Hackers, Crackers We always used to distinguish hackers from crackers. But cracking reveals the cracks in a way that nothing else does. It makes them real, sometimes laughably or painfully so. Electronic privacy is currently a joke. It's bad. You need to know what kinds of attacks you're trying to defend against. I used to think those arguments were rationalizations. Now I'm glad there are people who know this stuff, who are actually doing it. Some of "them" are on what I think of as the good side, and

And if I shoot you or poison you, I will have vividly revealed to you your pathetic lack of physical defenses. Will I have done you a service? How about if I just break your windows or doors? That rationalization for crackers is based on the idea that perfect security is feasible. Once you view this from an economic perspective, then the only things the crackers do is raise the cost of getting to a level of security such that operation can continue uninterrupted. BTW: I happen to believe that within a trusted infrastructure, perfect security is possible. Even so, consider the cost of changing operating systems, retraining all staff, reproducing familiar applications on a new substrate. Even if perfect security is possible, the use of it is still bounded by economic and social concerns. dean BTW: feel free to forward to extropians.