Computer Hackers in Virtual Community Forums: Identity Shaping and Dominating Other Hackers

22/04/2010 michael.n 35 comments

INTRODUCTION

Computer hackers are individuals who disrupt the operations of computer systems and software for anarchistic or other reasons. Hacking is an illegal activity, yet hacker activities become public knowledge online in virtual communities. Hackers seek to create a unique identity and compete with each other in their goal to disrupt computer networks but also hide their identities to avoid prosecution. Argued here is that hackers, using virtual community forums, create a private identity by disclosing illegal private activities in a public space in order to assert their identity and gain dominance over other hackers. This paper explores this issue with examples from hacker virtual communities that show how hackers create an environment where identities form and superiority of knowledge is used to dominant others.

This paper debates identity and community issues by using computer hackers as an example of shaping identities in virtual communities. The aim is to show that individuals use strategies within these communities to craft identity and use information to assert dominance over less informed hackers. As the theme is about identity, it is placed within the identity in communities’ stream and contributes to informing about hacker behaviours in online environments.

HACKER CULTURE AND VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES

A hacker is not always one who wants to hack into systems to cause disruption, though they do participate in hacker virtual communities. Rather they are computer programmers, or have skills to use computer software, to either improve existing commercial software or cause malicious and intentional damage to networks. Describing a ‘hacking culture’ is to draw on definitions of what a culture is. For this argument, Small (Small, as cited in Kroeber & Kluckhohn, 1952) provides an applicable description of culture. A culture ‘is the total equipment of technique, mechanical, mental, and moral, by use of which people of a given period try to attain their ends and their individual or social ends’ (Small, as cited in Kroeber & Kluckhohn, 1952, p. 344). This applies to hacker culture because hackers in their culture share techniques for hacking and as McKenzie (2006) argues, highly value the recognition of their peers especially experienced hackers. Hackers are defined by the period they live in, that is the current computer or digital age, and are trying to attain ends, namely how to hack systems, both individually and socially within hacker groups.

The virtual communities, especially hacker user forums, are places where hackers gather online. Hackers interact in virtual communities where people with similar interests meet and exchange ideas, files and message, and communicate with each other (Gattiker, 2009). A virtual community is described by Roberts (2009) in terms of these characteristics; it has a sense of group identity, it impacts in some way on the member’s lives and outside world, is a place to seek help off others and builds relationships within it. In this paper some examples of hacker virtual community interactions will be identified and discussed to show how identity is shaped and contested within these environments.

IDENTITY AND BEHAVIOUR IN HACKER FORUMS

To describe hacker behaviour two theorists give frameworks for understanding identity formation and domination over others. The work of Goffman (1959) can be applied to hacker identity development. Goffman suggests people create a private identity of their activities for public viewing and believes that individuals attempt to control or guide impressions of themselves by changing their manner and roles (1959). This is important because roles that are displayed are prefabricated; freely constructed by choice and displayed to the world (Menand, 2009). Although people display less inhibition in virtual environments, Menand’s assertion contradicts the idea that individuals would not display private things like admitting to hacking computer systems. Hackers do this to gain attention, but simultaneously hide their real identities when posting details of which computer systems they have hacked.

It is not just a matter of establishing an identity in a virtual community; it is also a case of having power over other hackers by asserting superiority over each other’s hacking knowledge. In computer mediated environments, people want to be seen in a certain way and engage in identity expression, communication and impression management to do so (Tufekci, 2008). Often this means the hacker will put down others in postings to assert their superiority in the hacking hierarchy. A way of understanding this is by using Bourdieu’s (1977) symbolic capital concept and applying it to hacker behaviour in the forum. Capital in the hacker community is expressed through disclosing technical superiority in hacking systems and by downplaying other hacker’s achievements and knowledge.

Hackers hold symbolic capital in a virtual community with their hacking knowledge and will exercise it over someone else who holds less knowledge seeking to alter other’s opinions (Bourdieu, 1977). To relate Bourdieu’s concept to hackers, it means a more experienced hacker will often demean others comments dismissing those views of less experienced hackers. This is known as symbolic violence because it involves a struggle for power and superiority over others. Any groups, such as hackers, are constantly striving to monopolise capital to bolster or enhance their position in society (Wacquant, 1987). Capital can be converted into other forms of capital to gain power (Mander, 1987). For example, to illustrate Mander’s common view on converting capital, in hacker forums hacking knowledge and experience can be converted into prestige and notoriety on and off line thus enhancing the hacker’s reputation beyond the virtual community

SHAPING HACKER IDENTITY

The shaping of a hackers’ identity comes from its members, the public’s view of their activities and from research on how hackers behave online. Hackers craft themselves as elite subcultures with power structures that exclude outsiders (Taylor, 1999). As Goffman suggests, crafting and shaping occurs as the hacker values privacy as they know the fragility of privacy (Goldstein, 1993). However, they attend public or underground conferences or write in online communities; therefore they also operate in offline settings that provide support and swapping of knowledge (Jordan & Taylor, 1998). They also identify, according to Turgeman-Goldschmidt (2005), as performing hacking for fun seeking and knowledge to justify undesirable behaviours.

Hackers adhere to beliefs that motivate their contestations over the main capital, hacking knowledge. These are described by Nissenbaum (2004) as total and free access to computers and information, mistrust of centralised authority, a disdain for obstacles erected against free access to computing and an insistence that hackers be evaluated by no other criteria than technical virtuosity and accomplishment. Hackers hold the belief that propriety software should be available to the public at no or little cost (Hannemyer, 1999). Whilst this is a generalisation of every hacker, one view by Gordon and Ma suggests their identity is devoid of a moral code of care towards legitimate computer users:

In the hacking community, dehumanization and attribution of blame is somewhat more common; misconstruing or ignoring the consequences of the act is somewhat prevalent; and moral justification is extremely commonplace based on the public communication of hackers on public mailing lists. Thus, it is not surprising that personal moral obligation factors highly in attitudes toward an intention to hack. (2003, p. 10)

This supports Goffman’s (1952) suggestion that roles are crafted to offer a presentation to society of one’s identity. However, most views, as illustrated by Gordon and Ma (2003), are outsiders’ accounts which often demonise hackers and reinforce stereotypical views of their anarchistic nature.

