusions against the NYT, Lexis-Nexis, and Microsoft. All three were amalgamated in a single count.
He found some valuable information there, including personal
details on thousands of people who had written for the paper, including celebrities
and ex-presidents. To avoid jail time, he negotiated a plea bargain that included six
months of house arrest. Due to that i think he is doing the right thing to the society positively. It's 'the notion among hackers that something is worth doing or is interesting. This is something that hackers often feel intuitively about a problem or solution; the feeling approaches the mystical for some. It's not that it's about the information, it's always been for about the process, which is why he used a published or unpublished 'exploit' in that extend  he wasn't looking for buffer overflows or flaws in the software. He was just trying to take normal every day information resources and arrange them in improbable ways. Actually he didn't spend time downloading databases of customer information.
One example is Excite@Home, as stated in one of his interviews which of course no longer exists per se. "When I compromised them I had full access to the customer data, including credit card data in full text. That was of no interest to me. What I thought was really cool, what had hack value to me was that I could log in to support accounts that they didn't check anymore and answer help desk requests from users who otherwise would never get an answer.

In recent years, Lamo has been in the news for reporting Bradley Manning to police.
Manning, a U.S. Army private first class, allegedly funneled thousands of classified
documents to the whistleblower organization WikiLeaks and then contacted Lamo, who
said that Manning boasted about his actions. Lamo's role in the affair, in which he
presented himself as a journalist, has attracted some controversy.

The moral philosophy comparing Adrian Lamo to Socrate is that he suggests that what is to be considered a good act is not good because gods say it is, but is good because it is useful to us in our efforts to be better and happier people. In other words Adrian did good that made some companies and even individuals who information was at hand happy by not revealing them to the public. He even helped solve these companies problems that could cost thousands for free.

To conclude  i will say that Adrian Lamo is not publicly harmful. His activities has even helped a lot of big tech companies .

Anonymous who are they and who can give the answers

Anonymous group of hackers and who they are? This question was not still answered yet. We can only imagine who is staying behind this group and how this group is big compared to other groups. this name anonymous was appeared first in the 4chan website and later on it was widely spread between hacker's communities. Anonymous mean to me something more than other groups who was launching attacks against FBI servers and NASA space servers. I have many reasons to say this statement because it is obviously the first group who was intended to fight against Scientology, for their beliefs and freedom of speech.

 

Scientology is the huge religious organization which is exempted from paying government taxes and who's leader was a Ron Hubbard. I had my own experience of having some influence from scientology and their recruiting people who are involved in this business. Ron's Hubbard books are cost a lot more than it should be, his influence changed many lives in a negative way. Everyone who has past negative stress or environment developed anagrams and in order for to rid off of these anagrams you have to be clear in a scientology way but this means your life will be completely different and you will not have your own choice to expand your life. I was meeting some person who was having a master's degree and was totally dependent and obedient to the church of Scientology. He could not take any other choices to change his life and he was totally happy to spend most of his time at the church of Scientology. I was seeing some people who was staying close to the wall and talking to themselves by phrasing weird words to me. I was shocked how people can be manipulated and changed and I left this of treating my negative anagrams to stop my stuttering. I am strongly agree that anyone should have freedom of his or her speech and should be able live without any brainwash mind as scientology does to people. I strongly agree to the statement that the Church of Scientology should not be exempted from paying taxes as a regular American does. I agree that Anonymous should show to the world and all media that no one will escape from their organization to fight for the freedom of speech and defend the freedom of people who are mistaken led by the scientology influence.

 

 Tom Cruise was the famous actor to me but not anymore longer because he is involved into scientology and I am not recognizing him  as my famous actor in his early movies. His last  marriage should be  his freedom of choice but it was selected by the Church of Scientology. It was not easy for these women to decline any offer because they will be punished and work in dirty hard jobs for the scientology. Tom Cruise speech was appeared on YouTube and later was taken out from YouTube with scientology hands. Anonymous is the group who believes that freedom is the Internet where they can do and express their ideas and no one can take our freedom from the Internet like it was done by a Scientology to take off video of Tom Cruise that was posted on the YouTube.

"The anonymous group released a video on the YouTube titled: "Message to Scientology" concerning their intentions to attack the Church of Scientology. A robotic voice on the video begins with "hello leaders of Scientology, We are Anonymous, " and continues by explaining their motivations: "Over the years we have been watching you, your campaigns of misinformation, your suppression of dissent and your litigious nature. All these things have caught our eye. With the leakage of your latest propaganda video into mainstream circulation the extent of your malign influence over those who have come to trust you as leaders has been made clear to us. Anonymous has therefore decided that your organization should be destroyed." (Wikipedia source)

This message on the YouTube was the first attempt of any way to stop the scientology influence and make it clear for the Church of Scientology that war be declared against them. many website of scientology were attacked and has been slowed down, they were brought to complete stop or even removed from the Internet. Due to this open challenge the Anonymous got more member to support them in this war from other countries. People stand up against Scientology with their demands to stop Scientology influence. The original members of Anonymous group and 4chan were amazed about how many other people support their ideas and demands and their power cannot be stopped even with Scientology hands including FBI. People will stand up for their beliefs and ideas no mater of what could be happened to them.

