What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Geek Squad employee sings for Best Buy in holiday campaign. view!
youtube.com/bestbuy0 - Valerie DeAngelo explains the moment she got the casting call.
44 Comments
- tuxidomasx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13as much as i'd like to help defend the true meaning of "hacker" i'm afriad its just taken on that negative stipulation. not even worth clarifying anymore.
people hear "hacker" and think one thing.
might as well keep telling people that "gay" really means "happy" not *****.
*shrugs*
"hacker" is now a slang word. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12No, that's just the hacking marketing department
- aboutblank, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8The next ***** thing someone tacks '2.0' onto... I swear to God....
- strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I swear to God 2.0
- Genius16, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6HACK THE PLANET!
on a serious note, i believe 2.0 is the new web hot word. cant wait for pr0n 2.0... - thescimitar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Is this some sort of advant-garde haiku?
- mrblack, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4indeed it is the case. However, there are some people in the media (the real media) who still make the distinction, for example Steven Levy and anybody who has read, what has become essential reading for any technology reporting, Hackers:Heros of the Computer Revolution.
- xfTwitch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5That's practically still in beta...
- profOblivion, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Hacking's only at version 2.0?
- davro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Hacker !== Cracker
"Hacking the Web is very much a commercial activity nowadays"
Yup Most of the Hackers are doing IT for a living now.
While the Crackers get away with it yet again and the Hackers get the blame, damn them Crackers are smart. - Joshua1211r, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Hacking for money? This is so 5 years ago.
- invader, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Combining AJAX with Javascript, makes for a deadly combination"
wow. that is idiotic on many levels. - strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Uhmm... they already have it. Techcrunch had an article on it (featured on Digg).
Since one of the main components of the whole "2.0" thing is user created submitted content I think you can guess what these sites feature. - logic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3That's why I code all my AJAX without Javascript.
/smirk - NanoStuff, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Web 3.0 patches most Hacking 2.0 attempts.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's ironic also he links to a PDF, which could be used maliciously with javascript calls.
- strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@Joshua1211r:
Yeah, I'm not sure why this is being treated as a new phenomenon. - m00kie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Hacking for money? What a bunch of sellouts. I remember when it was punk rock to hack
Hacking == Capitalism. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Since when was posting a link to malicious code on wikipedia equivalent to hacking?
- zombietuba, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2today's posters, use, unnecessary commas to, create incorrect, grammar.
- mrblack, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2hacking in the sense of breaking into computer for money. That has happened since the cold war my friend.
- scottschiller, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Alex Russell (Dojo toolkit contributor) wrote a good piece in response to some recent hand-wringing around all this "OMG web 2.0 javascript is evil!" business.
http://www.sitepen.com/blog/2007/01/07/when-vendors-attack-film-at-11/ - verifex, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Remember back in the day when hackers and virus writers wrote those complex payloads that would append themselves to the end of binaries and morph themselves to avoid detection. Those were viruses, and those things were scary. It's rather ironic that as technology moves forward, viruses seem to be getting less and less sophisticated and are less and less scary then the old days.
Of course I'm speaking from the platform of being a programmer/tech guy, and I find sufficiently complex implementations of simple programs intriguing. Script viruses (which are practically ALL viruses these days) are not complex, and not interesting at all. Over the past 10 years the bar for outsmarting the average computer user has been getting lower and lower. Which is why anti-virus/anti-spam programs are all over the place now.
If more people were more educated about computers before using them, we wouldn't have half, or even a third of the massive virus outbreaks that we do have these days. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Hack for Dollars
"Indeed Finjan says that commercialization of malicious code was the most significant trend in the web security arena during 2006. Here's a graph from Finjan illustrating this:"
http://www.readwriteweb.com/images/finjan_graph_jan07.jpg - scottschiller, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Digg 2.0.
(You watch.) - invader, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2i was going to click the minimize button on your comment, but chose the red one instead.. turns out that minimized it, too
- tomarocco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Is that like Alcohol & Barbituates deadly?
- NanoStuff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You're right, it works.
- caldaean, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I submitted this article:
http://www.gnucitizen.org/blog/how-to-write-ajax-worms-theoretical-point-of-view
here:
http://digg.com/security/How_to_write_AJAX_Worms
But it didn't get much attention. A shame really, because it was quite interesting and I thought it was worth mentioning here since it's related to the topic and most people havn't read it, at least by judging from the amount of diggs. Not meant to spam my own submissions, just wanted to point to an interesting article. - tomarocco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Remember, Bush 2.0 came first. (...or try to forget...)
- osbjmg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Maybe an eighth? Maybe another arbitrary number?
- invader, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1edit: bury..
- neonpulse, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Did this article just call Myspace "Web 2.0"? LOL
The noun "cracker" should have been used instead of hacker in most instances. - godlovesme, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Oh, why can't we get along
in the meatrix?
god made code
code wont hurt you+# - dsthunder, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2earth 2.0
- scottschiller, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Garbage was, but that was in 1998. ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Version_2.0 - sachmanb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1If the term Web 2.0 wasn't bad enough by itself. I'm a Commenter 3.0. *fools*
- barkeep8, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1God does not love you.
- tomarocco, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I miss mosaic.
- vbisbest, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Ya, you got me. I should have been more clear. Ajax combined with javascript vulnerabilities, such as XSS.
- vbisbest, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Our company has been talking about dangers of web 2.0 for some time at now. Combining AJAX with Javascript (like in the MySpace example), makes for a deadly combination. Here is some more info.
White paper on AJAX and Web 2.0 dangers
http://www.spidynamics.com/assets/documents/AJAXdangers.pdf
Javascript port scanner. Example with source code.
http://www.spidynamics.com/spilabs/education/articles/JS-portscan.html
Web cast on Web 2.0 and AJAX (you need to register) Excerpt:
With the growth of Web 2.0 and the movement towards a more interactive Web, many applications now employ Ajax. This Web cast describes the benefits of the Ajax methodology, its security concerns, and recommendations for securing Web application development.
https://download.spidynamics.com/registration/AJAX_webcast.asp - Enigmatarius, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Hacking gets easier as the hours flow by it seems. Mostly since half the hacking community is script kiddies nowa days.
- godlovesme, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2digg will not late me
post code
way? - godlovesme, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1code
help me?
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 