[antiRepublicrat]

Anyway, the line is blurred. What about individuals who are very technically astute but write fairly destructive viruses like Code Red?

I'm not saying any of it is right, but if you're around the hacker community for long (and I have been, on both sides), you'll notice the difference between a kiddie and a gray- or black-hat hacker. Kiddies are despised by all, while hackers at least go for respect among their peers. I guess I should have added a fourth category: virus & worm writers.

It's also funny how hackers can lose respect by switching sides. This happened to the famous hacker group l0pht, makers of l0pht Crack, who became @stake, then bought by Symantec. Workin' for The Man.

All you are doing by messing with them is proving that they bet wrong.

But then you also get the situation of hackers who break in, do no damage, then notify the owner (even if indirectly) of what happened and how to fix it before somebody more malicious comes around. Like Adrian Lamo who just put himself in the New York Times' op-ed contributors list.

[Paridel]

you'll notice the difference between a kiddie and a gray- or black-hat hacker. Kiddies are despised by all, while hackers at least go for respect among their peers

Sure, I recognize there is a difference. I should have been a little more clear, I was just trying to say that personally I don't have a more respect for them. (I'll acknowledged that they are brighter than script kiddies, but that's about it)

I'm well aware of LC. My friend who introduced me to that program recently was hired by the FBI, doing the same thing he always did (I assume at least), but this time against different targets. Or maybe just protecting their systems, he doesn't really talk about it. But if that isn't selling out to the man I don't know what is ;-) But quite honestly, good for him. Better to be the man than not I'd say.

-paridel