Re: Two hackers caught tapping into Boeing, federal computers

Thread View: comp.security.misc

4 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

4 total messages Started by John Stanley Sun, 22 Nov 1992 02:35

#817

Author: John Stanley
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 02:35

25 lines
1686 bytes

In article <10013@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> nick+@pitt.edu (Nick C De Mello) writes:
>>>They didn't explicitly say that they cracked the root password. 
>>
>>If decrypting the passwords gave him the root password, then yes, Dave,
>>they cracked the root password.
>
>  Oh, come on... what do you think is more likely: these two kids
>broke the DES encryption scheme, or the newspaper confused decrypting
>with running the encryption on a /usr/dict/words file and greping
>it with the /passwd file.

Since both of these cases can be called "cracking" the root password,
what is your problem?

I think that it is most likely that they used something like Crack,
which is really not the same as either one of your proposed methods.

>  I'll grant you they cracked the root, and thus system, but unless
>I see some more details I'm going to be really skeptical of claims
>they came up with the inverse DES function.

My comment was in response to Dave's claim that the article didn't say
that the kids "cracked" the root password. Nothing else. You admit
that they cracked the password, and nobody here has claimed they
inverted the DES algorithm. What's your problem?

Re: Two hackers caught tapping into Boeing, federal computers

#821

Author: Nick C De Mello
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 03:54

16 lines
1217 bytes

In article <1emrkuINNs5s@talon.UCS.ORST.EDU> stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley) writes:
>
>My comment was in response to Dave's claim that the article didn't say
>that the kids "cracked" the root password. Nothing else. You admit
>that they cracked the password, and nobody here has claimed they
>inverted the DES algorithm. What's your problem?

  I stand corrected.  Apologies.

                                       -- Nick

-- 
   _/   _/  _/  _/_/_/   _/   _/  Sea Shells to C shells,  Waikiki to
  _/_/ _/  _/  _/   _/  _/_/_/     the Internet, a wave, is a wave...
 _/ _/_/  _/  _/       _/ _/                     
_/   _/  _/   _/_/_/  _/   _/  CompSrv: 71232,766 * I-Net: Nick+@pitt.edu

Crack vs. Decrypt (was Re: Two hackers caught...)

#825

Author: MARK ROMAN MACH
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 11:31

19 lines
1391 bytes

From the original article way back:
>``He then transferred the password file to a Boeing Company computer,
>where he decrypted the passwords.''

    I've always had the tendency to differentiate "cracking" and
"decrypting" as two separate things.  I always considered "decrypting"
to imply that the key was used to convert from cipher text to plain
text, or that the appropriate inverse algorithm was used.  "Cracking"
seems to imply things like randomly guessing the plain text until a
cipher text match is found, crunching out computationally difficult
inverse algorithms, or other illegitimate & unsanctioned methods to
discover the plain text.

    Am I wrong in believing this?  Does anybody else feel that the
newspaper was irresponsible (or at least misinformed) by saying he
"decrypted" the passwords?

--
Mark R. Mach, mrmach@mtu.edu

Re: Crack vs. Decrypt (was Re: Two hackers caught...)

#830

Author: Craig Nordin
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 20:43

43 lines
2377 bytes

In <1992Nov22.113138.26493@mtu.edu> mrmach@mtu.edu (MARK ROMAN MACH) writes:

>From the original article way back:
>>``He then transferred the password file to a Boeing Company computer,
>>where he decrypted the passwords.''

>    I've always had the tendency to differentiate "cracking" and
>"decrypting" as two separate things.  I always considered "decrypting"
>to imply that the key was used to convert from cipher text to plain
>text, or that the appropriate inverse algorithm was used.  "Cracking"
>seems to imply things like randomly guessing the plain text until a
>cipher text match is found, crunching out computationally difficult
>inverse algorithms, or other illegitimate & unsanctioned methods to
>discover the plain text.

>    Am I wrong in believing this?  Does anybody else feel that the
>newspaper was irresponsible (or at least misinformed) by saying he
>"decrypted" the passwords?

Well, yes and no.  I think your delineation was more correct, but
possibly from a too-technical point of view.

You are using descriptions of technical operations to separate the
two meanings, but you also hint at the more simple difference of
morality between the two words.  Cracking being an immoral action
while decrypting being moral - or decrypting being somehow peaceful
and cracking being combative.

Crack is the new verb here.  Decrypt ought to mean, to a layman,
"unhide" or even "reveal".  To a techie, it ought to mean other 
things too.

How much do you expect the non-expert to carry around in his 
head anyway? :-)

>--
>Mark R. Mach, mrmach@mtu.edu

 -
 US Department of Labor      Craig Nordin          craig@osh3.osha.gov
 OSHA OMDS FSDB #N3661                  uunet!osh1.osha.gov!osh3!craig 
 200 Constitution Ave. NW Phone (FTS/202) v:219-7788 x57  fax:219-5830
 Washington D.C. 20210    Standard, Complete, and Constant Disclaimers

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads