Show Posts
I do not really see why the public portrays hackers as intriguing individuals, when hacking is about as tasteless as vandalism, anyone can setup an anonymous server with a domain asking for credit card numbers in exchange for Emma Watsons nudes if you have 100k targeted views there will be at least 20% credit cards submitted, average of 1k per credit card is 20k if you sell them on the deepweb for 5% then you've got 5k which barely makes a normal salary.
The problem is if you're that good why not work for a european firm and make 10k per month doing some bullshit security job plus have all the perks and avoid the risk of getting locked up, only makes sense for individuals with a low financial intelligence. The average human is so dumb he would trade his credit card info for a chocolate bar, playing our monkey brains large scale is about as impressive as stealing candy from a kid, imagine if you get locked up for 5 years after 5 years of work your monthly salary gets inflated to 2.5 versus the 10 that you could have been making.
Please give me the contact info for a firm that is willing to pay 10k per month for some idiot that can open a website as described above. Or for whatever. Bullshit security? Isn't that what you are offering on this post?
When did $120k per year become so small it "only makes sense for individuals with a low financial intelligence."?
Are you turning your nose up at $120k? I would kill for a $5k a month job!,, $10k? I would let people shoot at me! ha
This is why Bitcoin works as a monetary system so well, it pays significantly more to work for the system than against it. The avatar was set back in 2011 when they still allowed avatars, no ill intent in mind. I still like to keep it because it reminds me of how infinitely not noob I am vs most of the forum.
Nothing in what you just said had anything to do with working for or against bitcoin.I realize you cannot change your avatar, that is unfortunate that it has become a symbol for noob protestors.
As for you, everything you said is so full of fail and face palm that I regretfully have nothing else to say to you.
No such thing as a white hat hacker either, if your system is secure there is no need to order some schmuck to try to bruteforce the password or type in zeros and ones against a green screen to attempt and gain access.
You are that schmuck yes? Or are you just selling bogus insurance? If your system is secure, sometimes you want to ensure that your assessment is correct. Banks do this, I would not insult someone for ensuring that they have worthy security.
Hacking is not brute forcing.
Programming has nothing to do with a green screen. This is not 1986.
Humans do not type 1s and 0s.
I must question your credentials for any sort of code work that you advertise at this point.
Sorry but everything you said just completely undermines your credibility as a programmer, coder, or anything to do with computers for that matter. Deepweb? lol.. deep web.. that was funny. And those stats!
Please stop.
Thank you
you call yourself a "hacker" yet this obviously will not work in real life
sit down and think about why
Please take this advice to heart madmadmax.sit down and think about why
Everything you wrote was a complete 100% fail.
You forgot to talk about port :139 vulnerabilities with all that green screen, 1s and 0s deep web knowledge.
I am sorry, I normally contain my rage.
FAIL
You're just a dumbass.
One of the best ways to get rid of cockroaches in your kitchen is to scatter bread-crumbs under the stove, right? Wrong! That's a dumb idea. One of the best ways to discourage hacking on the Internet is to give the hackers stock options, buy the books they write about their exploits, take classes on "extreme hacking kung fu" and pay them tens of thousands of dollars to do "penetration tests" against your systems, right? Wrong! "Hacking is Cool" is a really dumb idea.
Around the time I was learning to walk, Donn Parker was researching the behavioral aspects of hacking and computer security. He says it better than I ever could:
"Remote computing freed criminals from the historic requirement of proximity to their crimes. Anonymity and freedom from personal victim confrontation increased the emotional ease of crime, i.e., the victim was only an inanimate computer, not a real person or enterprise. Timid people could become criminals. The proliferation of identical systems and means of use and the automation of business made possible and improved the economics of automating crimes and constructing powerful criminal tools and scripts with great leverage."
Hidden in Parker's observation is the awareness that hacking is a social problem. It's not a technology problem, at all. "Timid people could become criminals." The Internet has given a whole new form of elbow-room to the badly socialized borderline personality. The #4th dumbest thing information security practitioners can do is implicitly encourage hackers by lionizing them. The media plays directly into this, by portraying hackers, variously, as "whiz kids" and "brilliant technologists" - of course if you're a reporter for CNN, anyone who can install Linux probably does qualify as a "brilliant technologist" to you. I find it interesting to compare societal reactions to hackers as "whiz kids" versus spammers as "sleazy con artists." I'm actually heartened to see that the spammers, phishers, and other scammers are adopting the hackers and the techniques of the hackers - this will do more to reverse society's view of hacking than any other thing we could do.
