Really 2000 hacker definitions. When I read on the internet about hackers vs crackers vs definitions it’s all a mess. And yet I find some new hilarious stuff around.

First about crackers: I am happy that someone mention software crackers here (breaking copy protection, etc) even if he confuses it with the other (crackers not hackers definition)

Simple as that: Original hackers (They were very good or enthousiastic programmers even at something completely irrelevant with security breaking = old definition) were pissed off the new definition of hacker (security breaking, no matter if reasons are good or bad (that’s in my opinion) and proposed the term cracker.

But they forgot that the word cracker is already been taken by software piracy crackers who have nothing to do with the cracker definition as perceived in “hacker not cracker”. (It’s like when you say ‘demo’ and you mean the realtime graphics demonstrations of the demoscene but it could also be confused as demos of commercial software)

That’s why I am against the “hacker vs cracker” distinction because the term is already used (and irrelevant) from the software cracking scene. But nobody seems to mention that! I would like to ask some crackers what do they think about it..

Also notice this trend: “hacker vs cracker” distinction was mean to say: hacker = very good or enthousiastic coder (It can be irrelevant with security breaking. You could be coding demos in assembly and have the hacking (clever programming) spirit.), cracker = anyone engaged into illegal security breaking.

And notice something else: Many people, because they couldn’t differentiate the word “hacking” from security breaking (they think only the programmers who are also into security breaking are hackers or that you don’t even need programming but just be like the hacker as seen in tv), they thought that: hacker = illegal security breaker with good intentions, cracker = illegal security breaker with bad intentions.

The got it wrong (concerning the understanding of what the first people making the hacker/cracker distinction wanted to explain). That’s because even with these distinctions, when you say “hacker” you are not thinking of the programmer, you are thinking of the security breaker. Nobody says “My computer was cracked”.

The problem is that with these word confusions, many kids want to be so called “hackers” with the new lame definition, they don’t learn to programm, they only want to hack into sites and have some kind of fame or honor. And because of the old respect of the pioneer coders, they confuse it, and say it’s respected to make cyber attack. Which is not!

Chris, although I agree with you when it comes to the general statements about what is what and the influence of the media, would I disagree with your detailed description of a cracker.

I did not crack myself, but I had a bunch of friends that did. Some were less capable than others while a few were geniuses in its own terms. Cracking is not just running scripts. The developers of software protection are very creative too. A dongle crack where the dongle contains some data that are needed for the software to run is “tricky” to say the least.

I also remember the PC version of the game “Flashback” from Delphine Software. The game had after each level another copy protection, a stronger one. The developer basically created a game within the game for the crackers. I am not sure if there is even today a 100% cracked version of the game out there that lets you actually finish the game.

I hope that illustrates that cracking and hacking both can (but don’t have to) have their “sudden insight, the moment of Zen” as you call it.

Well, I am going to stick to my definition of hacker, cracker and programmer.

my mobile is nokia N70

The coder writes a piece of software. The hacker is testing it thoroughly and approaches is from all kinds of different angles. He is doing QA basically. The cracker is the one who is looking under “the hood” and checks the software for deep build in flaws and errors.

In the example of a piece of security software would the coder write the interface to enter the password, the encryption routines etc.

The cracker checks the code to make sure that the encryption is strong enough and that nothing is being exposed that reduces the effectiveness of the protection, like loading the key pairs in plain text into the memory for processing and stuff like that.

The hacker checks more like things such as minimum keyword length, supported characters and flaws in the interface.

The best encryption is worthless if the password can only be a set of numbers and the password is 3 digits long = only 1000 possible combinations which can be tried out in no time. Via script or even manually.

The best protection software is also useless, if you can simply press ALT-F4 and close it and then be able to move on and do what you want to do anyway. The hacker is the one who would look for this kind of stuff.

That’s my take on the whole thing and so far is it the one that most people are comfortable with, including hackers, crackers and coders themselves.

The hacker would be the guy in charge who coordinates the efforts. He is the one who has clear goals and ideas in his head. He would for example think up a tool he needs to do something very specific the coder could write for him. A port scanner for example (just to keep it simple). The cracker is needed when the hacker encounters a specific software and can’t get around it by using brute force or guessing. He would try to get a copy and have the cracker take a look at it to find flaws or have him create an altered version, the hacker could try to sneak in as replacement for the original.

You get the picture I hope.
Does this make sense?