Table of Contents
Although hackers are often ignored for being executors of crimes linked with computing, hacking essentially began as a method of customizing novel technologies producing better means of enhancing it (Taylor, 1999). In the contemporary society the number of hackers has increased with the majority of individuals of an average age of thirteen years understanding computing secrets. According to studies, there are various types of hackers and each one of them is motivated by various reasons to hack. Whilst some of them hack with an aim of understanding and uncovering the ins and outs of most recent technologies in order to reveal novel possibilities, others do so with an aim of enhancing the overall Information Technology system. Nevertheless, there are some hackers out there who are motivated by other factors including monetary gains and according to studies approximately 70 percent of hackers are entirely profit-motivated (Wireless Network Security, par. 2). The major categories in which hacker motivations are subdivided into following:
According to studies, most hackers are greatly motivated by monetary gains (Taylor, 1999). They do this by stealing information from bank accounts, fraudulently acquiring money or by stealing property by altering computer information (Taylor, 1999).
The majority of hackers deem that the entire networks ought to be completely accessible whilst the cyberspace must be entirely free (Wireless Network Security, par. 5). Besides, they may have a political and social agenda in which their objective is to damage high-profile systems with an aim of delivering a statement.
Fun and Curiosity
Some hackers make use of scripts that are developed by skilled hackers with an aim of attacking computer systems and networks to have fun, impress friends, gain recognition or learn hacking basics (Wireless Network Security, par. 9).
What Can Organizations Do To Be More Proactive In Identifying And Mitigating Hacker Threats?
An essential constituent of a proactive security gauge is an evaluation and an understanding of the threats which face an organization. Regrettably, the dialogue concerning the threats of information technology is challenged by invocations of requirements of a security clearance, failure of having a common threat classification and soundbite rhetoric (Devost, pp. 20). In this case organizations are required to make decisions regarding risk management if there is no applicable threat context. Organizations should conduct threat assessments in order to complement susceptibility assessments with an aim of enabling the organizations formulate educated decisions which will guide their information technology programs (Devost, pp. 20). The security program should entail monitoring the black and white hat hacker for data concerning novel vulnerabilities that affect their environment (Devost, pp. 21).
The Differences between Hackers and Crackers
A hacker is mostly interested in the recondite and arcane mechanism of any computer’s operating system; they are programmers (Security FAQs, 2009). Therefore, they have highly developed understanding of the programming languages and operating systems. They might be familiar with holes inside systems and the causes of such holes. Hackers continuously look for more facts, liberally share their discoveries and by no means do they intentionally damage data (Tech Republic, 2009). On the other hand, crackers access or else breach the system reliability of distant machines, with the intentions of altering the systems working (Security FAQs, 2009). Crackers, after getting illegal admission, wipe out very important data, refute rightful client service or mainly bring harm to their intended ones. Crackers are straightforwardly recognized due to their malicious actions (Tech Republic, 2009; Moore, 2006).
Hackers mostly check out the system at a microcosmic point looking for getting through in snags and software in a logical way (Security FAQs, 2009). They make programs to verify the reliability of additional programs. Therefore, when hackers make programs that can by design confirm the protective organization of distant machines, it symbolizes a need to improve what is already present. It is designing and improving through the method of analysis. The hackers who are also known as the white hats will inform the software vendor on discovering an error and presents the company with an opportunity to correct the error before publicizing the bug while, on the other hand, a cracker, also known as a black hat, vandalizes systems for his own gain (Tech Republic, 2009).
Should Hackers And Crackers Be Punished Differently?
Since hackers are also involved in different acts most of which are unauthorized and criminal in nature, it ought to be stressed on that a distinctive characteristic of this set of wrongdoers is the lack of patent illegal intention (Tech Republic, 2009). Just about all events are carried out by them to exhibit their logical and skilled abilities. On the other hand, crackers are dangerous vandals who crush sites.
All these point to computer offenses and they face single categories which comprise of not having purpose, clearly planned preparation for the offense, lack of the ability to cover up the offense, the initial technique of committing an offense and committing roguish operations on sight (Moore, 2006). Therefore, hackers and crackers should be punished basing on the categories of their crimes and sentences which are stipulated for each of their crimes.
Treatment of Hackers Apart From Incarceration
Treatment as an alternative of incarceration would be advantageous to the hacker as well as to the entire people (Schwartz, 2011). First and foremost incarceration calls for big housing facilities which may lack and this may lead to overcrowding in these facilities. Home confinement may be used as an alternative to incarceration. This helps in decreasing the population of those who are in prison and it also costs less especially to the government.
Community supervision can also be used as another way of treating hackers as opposed to them being incarcerated since it has fewer negative results and more outcomes which are positive since out of interaction with the right people in the community may help the one to be optimistic and more involved in doing the right things (Koprowski, 2008).
Boot camp should also be considered as a way of treatment. It stands for a rapid, frequently appalling switch to a new approach of life (Schwartz, 2011). Discipline is harsh and hard work is emphasized, physical exercise and absolute submission to authority. The recruit is notified at what time to be asleep, when to be up and what time to eat. Instructions have to be obeyed right away and individual freedom is almost absent. As boot camp ends the hacker becomes a different human being (Schwartz, 2011).
As strict as it is, capital punishment may also be used in dealing with hackers instead of incarceration. It is the execution of wrong doers for committing unlawful acts which are so bad and the only way of bringing end to them is by death. Incarceration should be discouraged since it may lead to mental illness especially to those inmates who are 24 years or younger. It is also out of incarceration that these hackers tend to meet and learn more from each other and once they are out of these prisons they tend to go back to their hacking and with more skills (Schwartz, 2011). Therefore other ways of treatments which don’t bring these hackers together are better. Out of incarceration the nonviolent hackers are made to live by violence and they even make them to be more hardened.