By contrast within hacker cultures there is disagreement about the credibility of identity and levels of hacking knowledge. Raymond (2008), an experienced hacker who displays his real identity publically by explicitly reporting his hacking activities using his real name, contests the notion that hackers are only of one type:

There is another group of people who loudly call themselves hackers, but aren’t. These are people (mainly adolescent males [sic]) who get a kick out of breaking into computers and phreaking the phone system. Real hackers call these people ‘crackers’ and want nothing to do with them. Real hackers mostly think crackers are lazy, irresponsible, and not very bright, and object that being able to break security doesn’t make you a hacker any more than being able to hotwire cars makes you an automotive engineer.

Raymond creates distance between who he sees as a ‘real’ hacker and a novice hacker. This occurs frequently in hacker virtual communities. This illustrates Bourdieu’s concept of capital acquisition from a hacker perspective; knowledge on how to hack systems and reporting how to do so to others is a strong symbol of membership and credibility in hacker communities. Hacker knowledge is a form of sacred symbolic capital that gives access to, and personal control over, the means of information creation and circulation. Hence it is valued as essential and technical activity is often experienced as the vehicle for self-fashioning and creative self-expression (Coleman & Golub, 2008). New hackers are often discounted as not credible; hence they have access to capital blocked by those with hacker knowledge capital. Raymond’s comments illustrate how symbolic violence works through marginalising, discrediting and excluding those whose hacker knowledge is not considered credible.

IDENTITY AND CONTESTING CAPITAL IN HACKER VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES

To illustrate the argument that formation of private identities in public spaces and contestation over capital occurs, two examples of posts from hacking virtual communities are analysed. The purpose is to demonstrate the interactions that illustrate Goffman’s crafting of roles and where Bourdieu’s symbolic capital supports the argument that disclosure of private information is used for public identity forming and to dominate other hackers. Two posts, Hungry Hackers Community and House of Hackers, are used as examples. Both forums are gift economies where prestige through knowledge and asserting dominance over others’ knowledge govern the relationships within them. Persuading other hackers to accept the expert hacker’s views becomes easier and less skilled hackers gain capital in the forum by associating and agreeing with experienced hackers’ views (Raymond, 1998). However, the expert hackers can discredit others’ quest for identity by posting abuse and arguing to show that the original poster is wrong.

Example 1: Arguing Over Resources for New Hackers – Contesting Knowledge

In example one (How to be a Hacker, 2010) Akira, who identifies herself publically with a photo, is a beginner hacker and asks ‘who knows the first steps to be a hacker?’ She has crafted herself as a new hacker. The first reply from Murder Mouse, gender unknown, exercises symbolic violence when the reply tells her to stay away from the hacker tutorials until she has reached an appropriate, but unclear, level of expertise:

You learn how it all works, and then and only then explore how it could be explored/exploited/fondled/whatever. Meaning keep your eyes out of the hacking tutorials for now. They’re useless to you.

Android identifies himself as an experienced hacker but is not as harsh as the previous poster:

First, when you say “who knows the first step to be a Hacker?”, it is very vague because I have quickly learned that everyone has their own interpretation of what a Hacker is. Second, what do you hope to accomplish or learn by being a Hacker? For example, if you want to learn to start snooping through other peoples computers through open ports, it would help if you knew something about the TCP/IP protocol suite.

Both Android and Murder Mouse use hacking terminology as currency of knowledge, much like Bourdieu (1957) suggests people do to establish power over others. However, Murder Mouse tries to craft an air of superiority when Azathoth suggests Akira reads a book on hacking. Murder Mouse criticises this:

lol No offense, I usually don’t criticize advice, but that’s horrible. Read a book full of regurgitated vulns of yesteryear and then try some “view source” challenges on some two-bit “security” site? Noooo.

Murder Mouse continues to disclose private knowledge, shaping the identity as powerful because Murder Mouse knows many ways to become a hacker. The contestation over knowledge appears when K! tries to tell Akira to go to a website. Murder Mouse replies:

You totally ripped all that from the Eric Raymond how-to, which sucks…horribly.

K! replies to make amends, suggesting that he wants to assert he is right with giving the link but Murder Mouse commits more symbolic violence when K! is told abruptly by Murder Mouse to look at another post. Thus Murder Mouse has tried to assert dominance over everyone in the forum topic.

Example 2: Forming Identity through Knowledge Exchanges

Hacker’s identities are crafted on the basis of giving knowledge out to dominate others. A post in the Hungry Hackers forums illustrates Goffman’s and Bourdieu’s assertions about identity and contesting capital. Ankur16 discloses publically a private hacking technique to crack Windows 7 and Vista operating systems. The statement Ankur16 makes reflects Gordon and Ma’s (2003) assertion that hackers are devoid of ethics when the poster refers to the hacked computer user as a victim:

Now, boot the victim’s computer using this cd. If the computer still boots by hard disk, then assign cd rom as first priority device using bios.

Now, you can gain access to victim’s computer.

Then, zellfaze not only supports Ankur16’s posting but respectfully contests Ankur16’s posting by an in-depth explanation of how to further hack the operating systems. First, zellfaze compliments Ankur16:

Excellent, Excellent. You my friend get a Karma point and are my favorite user for the day. xD

After correcting Ankur16, zellfaze then further praises him, suggesting that zellfaze wants to add to the collective capital base of hacker knowledge by appeasing Ankur16 but is careful to appease the other hackers:

If there is anything you have a question about, or need re-explained let me know. You are now one step closer to being a real Hacker.

