EYENET: Loose lips online
eye WEEKLY
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
eye WEEKLY October 10, 1996
Toronto's arts newspaper .....free every Thursday
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
EYENET EYENET
LOOSE LIPS ONLINE
by
K.K . CAMPBELL
The latest Computer Privacy Digest has an interesting thread about
privacy and the net.
It reminded me that all the hand-wringing about net.privacy seems a
little misplaced considering the way everyday people will talk about
anyone and anything if they think they are speaking to an authority
figure.
Perhaps the privacy problems now coming to the fore in regard to the
Internet are deeply imbedded in our society, "human bugs" beyond the
technology of the net.
What struck me most in the Computer Privacy Digest exchange was a
contribution from a Susanna K. Hutcheson (shut...@feist.com). She
wrote:
"I did an article on a private detective once. I found his
observations on Americans interesting. He said that he could go to any
block in any neighborhood and ask people at random about their
neighbors and he could soon find out anything he wanted -- from how
many lived there to their lifestyles, etc. In addition, the people he
interviewed would tell them literally anything about themselves if
given enough time."
I'd like to underscore the point she's making about that tendency in
human beings to wilt before authority -- a tendency that is arguably a
greater privacy risk that any technical hacker.
I've a friend who works the phones at a major U.S. newspaper. She and
her colleagues are the unsung heroes of the news game.
Once upon a time, I asked her for advice on how to get more info on a
person I was doing a story on. I'd run into an investigative dead end.
So she suggested something I'd never considered: the direct phone
call. Call the person's neighbors. It was a dizzying notion.
"That's a little drastic, don't you think?"
"But you aren't getting anywhere."
"Well, what are you suggesting? I call up, say 'Hi, I'm a reporter...'
"
"God, no. I never say I'm calling from a newspaper. Is that what you
think? They'd never tell me anything. I don't say anything, and let
them draw their own conclusions."
"Don't they ask?"
"Sometimes. You'd be surprised how often they don't."
"And they actually tell you things?"
"Some will tell you everything."
"I can't believe that," I laughed.
But I knew it was true, because she could find anything. And I
innately understood her secret: It was nothing magical, she could just
"talk the talk." She took subtle control of the conversation with her
voice -- listening for signals, exuding authority, eliciting facts
before the person thought twice. And hanging up.
In the phrack (phone/computer underground) world, it's called "social
engineering."
"The more WASP they are, the more likely they'll tell you anything you
need," she said. "The worst, at least in my experience, are Chinese
people. They just mumble and hang up."
Good for the Chinese. The rest of you: read newsgroup
comp.society.privacy and learn to shut up. You'll make the lives of
journalists more miserable. Ain't that alone worth it?
MITNICK THE MISCREANT
Speaking of social engineering...
The most-vile-computer-hacker-who-ever-lived, Kevin Mitnick, pleaded
"not guilty" Sept. 30 to charges surrounding his so-called "crime wave
in cyberspace."
Mitnick, 33, was wanted by the FBI for about two-and-a-half years for
his online activities.
Mitnick has been indicted for 25 counts of Bad Things: computer and
wire fraud, intercepting electronic messages, possessing stolen
computer passwords, possessing unlawful access devices, damaging
University of Southern California computers and stealing software
valued at "millions of dollars" from technology companies including
Novell, Motorola, Nokia, Fujitsu and NEC.
What a busy boy.
No one's saying Mitnick's a saint. He has a record for phrack crimes.
Last April, Mitnick pleaded guilty to using 15 stolen phone numbers to
dial into computer databases. (The almost two dozen other charges were
dropped.)
But the hyperbole surrounding Mitnick is a regurgitation of the usual
hysteria put out by U.S. feds. In the '90s, nothing can make a career
faster than hunting "hackers." And a technologically intimidated
mainstream press corps barfs it all back up like it was a Gulf War
military briefing.
For a perspective outside the drooling demonizations, try Josh
Quittner's article at http://www.takedown.com/coverage/obsession.html
. Or check out the Mitnick page at
http://rom.oit.gatech.edu/~willday/mitnick.html . It even has a link
to the Mitnick defence fund. Heh.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Retransmit freely in cyberspace Author holds standard copyright
http://www.eye.net Mailing list available
eyeNET archive -----------------------> http://www.eye.net/News/Eyenet
e...@eye.net "...Break the Gutenberg Lock..." 416-971-8421