54 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2021
  2. Feb 2021
    1. our knowledge and our attention to detail

      detail, thoroughness is the key as Trump said.

    2. Functions and/or resources that allow us to interact with the target and/or provide additional information. Information that provides us with even more important information to access our target.

      Functions, resources, information for getting access or more information on getting access to the system

    1. A problem is an emotional state. Without emotions, it is just a situation.


    1. Do not forget that this feeling of frustration is temporary. This means that when you feel frustrated, it will pass.

      There are two different types of frustration. One is caused by external influences, such as negative opinions of superiors, and the other is caused by inner frustration, caused by conscious or rather subconscious thought processes. ............. Most people are not aware that feelings reflect subconscious thoughts and thought processes. That is why you can understand quite well how you think from your feelings.

    2. attention is the perception of a specific topic with a higher level of interest in order to gather specific data and information from it.

      when we talk about concentration, we mean the maintenance of our attention on a specific topic.

    3. know your goal. Imagine the following scenario: You're standing still in a room, and your instructor instructs you to move across the room, and you start moving. After a while, the instructor put a chair in your way. What will you do? - You may sit down on this chair.

      Now let us change the scenario a little bit.

      Your instructor instructs you to move to the other corner. You start moving, and the instructor puts a chair in your way again. What will you do? You will pass the chair and continue moving forward to the corner because you know your goal.

  3. Dec 2020
    1. Stuaert Rtchie [@StuartJRitchie] (2020) This encapsulates the problem nicely. Sure, there’s a paper. But actually read it & what do you find? p-values mostly juuuust under .05 (a red flag) and a sample size that’s FAR less than “25m”. If you think this is in any way compelling evidence, you’ve totally been sold a pup. Twitter. Retrieved from:https://twitter.com/StuartJRitchie/status/1305963050302877697

    1. We are unapologetic tinkerers who neither invent the wheel, nor are satisfied with the wheels already at our disposal. The best scholarship and the best pedagogy take the best of what already exists and make it better, at least better for the task at hand. We need to embrace this identity as hackers, acknowledge our indebtedness to those who have gone before us, forsake the illusion that we are creating (can create, should create) something wholly original, but also refuse to take for granted the things that have been passed down to us.

      I think that this might be where I'm missing something. The article is about the relationship between open-source software development and scholarship, but now we're talking about "hacking" as the equivalent of a software developer. And I'm not sure that I agree with this.

      I don't think that software-developers think of themselves as hackers. For me, there's an underlying subversive nature in the hacker category, which need not be present in a software developer. There's a conflation between software developer and hacker, which misses some of the nuance that's necessary.

    2. Academic research and teaching often necessitate manipulation, re-creation, breaking, rebuilding, etc. This “manipulation, re-creation, breaking, rebuilding” — in other words, hacking

      It's not self-evident to me that these activities are the same as those associated with hacking (and I'm not talking about the malevolent/negative connotations of hacking).

      I also think of a hacker as a tinkerer, which can include "manipulation, re-creation, breaking, building, etc." but need not. It feels like there's something fundamental missing here but I can't put my finger on it.

      I don't really have a conclusion here, other than to suggest that the hacker/scholar relationship might need a lot more development than I see here.

    1. BlackArch is a Linux distribution designed for penetration testing and security research. You can think of it like Kali Linux, with the exception of being based on Arch Linux. Its official repositories contain more than +2500 various penetration testing tools, and hence it can be considered a very good option for anyone wishing to explore this field and try to hack their own phones/routers/devices during the quarantine time.

