rippleman, on 22 March 2013 - 17:20, said:
how do you differentiate the acts of crime? how do you know what act is them or not them?
I think that is the problem, you don't. I don't. The people that see the hack as the crime is the people who have the fire power.
If the USA, China, or Russia etc turned around and said. FU we got hacked by one of your guys, we're sending nukes in now (OTT example). Who is to say it was true, the hack that is.
Hackers are very good at covering themselves with bouncers all over the world making use of a vast array of systems.
And what if it isn't even a hacker. What if its just a ruse to create anger to justify an attack. For example, if the USA say, OMGs North Korea has hacked into several nuclear reactor power plants, they're going critical and we've had to shut them down before it explodes. People would go crazy when the power goes out, no actual proof or damage done, but they go to war anyway. Obviously I'm just using that as an example of how it could be abused.
It's a very worrying state we're going to be in if this holds true. Rather then fighting back on a digital level to stop the hack attacks in the first place, or minimise the damage caused via patching exploits and creating a more secure environment and teaching people effective security protocols to use in the office etc, we have people who have more firepower just using brute force trying to find hackers..
That's like setting fire to the barn to find the needle in the haystack, and it's not even the right farm.