Good job.

You get a gold star

However, zellfaze continues to dominate the forum topic disclosing more hacker knowledge and then helps a poster, neokhan22, who identifies as a new hacker, who states:

I am Beginner I am not getting the way to go further after booting on CD…

Please tell me how to go step-by-step on…..
I am having winxp n just for my curiosity I am cracking my password

Although the topic postings end these extracts suggest that Goffman’s theory of crafting a role operates in identity formation when zellfaze discloses private ways of hacking an operating system. The hacker asserts that they are an expert to be respected. However, operating here are displays of symbolic violence as more knowledge is given out. In both forums hackers like to identify as having that knowledge, their capital, and assert it over others. The difference between the two forums is that in the first they are competing with each other, as illustrated by MurderMouse’s assertions, but in the second forum zellfaze still asserts knowledge over others but is less confrontational.

CONCLUSION

The forum examples, and applying Goffman’s and Bourdieu’s theories, suggest that hackers do craft an anarchistic identity in virtual communities through their displays of hacking knowledge. This is a private and undesirable activity, yet it is what primarily shapes a hacker’s motivations to disclose their hacking activities. They also compete against each other to dominate those that do not have the levels of hacking knowledge, their form of capital, suggesting their identity is one of holding power. The conclusion is that hacking virtual community, despite its relative anonymity, is the platform hackers will use to shape identity and contest their knowledge with each other. An implication of this is that those that seek to understand hacker behaviour can see why they behave in this way; hackers want aspects of their private selves displayed to others to show their skills without being accountable for their actions.

References

Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. (Richard Nice, Trans.). New York: Cambridge University.

Coleman, E.G. & Golub, A. (2008). Hacker practice: Moral genres and the cultural articulation of liberalism. Anthropological Theory, 8, 255-277.

Gattiker, U. E. (2009). The internet as a diverse community: cultural, organizational, and political. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday Anchor Books.

Goldstein, E.. (1993). Hacker testimony to house sub-committee largely unheard. Computer Underground Digest, 5(43), Retrieved March 23, 2010, from http://cu-digest.org/CUDS5/cud543.txt

Gordon, S. & Ma, Q. (2003). Convergence of Virus Writers and Hackers: Fact or Fantasy? Symantec Security Response White Paper. California: Symantec, Retrieved March 18, 2010, from http://www.yesky.com/image20010518/238454.pdf

Hannemyr, G. (1999). Technology and pleasure: considering hacking constructively. First Monday, 4(2), Retrieved March 23, 2010, from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/647/562

House of Hackers. (2010). How to be a Hacker. Retrieved March 24, 2010, from http://houseofhackers.ning.com/forum/topics/how-to-be-a-hacker

Hungry Hacker’s Community. (2009). Crack Windows 7 and Vista. Retrieved March 19, 2010, from http://www.hungry-hackers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=190

Jordan, T., & Taylor, P. (1998). A sociology of hackers. Sociological Review, 46, 757-780.

Kroeber, A., & Kluckhohn, C. (1952). Culture: a critical review of concepts and definitions. Cambridge: Peabody Museum.

McKenzie, W. (2006). Hackers. Theory Culture and Society, 23, 320-322.

Mander, M.S. (1987). Bourdieu, the sociology of culture and cultural studies: a critique. European Journal of Communication, 2, 427-453.

Menand, L. (2009). Some frames for Goffman. Social Psychology Quarterly, 74(4), 296-299.

Nissenbaum, H. (2004). Hackers and the contested ontology of cyberspace. New Media and Society, 6, 195-217.

Raymond, E.S. (1998). Homesteading the Noosphere. First Monday, 3(10), Retrieved March 22, 2010, from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/621

Raymond, E. S. (2008). How to become a hacker. Retrieved March 19, 2010, from http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html#what_is

Roberts, T.L. (1998). Are newsgroups virtual communities? Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in Computing Systems, Los Angeles, CA, 360-367.

Taylor, P. (1999). Hackers crime and the digital sublime. London, Routledge.

Tufekci, Z. (2008). Can you see me now? Audience and Disclosure Regulation in Online Social Network Sites. Bulletin of Science Technology Society, 28, 20-36.

Turgeman-Goldschmidt, O. (2005). Hackers’ accounts: hacking as a social entertainment. Social Science Computer Review, 23(8), 8-23.

Wacquant, L.J.D. (1987). Symbolic violence and the making of the French Agriculturalist: an enquiry into Pierre Bourdieu’s sociology. Journal of Sociology, 23, 65-88.

This work is covered by a Creative Commons License

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.5/au/

Identity in Communities and Networks contesting capital, hackers, identity, virtual communities

Edit in Admin

Comments

Written by janette about 2 years ago.

Yes, good point, Michael, about certain people seeking power where they can get it, especially those who feel powerless in their daily existence.
Maybe this is what motivates graffiti artists? They appear to carry an attitude of snugness too…when they can get away with it.
We could equate hackers to graffiti artists – they are just working in different environments. Hackers, of course, can do so much more damage.
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Thank you for the comments Jhi. I especially thank you for confirming that the paper was not overdone, as some feel Goffman and other theorists need pages and pages of explanation.

I would say based on further reading and discussion that they have a loose community, but one does exist. Obviously the need to remain anon plays a major impact on identification of hackers, but they still have a community because they exchange knowledge and re-enforce what the culture of hackers is. The ethos and spirit of hacking and the disdain for newcomers and crackers. There is obviously some sort of heirachy and the community postings do give evidence of this. Thanks again.
Written by jhiroberts about 2 years ago.