      BlackArch <--- kind of Kali Linux based on Arch Linux

  4. Nov 2020
    1. The Ideology of Hacking


      The hacker movement is a political project. Like the activity of many 'alternative' subcultures that are not directly defined by their political engagement, "the struggles are at once economic, political, and cultural - and hence they are biopolitical struggles, struggles over the form of life. They are constituent struggles, creating new public spaces and new forms of community" [46]. The chief uniting and mobilising force for the hacker underground is the common enemy of Microsoft (Bezroukov, 1999a). Opposition to Microsoft draws both from socialist anarchistic principles, and from high-tech libertarianism. The rightwing drift, dubbed as the Californian Ideology, is a recent transition, and not surprising given the hegemonic dominance of the corporate sector in the United States and the greater stakes in free software for business. However, it runs counter to the roots of hacking, which essentially is a reaction against Taylorism (Hannemyr, 1999). Basic motivations to engage in free programming are the rush of technological empowerment (Sterling, 1994), the joy of un-alienated creativity (Moglen, 1999), and the sense of belonging to a community (commonly recognised by hackers themselves as 'ego', but reputation only viable within a group of peers, i.e. a community). Those values may not seem political at first sight, but they are on collision course with the commercial agenda of turning the Internet into a marketplace. The rising tension within the hacker community are illuminated by the words of Manuel Castells: "The struggle between diverse capitalists and miscellaneous working class is subsumed into the more fundamental opposition between the bare logic of capital flows and the cultural values of human experience"


  5. Oct 2020
    1. Longstanding controversy surrounds the meaning of the term "hacker". In this controversy, computer programmers reclaim the term hacker, arguing that it refers simply to someone with an advanced understanding of computers and computer networks[5] and that cracker is the more appropriate term for those who break into computers, whether computer criminals (black hats) or computer security experts (white hats).
  6. Aug 2020
    1. If a prominent magazine like The Lancet is publishing such rubbish, who is to say smaller and less well financed magazines aren’t doing the same on a langer scale?

  7. Jun 2020
  8. May 2020
  9. Apr 2020
  10. Feb 2020
    1. Shortly after Citrix initially disclosed the intrusion in March 2019, a little-known security company Resecurity claimed it had evidence Iranian hackers were responsible, had been in Citrix’s network for years, and had offloaded terabytes of data. Resecurity also presented evidence that it notified Citrix of the breach as early as Dec. 28, 2018, a claim Citrix initially denied but later acknowledged.
  11. Dec 2019
    1. ReconnaissanceFirst, we try to gather as much information as possible. Because our success depends on this information. Here we do search about the target, Find the social information, Find the technology used. We do it manually and automatically.Vulnerability AnalysisWhen we will have enough information, we start vulnerability analyzing. For example, In this step, we figure out what Ports are open, What operating system the target is using and the version of software used.Here we use some commercial, open-source tools and manually to find the exploitable vulnerability.ExploitationOur goal is not just to find a vulnerability. We have to get access to you and do the thing you wanted us to do. Successfully exploitation completely depends on the previous two-phase. It depends on how hard we worked there.For example, If we found an overflow type vulnerability, then here we write an exploit. In this step, we need more hard to exploit the vulnerability because most of the thing we need to do manually.Post Exploitation and Covering TracksThe job is not done yet. After successfully hacking(Exploiting) into the system. Our future access depends on this phase. Here the hacker will install an advanced backdoor. And clean all the logs very carefully.
  12. May 2019
  13. Apr 2019
  14. Jan 2019
  15. Jul 2018
  16. Jun 2018
    1. The archival community needs game changers and iconoclasts. In some areas we need to directly challenge the established order and refuse to accept some practices and institutions as they currently stand. We need to show a willingness to adopt a DIY approach based on necessity; and we need to push ourselves forward, so we are seen and heard standing up for what we believe in (even those of us who consider ourselves introverts). Bring in the Clash or the Dead Kennedys and you get a strong sense of political and social justice. With Patti Smith comes a fusion of genres. With the Ramones at their best comes a stripped back, short, sharp shock. With riot grrrl comes a refusal to accept oppression based on gender, sexuality or class.

      This contains a some pretty good ideas around what 'a hacker in the archives' or 'archive hacking' might be.

  17. Mar 2018
  18. Feb 2018
  19. Jan 2018
    1. también proponen ideas creativas como el co-diseño mediante prácticas no industriales (crafting), lógicas ‘piratas’ (hacking) y el abordaje de temas difíciles relacionados con conocimientos alternativos, cuestiones políticas, y transiciones a otros modelos culturales y ecológicos para la sociedad (
  20. Nov 2017
    1. Thestoriesthathavebeentoldabouthackersmakeitdifficulttoresignifythissubjectofpowerafresh.Sincethe1980s,theimageofhackershasdominatedfictionalandsemifictionalworldsofwritingandfilmmaking.Ourfocushere,though,istogetagripontheopeningsthat‘actsofhacking’havecreated.
    2. Forus,probablythemostpertinentdistinctionisbetweenprogrammersandhackers.Inorbysayingsomethingincodeperformsbothillocutionaryandperlocutionaryacts.

