Hacker News Reader

Comment by mixmax | Hacker News Reader

I wouldn't underestimate Julian Assange either. He made the first free portscanner (precursor to Nmap), co-invented Rubberhose deniable encryption and wrote the Usenet caching software NNTPCache. He knows what he's doing.

View on HN

He didn't write the first free portscanner (all portscanners were free in the '90s, and most still are). He wrote the first fast one.

This is what wikipedia says: "In 1995, Assange wrote Strobe, the first free and open source port scanner. Strobe inspired Fyodor to develop the Nmap port scanner."

Is that incorrect, or weren't the other ones open source? I'll trust you over wikipedia :-)

There were definitely port scanners before Strobe, but Strobe was the fastest port scanner. The notion that there would have been a commercial port scanner in 1995 strikes me as funny.

If you just need me to "win the bet" here I'll point out that even SATAN scanned ports, and the netcat man page (also '95) shows how to use it as a port scanner. Hobbit "invented" UDP port scanner (which Strobe didn't do) in '94.

If you were thinking that maybe portscanning was an original idea, I'll recommend that you research NUAA (a "port scanner" for X.25 networks) and Tone-Loc (a "port scanner" for telephones).

Remember that 1994 is before the web and before ISDN. The Internet was mostly a means to get on IRC, which was in large part a place to talk about attacks on dial-up systems. This is back in the days where there was a "commercial" UUNet and a "noncommercial-only" NSFNet, and actual splits between the two. To some attackers, a high-quality NUA scanner might have been more valuable than a high-quality TCP scanner. Who scans TCP ports when 1/3 of Unix systems are running rexd and another 1/3 are exporting / to "everybody"?

For the record, I 100% believe Strobe inspired Fyodor. I don't want to take anything away from Strobe. It was impressive for its time.

(Late edit: I'm reminded by a friend that Pluvius wrote pscan.c before Proff wrote Strobe. So there.)

(Later edit: here's probe.c from Phrack in '94:

http://www.phrack.com/issues.html?issue=46&id=23

[look for probe_tcp_ports]).

I stand corrected...

As I recall, Tone Loc used to do the wild thing on telco networks.

These guys are known for using bullets... I wouldn't be overconfident.

You're thinking of North Korea. In the US, we have actual laws that the government has to follow. Specifically, we are not entitled to perform summary executions, even if someone is redistributing copies of stolen documents (outside of our jurisdiction).

Honestly, the whole thing is hot air right now. The government can't do anything about this incident. They can ensure that they don't let it happen again.

> In the US, we have actual laws that the government has to follow.

Not that this is really appropriate here, but the government is increasingly either not following laws, or not following the spirit of laws. For instance, Bradley Manning is being held outside of the country and isn't allowed to talk to a lawyer, or Gitmo, or this whole "videotaping cops" thing, or the storing of airport scanner photos... the list goes on and on. I don't think they'll outright kill Julian, but don't think the government is actually bound by the law.

(EDIT: tptacek has corrected my statement about Manning, but my overall point still stands.)

Please cite your sources. According to Wikipedia he is being held in Quantico.

We only have Assange's word that he is being denied an attorney. I am sure the DoD are following their rules and if he has not already will eventually be assigned a JAG lawyer. He is not a civilian and he won't be treated as such.

I read this this morning here:

http://harpers.org/archive/2010/08/hbc-90007466

> He appears to have been denied access to independent counsel and held incommunicado outside the country.

They do not cite any sources. I think they are just repeating that Assange said.

Bradley Manning is not being held outside the country, and if you don't have that fact right, I'm guessing you don't have the facts on his legal representation either.

Check out my reply to your sibling, I read it in Harper's this morning.

Harpers is also wrong. Not shocking. Harpers: often great writing, rarely great reporting.

Manning has been at Quantico for (at least) almost a week now.

All righty, I'll take your word for it. I trust you more than even a well-known magazine, for better or worse.

Don't take my word for it; the AP reported this on July 31.

Manning is in serious shit. The crazier this Wikileaks stuff gets, the worse it's going to get for him. It's hard to hyperbolize the possible consequences at this point.

Part of the reason for that is that it's very easy to characterize the crime that he's alleged to committed.

Assange, on the other hand, probably hasn't committed any "crime" at all.

Yeah, his situation is certainly unfortunate... and highlights the need for concealing sources.

It's certainly interesting to see our increasingly international, distributed world. The old is trying to adapt to the new, and there's always going to be growing pains. That article where that guy claimed we should kidnap Assange was pretty funny; but also kind of scary. It's sort of amusing (in a morbid sort of way) that people feel we should impose our laws on people that aren't even our citizens, but then things like ACTA happen (or will happen, in its case) and it's not that funny any longer.

>Specifically, we are not entitled to perform summary executions

Obama authorizes assassination of U.S. citizen:

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/07...

"No due process is accorded. No charges or trials are necessary. No evidence is offered, nor any opportunity for him to deny these accusations..."

The accusation that Obama might authorize the extrajudicial killing of Julian Assange is impossible to refute, and thus very boring to discuss. But very few people outside of the right wing fever swamps would draw a direct equivalence between Assange and an active, productive member of Al Qaeda.

(The argument about whether al-Alwaki is or isn't part of Al Qaeda is even more boring than the argument about whether someone who posts embarassing things on the Internet might be killed).

I wasn't saying an assassination of Assange is likely, just responding to the statement "we have actual laws that the government has to follow". The US state legally permits itself to kill anyone.

> But very few people outside of the right wing fever swamps would draw a direct equivalence between Assange and an active, productive member of Al Qaeda

It all hinges on pissing off the wrong person.

Without venturing a personal opinion on affairs, there seem to be a few popular beliefs in certain people (e.g., Bruce Ivins, David Kelly, DC Madam, Hunter S Thompson) being suicided.

Don't forget Vince Foster.

I was in grade school, cut me some slack :)

     They can ensure that they don't let it happen again.

I have a feeling you mean:

     They can TRY to ensure it doesn't happen again.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com