Hi Micheal,

Thanks for a really interesting paper, It was a great read and well researched. I am amazed by home much information you were able to get into the paper, without it being overdone.

I had never really thought about Hackers being in any type of community. However Last month i was on a Qantas flight back to Singapore and I happened across a documentary about Hackers (The name escapes me, and I could not find it whist searching the internet). Which also discussed the “Social Network” that hackers have, so reading your paper was of particular interest to me as I enjoyed the documentary.

Again thanks for the great read.

Cheers

Jhi
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Again Tessa thanks, I do believe you are right regarding it as being a thrill. I noticed too your take on Virtual Communities was different, but again it arrived at some similair conclusions. Everyone uses a community or SNS for different reason and although not always out to cause anarchy, hackers do display much bravado online. The information in the postings suggest they do enjoy telling the world whilst staying hidden. I think also people need to not take the postings too seriously if the are derided but sometimes people want to be elite hackers. At the minimum the forum gives clues to this behaviour. Thanks again for your kind words.
Written by TessaG about 2 years ago.

Thanks for that link
Written by TessaG about 2 years ago.

Hi Michael – thanks for your quick response

It is good to know that hackers are being employed for computer technology positions and even in security. Reminds me of the movie ‘Catch Me if You Can’ – the difference is the era and the type of deception.

In the movie (set in the 1950s i think) the main character forges cheques and takes on the false persona of an airplane pilot for money and personal reasons (the thrill of the chase and I think he wanted to feel important). It was based on a true story and the main character was given a job with the FBI to assist in catching other forgers…I think I remember reading in an article that he was actually quite intelligent and very gifted.

With hackers, I believe they are gifted in the area of computer technology and may also enjoy the thrill of doing something against the norm/acceptable public behaviour.

Thanks also for sharing your ideas on the concept of symbolic violence – I had never given the issue any thought.

Your paper really takes a different view of online communities to what my paper does.

I was arguing the benefits of supportive online communities for positive identity development.

It has been really interesting for me to read your paper and see the other view: how online communities, while still assisting in identity formation, can also have forums where your good ideas are derided – possibly leading to feelings of inadequacy.

Thanks again for your in-depth but quick response
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Apologies I forgot to reference that reply:

Martin, B. (1999). In Response To: Hackers in the Workplace. Attrition. Retreived May 9, 2010, from http://attrition.org/~jericho/works/security/hackers_workplace.html
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Hello Tessa. Thank you for the kind review and bringing up yet another dimension of possibility as to why they act the way they do. I have no numbers of those that do this but there is no doubt hackers are tempted to turn their skills, and often to, to working for security, finance and other companies with sensitive data, though I suppose every business has that. Money might be an incentive but also there are examples where skills were sought by the companies in return for not reporting them to the police.

Martin (1999) wrote an interesting response to a debate which suggests the dichotomy which is probably still going on, namely, do they get hired or not and is worth reproducing here:

“Hackers (thanks largely in part to media hysteria) are considered to be malicious,
unethical, and irresponsible. On the other hand, they are rumored to be the
most technically gifted as well. This puts companies in a bind: do they hire
hackers or not?

Not surprisingly, they don’t know (in more ways than one). To satisfy public
opinion and customers, companies do NOT hire hackers, especially in the
security industry. Behind closed doors, they hire hackers left and right.
In some cases, they do it in ignorance of their new employee’s background.
They hire young men and women capable of doing the job, often willing to work
for a lot less than national average salary.

In other cases, security companies in particular, they hire hackers knowing
full well the background and training that lead to their expertise.
They know that the individuals have broken into computer systems, defaced
web pages, and even deleted entire servers. These companies rely on the
newly employed hackers to blend in with the rest of their team, or more
often than not, work behind closed doors, away from customers.”

I think another element in undertaking research on internet text like what appears in virtual communities is that although the words give clues to what someone is thinking, that may not be totally true. But there is an element of egotism I am not sure if it is low self-esteem driven, but certainly the text in these forums suggests a need to broadcast an i’m better than you you will respect me attitude. Without getting too technical that is why symbolic violence as a concept is useful because again it might be virtual but people who are starting hacking would feel quite put down by others who have the skills they do not have and wish to acquire. It is not good in anything to be put down purely because you are learning but that it seems is what occurs in hacker forums.

Thanks again for your comments Tessa much appreciated.
Written by TessaG about 2 years ago.

Great paper Michael!

I found your topic very interesting and enjoyed reading your solid argument.

The aspect of hacker identity that I found most intriguing was their need to dominate forums in the hacker community. By telling other posters that they are *the* experts and know more about hacking than others in the hacker community it leads me to believe that perhaps these people have self-esteem issues? Maybe they were unsuccessful in obtaining a career in the field of computer technology…or maybe they are in the field but have lower level positions which they despise?

If their self-esteem and self-acceptance is adequate, I don’t believe they would need to display their prowess online…except that i can’t think of where else they could boast about their exploits in a face-to-face setting!

Also, if these people have such great skills in computer technology I wonder why we can’t put them to good use – for helping others and not interfering in a malevolent way.

The ‘Robin Hood’ character who wanted all software etc to be free of charge is another enigma.

It was also interesting to read about the fellow who used his real name in the forum – definitely interesting.

Thanks again for bringing your unique aspect of identity online to this forum – it has been a real eye-opener for me
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Janette thank you for your kind reply. I agree with you in your comments regarding the Wikipedia paper I reviewed. I tend to find that is true. I have learnt a lot more about hackers since putting the paper up that has changed my view slightly, but the arguement in this paper remains.

