This is a book about hacking in the traditional sense: about the process and methods of exploration. Some may be surprised that this book doesn’t have chapters devoted to ripping games and patching specific security checks — after all, isn’t that what hacking is all about? In reality, the term
“hacker” has evolved quite dramatically over the years as the public’s awareness of technology has increased and as a sensationalist mass media continues to color the public’s opinion of hackers.
In the beginning, a hacker was someone who worked passionately for the sake of curiosity and exploration. There were hardware hackers who took it upon themselves to remove the covers from computers to
optimize their design (early computers were built out of discrete components, so they could be modified in meaningful ways with simple tools), and there were software hackers who labored to make the most compact and elegant code, since computational resources were scarce and slow. There were hackers who explored the ins and outs of the phone system, and those who explored the roofs and tunnels of buildings of university campuses. Quite often, early hackers engaged in all of these activities. Hackers would share their findings or results (hacks) with each other freely, as their rewards were not financial, but came from satisfying their intellectual curiosity and from the enthusiasm of their peers. As a result, hackers tended to form into meritocratic groups where member-ship and advancement were based entirely upon a person’s ability to hack.
As technology evolved and computers became faster and more inte-grated, hackers found that the effort involved in hardware hacking was not worth the benefits. The interesting pieces of computers were quickly becoming buried deep within hermetically sealed ceramic packages, etched into silicon structures that were difficult to see even with a good microscope. A difficult hardware hack that might double the perfor-mance of a computer was made moot within months by Moore’s Law.
On the other hand, software hacking was beginning to focus more on applications and less on algorithms or optimization. The compactness or elegance of a program was no longer directly important as memory and processor power became cheap and plentiful. Besides, compiler technol-ogy had also improved to the point where compiled code ran almost as fast as hand assembly. By the late 80’s, the term “hacker” had grown to imply someone who could write volumes of C code in their sleep and create brilliant applications overnight. The old hardware hackers were either converting to software hackers, or retreating to university labs and corporations that could afford to support their expensive hobbies.3 The term “hacker” at that time was increasingly associated with people who cracked passwords and programs to gain access to machines and software that was otherwise off limits. Hollywood was partly responsible for this stereotype, with a slew of movies that portrayed teenagers bringing the world to the brink of nuclear annihilation with a few keystrokes, or closet geniuses creating artificially intelligent cyber-monsters in their basement.4 Unfortunately, the hyberbole of these movie
3 The good news is that hardware hacking technology has been catching up with Moore’s Law lately, leading to a hardware hacking renaissance. Affordable circuit board fabrication services have spring up, and the birth of the Internet has simplified the process of acquiring components. In addition, services such as the Mosis chip foundry service and FIB (focused ion beam) services have started to bring integrated circuit hacking into the realm of financial possibility for individual hardware enthusiasts.
4 Rodney Brooks, the Director of the Artificial Intelligence lab at MIT, once said that the Hollywood idea of a crackpot inventor making an artificially intelligent being in their basement was about equivalent to someone building a 747 jumbo jet in their backyard.
plots was lost on the general public, and this dark impression of hackers eventually became a dominant part of the hacker stereotype. The inaccuracy of this stereotype contributed to the creation of a term for hackers that focuses primarily upon cracking systems and programs —
“crackers.”
Technology shapes the contemporary hacker as much as hackers have shaped technology. New generations of hackers have to work hard to penetrate the “friendly” user interfaces and the media and marketing glitz that surrounds computer technology today. Everybody uses computers and expects them to perform flawlessly and intuitively, but few really understand what’s going on underneath the hood.
The technology of computation has grown so complex that beginners are increasingly like the parable about the seven blind men and the elephant.
Some beginners will start their hacking journey by exploring the Internet.
Others will start by exploring the operating system on their computer.
Still others will start by looking underneath the covers of their computer.
Each individual could spend a year exploring their facet, yet each will have a distinctly different view about computer technology at the end the day.
The cultural rift between the young hackers and the old guard was made apparent to me when a self-proclaimed hacker hot-shot freshman at MIT scoffed, “Where are all the Windows[98] computers? . . . all you have are these lame Sun computers that don’t even have AOL! I thought MIT would have good Internet access.” He seemed to have no comprehension of the fact that the “lame Sun computers” were quite powerful worksta-tions running one of the most robust operating systems in the world, and that there is Internet beyond AOL — moreover, that the MIT campus was one of the birthplaces of the Internet, with rights to more IP addresses than most ISPs and a direct connection to the backbone of the Internet.
The penetration of computer technology into every corner of everyday life intensified the hacker stereotypes. In particular, the media’s portrayal of hackers as modern-day Robin Hoods has somehow irrevocably tied hacking to aspects involving security or access to computer resources.
Now, the stereotypical hacker is responsible for warez, Code Red and ping floods, while “developers” are responsible for Linux and BSD.
Hackers are 31337 d00ds that 0\/\/n jh00r b0x0r, and a hard-ware hacker overclocks and mods their computer case with neon lights.
Hacking has become trendy, and many are striving to fit the stereotype created by the media. It is very difficult today to convince people that I hacked the Xbox solely because it was there to be hacked: it was challeng-ing, and it was new. Likewise, it is difficult for people to understand why I haven’t worked on the Xbox since. After hacking the security on the Xbox, all that is left is a standard PC — which, to me, is not that
interesting to work on, and definitely not worth the risk of a lawsuit from Microsoft.