By describing some good things about Anonymous hactivist group I have to say some negative aspect of other member of Anonymous group called Lulz Security or commonly known as LulSec. This group was consist of highly profile hackers who managed to attacked the famous companies such Sony and CIA website. This group was pointed on dangerous consequences of the password reuse and how vulnerabilities can penetrate any secure website. The main leader of this organization was a very intelligent and super smart individual called Sabu. Sabu was coordinating all these attacks and managed their group members who will be involved into any particular attacks. This group was even attacked newspaper websites and Fox Broadcasting Company. This group was attacking any companies and website what could be hacked and exposed any confidential information. I strongly agree that this group is different from the Anonymous group and should be prosecuted for their wrongful activities

Lulsec group members hacked  HBGarry and it that was shown of how strong and dangerous hackers can be. This group released many confidential information of many innocent people and caused an aggravation of other hactivist groups by doing this. Other hackers groups promised to release all information regarding this group member on-line. This LulSec hacked also the database of X factor contestants containing information of 73000 contestants. The leader of this group somehow helped FBI to arrest his members on the March 2012. it is now obviously for me how this group was tracked down and how it was done but it is clear to me that the leader become a rat to his trusted members. Someone said that Sabu was the leader of anonymous group but there are no facts to prove this statement. Any hacker's organization as son or later can be tracked down by FBI with all means to achieve this arrests. it was done before when FBI tracked down the Kevin Mitnik but it is not enough to realize for other hackers that anyone can be prosecuted.

Luzsec did not appear to hack for financial profit, claiming their motivation was to have fun by causing mayhem. they did things "for the lulz" and focused on other possible comedic and entertainment value of attacking targets Everyone can have a fun but some fun that relieves someone confidential information of LinkedIn profiles and the names of 73000 X factor contestants cannot be called a fun anymore and must be prosecuted by all mean available. This was happened to LulzSec members and will happen to other hacking groups who is going to have such a fun. I strongly agree if you are hacking for the for the discovery of the security vulnerabilities in companies that is a different story but if you are exposing the confidential information and people's profiles of the Face book or a Twitter then you should understand all the consequences and legal obligations of submitting these wrongful actions. As soon or later every hacker who does these actions will be found guilty and prosecuted and I totally with this conclusion.

Final Hack

My Final Hack was to gain access to Prof L'Heureux's office without her being there. 

My hack was reasonably successful. I had spent some time watching the office between classes, and was planning on waiting until a someone from the cleaning staff to open the door, and I could make my way in. This proved to be unsuccessful because they only come by late at night. So I waited until around 11pm, and made my move. I managed to get into the school undetected until I got to the office door which was locked, and no janitorial staff to be found. I eventually was discovered by a security guard, and I thought it was all over.

I convinced him that I was the Professor’s TA and needed to put something on her desk. He didn't believe me, so I said for him to call her (a bluff), and this was very important because it had to do with final grades (not really a lie). He actually let me in, and I told him I would need privacy. He did not give me any.

I technically gained access, but could not have potentially gained any confidential information. I feel that I could have possibility uploaded something to the computer though, maybe through a USB drive.  

ethical hacking mission from last week that needs POINTS\feedback!

http://ethicalhackingbhcc.blogspot.com/2013/04/live-updates-on-status-of-boston.html

Hey All,
Someone wanna rate this hack?
I made a sweet looking GMAIL phishing site and no one even checked it out.
Anyways, points\feedback would be appreciated.

I say it's worth 10  points, easy.

Interesting links to check out...

Some very interesting links to check out about hacking and information I thought you guys might like to check out:

An article on DDoS Visualization
An article on Firefox being used by governments to spy on it's people and Mozilla being angry about it.
An article on the DoL being hacked.

You just got hacked if you clicked the first link!

Final Hack MIssion 5/1/13

I'm not sure if this hack is legit but here we go:
I'll post some people's facebook accounts. If you post someone else's facebook from the class, I'll remove your facebook from the blog. 


IUUQT://XXX.GBDFCPPL.DPN/P3PAPOFP3 - Cap'n Crunch
IUUQT://XXX.GBDFCPPL.DPN/SRVBSSZ1 - Peon Pinkish

These are encrypted using the ROT1 cipher.
Decrypt them here:
http://web.forret.com/tools/rot13.asp?dir=decrypt&rot=1&cipher=V'Z+GELVAT+GB+GRNPU+GUR+PNIRZRA+GB+CYNL+FPENOOYR.+VG'F+HCUVYY+JBEX.+GUR+BAYL+JBEQ+GURL+XABJ+VF+'HAU'%2C+NAQ+GURL+QBA'G+XABJ+UBJ+GB+FCRYY+VG.%09