      The difference between programmers and hackers is, however, the effects of their acts, which have dramatically changed over time. Programmers are those— either employed by software companies or working independently—who make a living by writing code, which includes anything between snippets (short code) and apps. Hackers may also program code in this fashion, but the culture that gives them the name emanates from a distinct set of ethical and aesthetic values that combine to create a different kind of politics than programming does. This difference is hard to express, but it is also the difference that is of interest to us. It is hard to express perhaps because so much has been said and written about hackers—mostly negative. As a consequence, a unified, typically clandestine, selfish, young, male, and outlaw image has become dominant, which more recent studies have shown is grotesquely simplified. We want to argue that hackers are those whose acts break conventions of programming.

  21. Sep 2017
    1. Jordan stipulates that the commonality of various perspectives on hacking (Himanen, 2001; Wark, 2004) is the hack, or the "ability to create new things, to make alterations, to produce differences" (Jordan, 2008, p. 7). These differences are linked with what Steven Levy (1984) called a "hands-on imperative" (p. 28) and enjoyment from deep concentration. By this line of thinking, the prerogative of hacking is that people should encounter technology not just to gain experience but for the enjoyment of pushing boundaries of what it was meant to do. Taylor (1999) describes the "kick" of hacking as "satisfying the technological urge of curiosity" (p. 17). This transgressing of the internal logic of systems lends a thrill that is difficult to pin down but is understood by those who have experienced it (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997). Tim Jordan's (2008) assertion that "hacking both demands and refutes technological determinism" (p. 133) gestures at a blending of material and social agencies in specific contexts. In other words, hackers see systems as malleable even as they rely on them to accomplish goals. Jordan saw this as paradoxical perhaps because technological determinism tends to be only viewed in the negative (Peters, 2011 ). Viewing his statements as a reflection on enabling and constraining (Giddens, 1986) engagements with materialities, rather than "determinism" per se, brings us towards a more productive theoretical framework for thinking about the connection of HMSs to informal learning.

      Esto podría resolver el tema de si todo es hackear? Una materialidad que, a pesar de hacerse en lo ordinario, también tiene que ver con retar los límites y luchar desde la tecnología con el determinismo tecnológico, parece una adecuada aproximación al término, sin convertirlo en totalizante.

    2. However, hacker and maker spaces are not synonymous with hacker culture at large. As previously discussed, since at least the mid-1990s, hackers have encompassed too wide an array of concerns and histories to safely be referred to as a unified group. Hacker and maker spaces, while a significant movement and informed by a more popular definition of "hacker," hardly define everyone who calls themselves a hacker.
    1. For these women, the values and practices of everyday life intertwine with technical labor. In the 1970s, theorists like Dick Hebdige, Henri LeFebvre, and Michel DeCertau took up everyday life as a site for radically re-imagining social life. The potency of domesticity and the social status of quotidian craftwork became a key precursor to contemporary Feminist thought. Today, it has reemerged in the work of modern-day hackers.By designing hackerspaces to serve domestic and familial needs, and by surfacing a new emotional style through failure, members of women-operated hackerspaces are

      actively negotiating the terms by which they make themselves heard within computer engineering cultures (Fox, etal., 2015; c.f. Suchman, 1995). This “oppositional position-ing” (Haraway, 1988: 586) relieves them of expectations to hack in the same manner as men, women, or mothers. [...] Exposing a politics of difference — destabilizing the cate-gory of hacking — they not only build new material circumstance for the artists, makers, mothers and fathers within these spaces, but also position their work as relevant to the acts of “world-building” just beyond it.

      Potente idea de construcción de mundo en el cotidiano.

