Keyless entry...........

In fairness - he never said such a thing. He did say that one couldn't tell if someone was asking for that purpose.

I'd add that I can't even tell whether or not you have a firearms collection.

Methinks a hacker would answer as you did, but a non hacker/cracker would deem BOTH as illegitimate intruders

1. Once again, (and check back through the thread) noone called you a criminal... What WAS mentioned is that noone KNOWS that you are NOT a criminal... Two entirely different things.
2. Someone DID ask if your bitting question matched one of the code questions to gain access to a secured website. I never saw an answer to that exact question. IF the do match, you have to admit it would be quite a coincidence and a strong indication that you MAY be attempting to bypass the previously mentioned secured access.

If you were to receive a phone call tomorrow where a person you did not know asked questions whose answers COULD be used to compromise your network security (even if only in part), would you not think twice about giving that answer? Even if the question COULD also be only coincidently linked to, say, a certain password/defeat exploit/etc?

Would you be WRONG if you chose to take the preventative route and not answer?

For what it's worth, some of us still remember when "hacker" was a term of high respect, and "systems hacker" was the specific term for folks who were misapplying the skills (and did not necessarily imply that the individual was a hacker in the positive sense, as opposed to being the sort of person whose idea of fine carpentry is a axe and maul.)

exactly, don't go throwing that word around like an asshole. it's turned into a f****ng buzzword.

Shuddap cracker

The difference has been well established for years. The fact that the mainstream media misuses the term consistently only means it's yet another thing they consistently get wrong. Hackers in general are honest and ethical people who obey laws at least as much if not more than the general public does. If you doubt that go to a hacker (not a cracker) forum and ask about how to commit illegal acts/destroy systems and watch the flames pour in.

While I would prefer it if the meaning of words didn't change (and that they stayed the way they were when *I* learned them) - if the media and the general public "misuse" a word long enough, that turns into its new meaning.

I'm afraid that "hacker" now has as its first meaning "cracker". Then there is a second meaning (maybe labelled Obs.? :-) referring to someone who does creative but inelegant coding.

Ah, isn't technology great. From the first days when some cave man rolled a rock in front of his cave, people have been trying to secure things. And criminals like Fugi have been trying to violate the security.

Yes, cracker is likely the right word. I'm neither, and I don't pay much attention to these things. Thanks for the education.

Your proving his point, or maybe you are just jerking his chain a little. You don't know or have reason to believe he's a criminal. As far as accessing the site if it uses a password which is essentially public domain information then entering the proper password no matter how obtained probably doesn't break any laws. Such passwords are just a bad idea unless you intentionally want to provide only the slightest of security.

I am well versed in what a hacker is... Doesn't mean I would not care if one was benignly poking around my system... Well intentioned/moraled or not, they are still illegitimate intruders.

And what I'm telling you is that hacking in the purist sense of the word is NOT breaking into systems. It is the creative and eloquent solution of programming problems.

I agree... Your 'password' by means of asking a question that not just anyone could answer is NOT RESTRICTED SECURITY... It is to keep out those casual 'cracker' types who do web searches in order to find out more than they should know without taking any personal risks to learn...

A RESTRICTED WEBSITE (like the one my employer uses for payroll entry and other employee information functions) requires a userID and password that is different for each authorized user and grants different levels of access depending on who the person is...

Don't cry over someone asking for the 'secret word'... If you really wanted to keep people out of these trade websites you would use some of your trade association fees to pay for someone to setup user accounts and cross reference applicants for entry to the website against various trade association memberships and certification lists...

Evan the Maintenance Man

Oh I see...

stop

illegal

the

c*ck a

no. I said key words being "unauthorized access" do try and keep up..

this is what you pasted:

Hack / Informal. To use one's skill in computer programming to gain illegal or unauthorized access to a file or network: hacked into the company's intranet.

now, looking at this definition and saything the key words are "unauthorized access" would kicking down a door and robbing the place be hacking it? no it sure f****ng wouldn't. is greaking someones car windows to steal their stereo hacking their car? no. the key words in this definition are "skill in computer programming". what, do you have a 6th grade education?

into

some

programming to

hacked

are

robbing the

greaking

car? no.

really doesn't apply in this instance.

programming".

I do understand what the key words actually are but my point to you is that trying to gain "unauthorized access" to something is the same as hacking. thats why I said that the key words are "unauthorized access". sometimes one needs to read between the lines.

do you ?

So if vandals smashed the windows on your house, would you argue that the price you pay to repair the windows is a home improvement or just a sinking money pit.

To me the money spent on patches deprives the economy of the capitol to come up with something new and better. In other words the money is lost.

Whether it's "unauthorized" access in the TNL case is debatable. The password is information which is for all intensive purposes is in the public domain. Using that sort of password protection is a bad idea, unless you just want to provide a very minimal level of protection. The service is free so I suppose any real authentication efforts would probably be cost prohibitve.