I feel that although using virtual community postings as data still carries the risk someone has put up information that is false, the postings in the hacking VC’s do suggest there is this shaping of identity going on. Part of that is asserting knowledge over others for whatever reason and the posts suggest an attitude of smugness. That is not to say everyone is like that, but it would seem that holding any power on any virtual platform, community, SNS whatever, is a part of human nature we have seen but will see in the future as people are powerless in their daily life. Maybe that applies to the hacker.
Written by janette about 2 years ago.

When I started reading your paper, I immediately thought about graffiti artists! And also about a hacker some years ago who hacked into some government system and ended up with a really excellent job stopping other hackers from doing what he used to do. I can’t remember the details, but I was impressed – he showed his wares and those he was hacking turned his skills to their advantage.

The challenge is in hacking the system, as you note, to test and improve the system rather than causing disruption. Unless of course, individual hackers have an agenda or a score to settle for some reason, or even responding to a dare

I am aware that there are hacker forums ‘out there’ but I was never interested to investigate. I understand that there is quite a boasting culture between the hackers.

I am surprised that hackers have a habit of putting each other down to assert superiority – I would have thought there would be a quasi brotherhood environment.

It could be said that hackers are keeping the big computer companies honest and, as such, are protecting the general online user by keeping resources available and at a reasonable price. It is amusing that the hackers consider the newbies learning the trade as crackers!

I can relate your content to my paper in that there are always those who feel they know more and are more powerful and by learning the rules and terminology and rules and regulations, the gain superiority and lock out others. The experienced hackers want to keep out new, want to be hackers, just like the powerful Wikipedian administrators who have knowledge of the rules and regulations of Wikipedia are blocking out new wikipedians.

You state that ‘hackers do craft an anarchistic identity in virtual communities through their displays of hacking knowledge’ and that refers to the powerful Wikipedia deletionists and inclusionists who are warring with each other for supremacy over what is published in Wikipedia.

Thanks for an interesting read, Michael.
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Thanks Andrew for such a fascinating reply and for giving more information to me about their activities.

It is interesting that some on the virtual community hacking boards did not see what they are doing as crime. But what you describe clearly is. The security around many servers for many organisations seems to have become tougher, no doubt also in part due to the hackers telling them how other hackers get around such issues. But things such as SQL injections to re-direct are just more examples of the type of prizes some hackers will seek. The main thing is they view this as not being wrong but a challenge.
Written by Andrew Pettigrew about 2 years ago.

Hi Michael,
Interesting paper Michael, looking at the dark side of online communities. Going beyond the theory, the culture and script kiddie glory and recognition, here is a real-world example from 2010.
Over the past 15 years web development managers and operating system vendors have suffered millions of attacks from script kiddies to seasoned hackers. During this period countless patches, security updates, filters, intrusion prevention and detection software and firewalls have appeared.

Today’s web-server systems are extremely difficult hack; however hackers have become extremely sophisticated. Today’s hacker gangs often reside in countries where computer hacking is not viewed as crime. In fact they are often encouraged to hack western sites. Instead of hacking for peer recognition and fame, these hackers work for large hacking companies where they combine talents to hack for financial gain.

One technique is to use an SQL injection string that changes the contents of a webpage on a legitimate website; then this infected page automatically directs end-users to a page on another website where a key-logger virus infects the end-user’s PC. Then every site and every keystroke the user enters is sent back to the hackers. This activity goes well beyond website defacement …. This is organised crime!

Once they have your credit card details they place orders under assumed names and have the goods sent to unsuspecting local gullible recipients. Then they’ll have another third party collect the high value electronic items (digital cameras, projectors, iPods, mobile phones, Laptops etc) and have them shipped overseas for some fraudulent benevolent reason. Within a few months the local delivery point recipients are caught by police; however by then the goods have left the country never to be seen again. This is just one example of how organised hacking communities from distant countries operate in Australia.

AP
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Thanks Josh. I have now realised the hacker and cracker debate is important as one group does hold the other to disdain. It is true that in many types of forums people do the same behaviours as hackers with asserting knowledge over each other to control and put down. The hacker forum seems to have the common theme that it is both the morality of hacking and the displaying of technical knowledge that set the hacker forum apart from other types of forum, though I am sure such behaviours would go on in say a medical forum where they are discussing operations for example.
Written by Joshua Atlee about 2 years ago.

Hackers and Crackers do not get a long, Hackers use proper skill, Crackers hack normally what you call a memory leak inside a program, a security hole to gain access.

It is true what you said that hackers try to hold onto their status, power and undermine anyone without as much skill. But this happens in every single forum hacking or not, the forums I’m on people will always try to be bigger then others, it’s found everywhere and it’s society that makes that problem worse.

From what i know Crackers will keep a well known name to be popular throughout the net, same with Hackers but they will never be seen public, they normally hack and crack through HTTP tunnels, hidden IP, public networks not their homes like internet cafes etc.

Good paper Mick.
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Thanks Richie, yes the research indicates that hackers generally are unethical in their behaviour and do not acknowledge the possible implications of their behaviour. I’m not so much judging but saying the challenge of changing software and hacking systems just seems to be taken as something of value to do. The forums do have this consistant set of postings where the experienced hacker thinks it is of value to to this activitiy. Thanks for commenting.
Written by Richie_M about 2 years ago.

Hi Michael,congratulations, you have presented a thoroughly researched, well written paper.
I found it interesting that hackers define themselves and differentiate themselves from those that they deem to be crackers.
I also thought the point you made of hackers disassociating themselves and being devoid of ethics was particularly interesting, because in doing so they break down social barriers and basically cease to acknowledge the implications of their hacking, allowing them to use it and refer to it as an exercise in acquiring of capital in the form of hacking knowledge, which can then be used to assert superiority over other hackers and gain reputation within the hacker’s community.
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Thanks Clyde. You uncovered the main differences between hackers and SNS users. The hacker has a lot riding on how they are seen. We may not know if they are really that knowledable or not, but consistant postings of knowledge suggest they certainly do know their stuff and what others to know they know. It is not necessarily egotism but certainly credibility while still remaining unknown is of vital importance to them. They will be blunt to newcomers and those that challenge their technical knowledge but also their beliefs. It would be foolish to post on a forum how uncrackable Windows 7 is.