    2. HackerMoms built on the language of hacking, and its emerging discourse of digital production, to define and legitimate women as hackers and, accordingly, relevant actors in high-tech-nology markets. To accomplish this, members accorded feminized emotional and craft-based skills the same respect as accorded to computer engineering competencies within more “traditional” (predominantly male) hacker collectives.
    3. Showing and discussing their “hacks” became part of recognizing what Eva Illouz (2008: 20) would call a cultural resource, “a way for actors to devise strate-gies of action that help them implement certain definitions of the good life.”
    4. a HackerMoms member remarked, “when you avoid using the word ‘hacker’ you lend credence to hack-ing being a negative thing; by using it, you begin claiming the word as your own and reworking it.” This logic of appropriation calls to mind Smith’s initial purpose for assum-ing the hacking category: underscoring connections between hacking and women’s work

      through their mutual recognition. HackerMoms members “hacked” their situation to suit their needs, not necessarily creating new social structures from scratch. In the spirit of Love and Smith, they acknowledged the importance of hacking culture, not (only) devices (Fox, etal., 2015).

    5. we show how the work of failure began to destabilize an established ontology of hacking, making room for feminist legacies of craft.
    6. Craft, according to Adamson, became “a strain of activity that responds to and conditions the putatively normative experience of modernity, in many and unpredictable ways” (Adamson, 2010: 5). It was not outside modernity “but a modern way of thinking otherwise.” In the writing that follows, we show how a logic of failure became a means for “thinking otherwise” about the hacking ethos.

      Materialidades distintas afectan la manera en que pensamos sobre el acto mismo de hackear.

    7. Since the rise of early sites of computer hacking like the Chaos Computer Club, a German technology collective founded in the 1980s promoting open information infrastructure, the term hacking has fit aspirational ideals of technical cleverness and creativity perpetuated by engineer-ing cultures. Women-operated hackerspaces have opened an alternate view: enliven-ing connections between hacking and histories of women’s craftwork rooted in a feminist politics of fracture (Barad 2007; Haraway 1988).
    8. Critiquing such claims as sensationalist, recent work identifies a problem of demarcation by which people control access to technical agency and who counts as innovative (Irani, 2015; Lindtner, 2015), illuminating differ-ent and multiple hacking histories. Gabriella Coleman (2011), for example, compares the protest movement Anonymous and the whistle-blowing project WikiLeaks to clarify the varying political sensibilities and practices from which hacking develops
    9. Accounts of hacker cultures often highlight bug fixes (Coleman, 2011; Nafus, 2012), portraying failures as integral to the inventive, creative process of design and engineering (Petroski, 2006). Mothership HackerMoms began to address failure differently from these productivist tendencies. In addition to viewing failure as central to achievement, members identified personal failures and failures to transform hacker cultures, formulating failure as a moment for reflection. To make this argument, we examine two empirical contexts of failure: first, failure as members conceptualize it in the Failure Club project of narrativizing the self; and, second, failure as expressed from the outside through online “hate mail.” By tracing how members redefine failure we show how HackerMoms became a site of resistance: hacking the very ontology of hacking.
    10. By integrating feminist legacies of craftwork with the centrality of failure — exposing personal failures and failures to transform hacker cultures — members not only energize new modes of hacking activity but also hack the very ontology of hacking.
    1. This article frames appropriation as a political process.

      [...] ICTs provide unique flexibility for users to interact and re-invent. ICTs can be modified and re-programmed, whether the ability to modify is explicitly enabled through design or uncovered through hacking. Device producers, application designers, content creators, service providers, and end users can therefore engage in the creative appropriation process and insight into social, economic, and political impacts can be gained exploring appropriation modalities.

      Esto se puede conectar con la introducción respecto al caracter fluído, pero paradógico de las tecnologías digitales.

      Nótese acá la connotación de hacking en términos de apertura y reinterpretación.

  22. Jul 2017
    1. “The only way to save a democracy is to explain the way things work,” says Linus Neumann, a CCC spokesman and information security consultant. “Understanding things is a good immunization.”

      democracy and web literacy

  23. Mar 2017
  24. Jan 2017
    1. A person who delights in having an intimate understanding of the internal workings of a system

      I love this bit and it affords a bunch of other uses of hacking to fit here.

  25. Jul 2015
    1. They hire runners to jump fences, break open containers, and sprint away before guards can catch them, earning as much as €10,000 ($11,200) a trip. Stealing PIN codes is more elegant and less risky.