If you're a security practitioner, teaching yourself how to hack is also part of the "Hacking is Cool" dumb idea. Think about it for a couple of minutes: teaching yourself a bunch of exploits and how to use them means you're investing your time in learning a bunch of tools and techniques that are going to go stale as soon as everyone has patched that particular hole. It means you've made part of your professional skill-set dependent on "Penetrate and Patch" and you're going to have to be part of the arms-race if you want that skill-set to remain relevant and up-to-date. Wouldn't it be more sensible to learn how to design security systems that are hack-proof than to learn how to identify security systems that are dumb?
My prediction is that the "Hacking is Cool" dumb idea will be a dead idea in the next 10 years. I'd like to fantasize that it will be replaced with its opposite idea, "Good Engineering is Cool" but so far there is no sign that's likely to happen.
Around the time I was learning to walk, Donn Parker was researching the behavioral aspects of hacking and computer security. He says it better than I ever could:
"Remote computing freed criminals from the historic requirement of proximity to their crimes. Anonymity and freedom from personal victim confrontation increased the emotional ease of crime, i.e., the victim was only an inanimate computer, not a real person or enterprise. Timid people could become criminals. The proliferation of identical systems and means of use and the automation of business made possible and improved the economics of automating crimes and constructing powerful criminal tools and scripts with great leverage."
Hidden in Parker's observation is the awareness that hacking is a social problem. It's not a technology problem, at all. "Timid people could become criminals." The Internet has given a whole new form of elbow-room to the badly socialized borderline personality. The #4th dumbest thing information security practitioners can do is implicitly encourage hackers by lionizing them. The media plays directly into this, by portraying hackers, variously, as "whiz kids" and "brilliant technologists" - of course if you're a reporter for CNN, anyone who can install Linux probably does qualify as a "brilliant technologist" to you. I find it interesting to compare societal reactions to hackers as "whiz kids" versus spammers as "sleazy con artists." I'm actually heartened to see that the spammers, phishers, and other scammers are adopting the hackers and the techniques of the hackers - this will do more to reverse society's view of hacking than any other thing we could do.
If you're a security practitioner, teaching yourself how to hack is also part of the "Hacking is Cool" dumb idea. Think about it for a couple of minutes: teaching yourself a bunch of exploits and how to use them means you're investing your time in learning a bunch of tools and techniques that are going to go stale as soon as everyone has patched that particular hole. It means you've made part of your professional skill-set dependent on "Penetrate and Patch" and you're going to have to be part of the arms-race if you want that skill-set to remain relevant and up-to-date. Wouldn't it be more sensible to learn how to design security systems that are hack-proof than to learn how to identify security systems that are dumb?
My prediction is that the "Hacking is Cool" dumb idea will be a dead idea in the next 10 years. I'd like to fantasize that it will be replaced with its opposite idea, "Good Engineering is Cool" but so far there is no sign that's likely to happen.
Above is my point #1, hiring someone to pentest or attempt to exploit your system makes no sense whatsoever.
If you have half a brain you can EASILY make 5k a month, I was working from home and got paid 25$ per hour when I was a 19 year old teenager, if I could do it without any assistance from the government and no higher education then the average african villager could probably do it as well if he bothered to read books and study English instead of looking for the next chicken he can infect with his aids.
Typing up 1s and 0s was making fun of the publics perception of hacking, if you did not understand that it really makes me question your intelligence.
Yes the average person has a monkey brain and would gladly trade in his credit card number for a chocolate bar just ask b!z he was the fool that invested significant sums of BTC into Casinobit without even knowing the operators name.
It really doesn't surprise me that 60k a year is a lot to you, you've completely missed every single point I made.
Now run back to mommy, ask for a juice box and go nap nap, grown ups are talking here.
Normal users shouldn't be using it. They should stick with the "stable" releases. The purpose of this release is to find catastrophic bugs. No three letter agencies required. 