Yes the power struggle was interesting, I went though quite a few postings in the forums but that one stood out. I believe on other topics MurderMouse did the same.

I suppose the best way to support the assertions would be a full on study with interviews, but there is no doubt consistancy in the literature that identity shaping seems to be so vital to the success of the hacker in the virtual forum.

Thanks for your view much appreciated
Written by Clyde A about 2 years ago.

Hi Michael,

A really informative read showing the anarchistic identity construct in the hacking community, where, unlike the ‘little fibs’ that SNS identity constructs are created from in their search for popularity, hackers have so much more riding on their identity constructs, and their behaviours like resorting to symbolic violence clearly show this.

I also consider that the ‘dehumanization’ factor you discuss plays a major role in motivating the actions of hackers, it fits in with their need to “hide their real identities when posting details of which computer systems they have hacked”. (Micheal N, 2010)

Mind you, while I was reading about the power struggle between Murder Mouse and Android, I couldn’t help but draw a parallel between their power struggle and the one we see in Parliament every day – again, just a different pay-off.
cheers, Clyde
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Hello Emelia, thank you for the kind comments. In particular, I am glad to date no one is too worried about the theorists I used, I was expecting someone to say I have only used theory too simply.

First, I have learnt from the comments that the portrayal of individuals in films like Hackers does have some credibilty and truth to it. Obviously there is something in that person that seeks to break in virtually, though unlike Hackers not run around big computer installations doing that.

Second, the paper does point out that Goffman and Boudieu are frames for understanding hacker’s shaping, but I would argue the text in the forums does point to a crafting of image and a desire to be seen to be better than other hackers. Many have pointed out on and offline when I discuss this the disdain for crackers. But I do agree with you that hacker stereotypes are reinforced and the literature is consistant in pointing out the negative stereotyping of the hacker. I was surprised actually even in the pro hacker academic literature there seemed to be underlying distaste for anarchy, which might suggest we do not want our computer systems and reliance on them interrupted.

I don’t think a hacker who now works for a security company or a corporation to protect systems and computer assets should be shunned. I think some seem to think it is a badge of honour to be paid huge sums to do such work. I would have to investigate the forums but I saw no sign of condeming those that are not hacking anymore and work for the ‘other’ side, but I am sure they are there.

Perhaps anonymity might be a curse and liability, but the fact remains the hacker goes from credibility in one part of society to another and I suppose like anything people will not like one’s progress.

Thank you for the comments.
Written by ESutton about 2 years ago.

A very well written article Michael, though I must apologise for the entire way through I was thinking of the film/book Hackers! However don’t despair, I believe this is because your paper is easy to understand and the way it is written makes it very suitable for such translation.

I was particularly interested in how hackers create a persona for the online communities they use to increase their notoriety and status. The belief in their act or persona is what ultimately makes their actions just as credible as the results they provide. Whist hacking is ultimately illegal in most cases there are real world applications of these skills that create as much status as the boasting online, such as the Pwn2Own contents. But even when participating in these real world competitions i’ve seen them use their online names rather than real names.

Linking this to my paper, I think you’ve shown that hackers use identity management skills (amongst other skills) to protect themselves from being found out and also use these fora as legitimate spaces of education and personal growth. Being protected via an assumed identity or nickname is an accepted part of these environments and makes the environment more legitimate in the eyes of the participants. Just as stigmatized social identities such as paedophiles and other illegal movements use identity management to hide them for fear of punishment (legal) but also from fear of being found out and ‘outed’ to their family and friends. The use of self-aspects to create the illusion of a ‘hacker’ stereotype and using the various methods to increase their status amongst the group ultimately reinforces the stereotypes and the generalisations of hackers being in it for the thrill of the kill and rather than legitimate use of a skill. It does beg an off the topic question however, are ‘security experts’ reformed hackers that should be shunned by their community or should they be praised by our community for leading others to believe that there are legitimate uses of their skills? Is this the point where accountability become a liability and anonymity become a curse?

Many thanks,
Emelia
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

No good Davo I hope it gets resolved quickly and you get your money back
Written by Davo about 2 years ago.

The reason I’m here is that my credit/debit card was just fraudulently charged almost $500.00 by TIROform.internet. The bank informed me of this suspicious action and has cancelled any payment and we are pursuing further action.
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

No thanks for that Meryl. You did bring up the point that hacker terminology has become mixed up, so I have learnt something in case I write more about this issue. So again thanks.
Written by Meryl about 2 years ago.

Hi Michael,

lol yes it was very much out of the bounds of your argument But seeing as I’m not in NET204 I granted myself the liberty of going off on a tangent to discuss an interesting side note in relation to hacker culture *chuckle*… you know me, always on my soapbox! For me and other open sourcers we cringe at the effects that the hacker terminology mix-up has perpetuated in our globalised world. Your paper really was an enjoyable read Michael, good work & all the best with this unit

cheers,
Meryl
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Thank you Meryl I appreciate the research you have done. My paper because of word length and the need, I believed, to include some examples prevented a full discussion of hacker vs cracker. If I did an extended or new paper I would put that in. It is a very salient marker of contesting capital because it is putting one group ‘in their place’ and asserting the hacking community is the legimate one.

I also think, and again this is slightly out of the bounds of my arguement which concentrated on identifying on identity shaping being how the hacker presents themselves in the forum, but the media representation is inaccurate. Even Gordon and Ma (2003), valuable as a quote it was to illustrate a point, tended to draw out negative associations and ignore positive contributions a hacker may make to an organisation’s protection of intellectual property.

