|
Intervju med Eugene E. Kashpureff
Filmen varer 15 minutter
Kasphpureff var jeg så heldig å møte via Mike Hudack. Han var sjefen til Mike, og Mike hadde lenge pratet entusiastisk om den innleide sjefen til selskapet deres.
Jeg intervjuet Kasphpureff noen dager før jeg dro hjem våren 2000, midt på natta i de forlatte kontorlokalene til 2600 på Manhattan.
Teksting (transkribering) av interjuvet
Stig: Who are you?
I am Eugene E. Kashpureff
What do you do?
That’s really a good question, I’ve done a lot of things. I’ve driven a tow truck, got really good at driving tow trucks at one point in my life. I am probably better known for the work I do with computers. I built my first computer when I was ten years old. I played a lot with computers when I was a teenager. In my early twenties [I] did some work in medical billing systems. I did some work for the United States Government. Then I went back to driving tow trucks!
I spent a little bit of time in jail a while back. I guess to this day I am not really supposed to talk why I spent some time in jail.
Basically yes. I was charged by the United States Government with computer wire fraud.
No. I was charged in conjunction with events that happened in the summer of 1997. Convicted in federal district court in Brooklyn in the summer of 1998, and I am currently serving two years federal probation
No. There are no other restrictions that say I cant talk a whole lot about that issue. Lot of folks on the internet know me by name already.
Why?
I believe in freedom. I believe in freedom of communication. It is widely held that mankind got basic rights. For the most part, those basic rights that are represented in the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution and copied by institutions around the world. Of those rights, two of those who I feel is most important, are the freedom of speech and the freedom to privacy. Both of these rights are the freedoms of communication and I believe strongly in those rights.
US government rights less available?
I definitively do. The Internet has been a societal revolution. The reason why the Internet has been a societal revolution is that is has changed the way fundamentally that we as a world-wide society communicate. Many people feel that the Internet is a free information communication medium, when in fact is not. The Internet as we know it today is controlled by the United States Government. And I am opposed to this.
How do they control?
The United States Government through its contracts and programs controls everything from IP address allocations to who has overriding authority over the domain name space. In addition they govern the way Tier 1 providers can do business. Ultimately this translates into total control of the Internet.
What is a hacker?
Hackers create new technology, hackers come up with or point out flaws in existing technology. I would say that is the quintessential definition of what a true hacker does.
Denial of Service attacks political or vandal acts?
I consider them to be acts of vandalism.
Why were E-sites attacked?
If there were a political statement to be made that statement was not made clearly, [the] statement was not made publicly. To only harm or just plain doing of harm there was not clear message presented.
Has hacking changed its premises?
It is only a question how you define hacking, [I mean] it’s the long standing argument whether events that occur are acts of hacking or acts of cracking.
What is cracking?
To me cracking is more the realm of the acts of vandalism most often acts of vandalism using tools that are created by others. There is no new technology, there is no new thought presented when cracking happens. I believe in social responsibility. When you deal with DoS attacks, defacement of websites I don’t consider those to be socially responsible acts. When a new vulnerability is pointed out and made public, when a new tool which exploits a vulnerability is published, this is a creative act, because its show where the vulnerability are in the systems that have been deployed. It acts as a warning to those who deploys these systems without thought for the responsibilities that go along with deploying those systems. The responsibility to see that these systems are built to be secure so that the infrastructure that depend upon these systems do not themselves become vulnerable.
DVD-trial a matter of cracking or hacking?
I believe that’s hacking. What is done with the technology may be cracking, but the entertainment industry fears is cracking. The actual act of using that software to illegally copy copyrighted material is cracking. But the creation of the software itself as well as the deployment of that software to make legal backup copies for the purchaser of the copyrighted material, that’s not cracking.
A political act?
The creation of the DVD software? I believe it is, I mean it got political ramifications definitively. I don’t know if the act of creating the software was politically motivated in any way other than … I mean I am not the creator of that software uhm… politically I feel that software should be legal, that somebody who purchases copyrighted intellectual property that’s published in such a form should have the ability to make backup copies of their own. As has been published in many commentaries in the press on the issue itself. When you look at the classic example of a book, even a paperback book can take years of abuse. We have all seen or read a dog-eared paperback book. When you look at a DVD-disc, the media of a DVD is a much more fragile media. There is a real-life need to protect you investment in the copyrighted property by making a back-up copy of it. And this is really the root purpose for that software.
Counter-culture?
I don’t necessarily think it’s a counter-culture, it’s a part of culture. I believe in social responsible hacking. Technology in the deployment of technology is a great force, that is affecting the daily lives of everybody in our society today. More and more everyday as technology speeds forward. The employment of this technology in our daily lives brings up real issues. Issues that pertain to those basic human rights we hold, those basic human rights of communication. Now on the other hand, the development of the laws, the acceptable social norms, which control that technology, is driven largely by commercial interest. The hackers are largely the peoples voice that can be raised up to have an effect on the development of those rules, those laws which govern the deployment of the technology for the people, not for the commercial interest.
Tape is about to run out, do you want to continue after I change tapes?
Nah, you got some pretty solid hard-core stuff!
|