Gordon, S. & Ma, Q. (2003). Convergence of Virus Writers and Hackers: Fact or Fantasy? Symantec Security Response White Paper. California: Symantec, Retrieved March 18, 2010, from http://www.yesky.com/image20010518/238454.pdf
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Thanks Paula. Agree totally. The paper would need to be much longer to cover such aspects. Certainly my impression, and I used a posting to illustrate this, was they are looking for vicitims, not all, but it is a belief of them.

The main aim of the paper was to see if, on a small scale, Goffman and Bourdieu’s theories could be applied to how hackers shape their identity. Without getting too deep into Bourdieu, certainly looking for vicitims is a form of symbolic violence and contesting capital, namely, the ability to name and count the number of organisations they have hacked.

The replies have ignited a debate about the hacker being a villian or helping to make software better. Based on the literature and looking at the forums in retrospect, they are trying to do both. But the main thing they are doing is creating hierachies; saying that their identity is strong when they type technical and other information in virtual communities to create a look what I can do you cannot image, which would be a form of symbolic violence.

Just an aside for anyone interested, the problem with using the theories of these two is they require much study and when used at smaller levels in papers and essays, those who might be very skilled in understanding their work get upset because the paper’s author is using their theories at a superficial level. I argue you have to start applying theory somewhere and these two were useful to use for this paper.
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Thanks Josh.

I would say that they would mostly avoid the privacy issues. I would guess, without talking to one just yet, they have ways of masking their protocols so they cannot be found. Other social and privacy issues on say Facebook are different because people choose to make things very public with last names and other details. A hacker would only likely do that when they become a legimate hacker, that is, they work for organisations or law enforcement agencies. It seems some of them do this and their past anarchies are forgotten.

I should point out that a hacker would be nice to talk to in order to confirm a lot of the literature, but in what I read there are are a lot of common traits and the one that stands out is they do not want to get caught, which is obvious, as they do not really see themselves as engaging in criminal activity.
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Thanks Belinda. When I read your paper that is what struck me. There is a difference. I might be wrong, but my impression is that in Torrent Communities there is a banding of people together. I am sure they tell each other what to download and how to do it, but I would guess if I compared the two communities (a joint paper idea!) the language postings may suggest a more ‘let’s help’ attitude rather than ‘oh look what I can do and you can’t’.

The comparison with Graffiti Artists is also apt here.
Written by PaulaB about 2 years ago.

Hi Michael,

An interesting profiling of hacker and hacking culture in virtual community. To me – Hacking is just another illegal activity that can range from unsignifact crime to something more robust. Unfortunatelly it is still difficult to deal with cases in court due to legal inconsistencies. As your paper describes – the hacker hierachy is structured according to technical knowledge of hacker. I view hackers getting their tech knowledge by being driven by goal and motivation that will take them to perform a work where others may ‘suffer’ because of malicious cyber attacts and intrustion into people’s privacy. In general, hackers are simply looking for victims and better they perform more proud they are for their actions. I see one positive aspect of hacking is its illegal ‘testing security’ of other networks without causing any damage. Just go in and leave. It is fact that many networks are not maintained well despite holding sensitive and confidential data and a visit from hacker can wake up system administrator to take security issues more seriously.

I enjoyed reading your paper but the topic of hacking goes much more deep then paper can possibly cover.

cheers
Paula
Written by Meryl about 2 years ago.

Hi Michael,

You have produced a good article that covers a wide range of behaviours and characteristics of hacker and cracker culture. The differentiation between hackers and crackers that Eric S. Raymond talks about in your article has now come to threaten the global Open Source community, and the damage that has resulted from the media’s bundling of hackers and crackers together under the one label is now having global repercussions (Hopkins, 2006). A group of U.S. private sector trade associations are lobbying for a Section 301 trade restriction to be implemented against several nation-states that choose to promote Open Source Software (International Intellectual Property Alliance 2010a, 2010b, 2010c, 2010d; webmink 2010).

As you observed for Eric S. Raymond (n.d.), so it is for most people in the Open Source community also; the criminal activities of crackers, phreaks and script kiddies is anathema to them. Again in 2000 Philip Tellis set forth another clarification between the terms when he said, “The basic difference between hackers and crackers is this: hackers build things, crackers break them” (Tellis, 2000).

Unfortunately these terminology corrections have not been adopted by the media and the ensuing cloud of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt) still prevails over the term ‘hacker’. The consequences of this FUD has been advantageous for proprietary software producers because hackers are often associated with the production of Open Source Software projects. This loose terminology of ‘hacker’, coupled with the media’s misrepresentation of hackers, has evolved to the point where U.S. copyright lobby, the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA), now believe that Open Source is equivalent to piracy (Johnson, 2010). Today the Open Source Software method of production is under threat by the IIPA as they seek to de-legitimatise Open Source Software as a safe and viable alternative to proprietary software. We are on the brink of something big as this powerful group of private sector trade associations go to battle over their push for everyone around the globe to only use proprietary software products.

cheers,
Meryl

* Hopkins, H. (2006). ’4. Hacker’ in Urban Dictionary: hacker. From http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hacker
* International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA). (2010a). Indonesia International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) 2010 Special 301 Report on Copyright Protection and Enforcement http://www.iipa.com/rbc/2010/2010SPEC301INDONESIA.pdf
* International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA). (2010b). Thailand International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) 2010 Special 301 Report on Copyright Protection and Enforcement http://www.iipa.com/rbc/2010/2010SPEC301THAILAND.pdf
* International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA). (2010c). Philippines International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) 2010 Special 301 Report on Copyright Protection and Enforcement http://www.iipa.com/rbc/2010/2010SPEC301PHILIPPINES.pdf
* International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA). (2010d). International Intellectual Property Alliance 2008 Special 301 Report Appendix B: Methodology http://www.iipa.com/pdf/2008SPEC301METHODOLOGY.pdf
* Johnson, B. (2010). ‘When using open source makes you an enemy of the state’. From http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/feb/23/opensource-intellectual-property
* Raymond, E.S. (n.d.). ‘cracker’ in The Jargon File, version 4.4.7. From http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/C/cracker.html
* Tellis, P. (2000). Hackers are Not Crackers. From http://db.glug-bom.org/lug-authors/philip/docs/hackers-not-crackers.html
* webmink. (2010). ‘Time To Rebut The IIPA’s FUD Against Open Source’. From http://www.opensource.org/node/510
Written by Josh v about 2 years ago.

Hey Michael : ) – Nice work!

I think hacking communities represent the clearest examples of creating identity in the virtual world becuase of the anonymity the participants need to keep. We can look at the pure mechanics of how identity is presented online free from the outside influences of previous offline social interactions or relationships.

These communities show great use of ‘weak ties’ across online networks. “The majority of our online networks are recognized as weak social ties, yet they develop into important resources which offer participants interaction with broader and more diverse elements of society.” (Taken from my papaer – Cut and Paste Identities: Creating our own Realities Online). The weak ties within these communities allow practically any member to easily find highly detailed information by asking the network.

Your paper also made me question our modern culture’s romantacized ideas of the ‘Hacker’ which appear in Hollywood movies like ‘The Matrix’ (Neo) and many a William Gibson novel (Neuromancer, Count Zero, etc). I have always thought of these communties as, like your paper mentions, ‘elite sub-cultures’ – I didn’t realize ‘noob’s existed within these communities too…!

Do you think that hacking communties (through the anonymous nature of the trade: ) avoid social and privacy issues that members of other social network sites are having to deal with? Or is this just another way of interacting and creating community through the internet?

Cheers Michael – I really enjoyed reading your paper.

Josh v

http://networkconference.netstudies.org/2010/04/cut-and-paste-identities-creating-our-own-realities-online/

: )
Written by Belindam about 2 years ago.

It is interesting to note, the highly competitive culture of hacker communities, where knowledge is used as currency to be traded, rather than as a tool to build community ties.

It reminds me of a conversation I once had with a graffiti vandal (for want of a better term). He suggested, graffiti was all about being noticed and being seen and recognised by other ‘taggers’ as having taken the biggest risk. For him it was about ‘keeping it real’ (whatever that means).

On BitTorrent, much the vitriol seems to directed at music and movie companies and industry bodies such as the MPAA and AFACT, who are the natural threat. There are some hierarchies, but these are related to how much an individual has contributed to the community in the form of shared files. The more you share, the higher your level and the faster your downloads.

It seems very different to hackers, who are rated according to individual accomplishment and personal knowledge and must fight to earn their rank and then fight to keep it.

All in all, a fascinating paper, well done.
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Laura I find it interesting you raised some questions out of the research in this area.

To the first question, I found in articles including ones I did not use that the general belief in the culture is that software should be free. I noticed that in my days working with web designers and computer programmers, any IT people, not all, but just comments that software is to expensive. I do not think a hacker would reconcile Photoshop or other software not exisiting without commerical value. The issue is most feel they are creating anarchy and disrupting the establishment. Granted, they do it in a subtle way, hence most do not want to get caught, but the forums I reviewed all gave information about how to hack popular software, so it seems they, generally, do not care what they do to commercial software.

I do not think exclusion is detrimental to their community as they operate on a different view of teamwork and community. Because the activity is mostly illegal they do not want get caught so therefore they will exclude others who they feel will potentially report them. I think that if some are on there and do not want to boast of their activities they will simply ask questions and not reply. This does result in loss of knowledge but I think that the knowledge they want to impart is highly controlled. A hacker may not want another hacker to know a certain way of hacking a system if that system has not been hacked yet. Excluding someone would mean the excluded hacker would go about their own thing and not report it in hacker communities. However, the hacker community despite its anon nature is where they go to get a reputation and often craft an identity based on their knowledge levels.

I argue that the paper certainly is not indiciative of every hacker. However, based on the forum postings, some hackers do like to shape an identity of boasting and reporting their conquests. They will also belittle others and test out newcomers committment to the hacking ethic. Many professionals will do that as some feel threatned by those that may have the skills and abilities to do more. Not every hacker wants to belittle and boast but the suggestion in the literature is that hacking knowledge shapes the reputation of the individual in the forum and sometimes beyond as seen by Roberts disclosure he is a hacker.
Written by laurap about 2 years ago.

Michael, I notice in your paper you refer to hackers belief that software should be free – how does a hacker reconcile the fact that something like Adobe Photoshop would simply not exist without commercial value?

I found lots of interesting overlap in your paper with some of the concepts in mine. Primarily, the idea that hackers (and in my paper, flamers) use demeaning comments and exclusion to assert authority and create and maintain their hacker identities. Do you think that this habit of exclusion is a detriment to their community overall? I found so in my research, because even though the exclusion is perhaps designed to discourage ‘pretenders’ that are trying just to be cool, there are often still legitimate community participants that may have a right to belong there (that is, the technical hacking skills) but have no desire to take part in the normal community behaviours of boasting, belittling others, etc. I think it’s possible that some very experienced hackers, seeing all this pointless posturing within the community, choose to just ignore the rest of them completely, which is certainly a loss of knowledge to all.

Comment Pages:

Online Conference on Networks and Communities

Computer Hackers in Virtual Community Forums: Identity Shaping and Dominating Other Hackers

Comments

Categories

Tags

Latest comments

Meta