Distinguishing Between Hacking and Cracking

Topic area Hacking / Security
Target audience Undergraduate and graduate IS/CS/CE/EE/SE majors in general.
Activity type Worksheet, reading assignment, class discussion.
Time required This activity will easily fit into one class period (either 50 or 75 minutes). The average time for completing the readings and worksheets prior to class is estimated at 2 hours.
Attachments Worksheet 1
Worksheet 2
Worksheet 3
Additional materials
  1. A copy of the first chapter from "The Hacker's Handbook", by Hugo Cornwall, published by Century Communications Ltd. (available on the web).
  2. A copy of the article "The United States vs. Craig Neidorf", by Dorothy E. Denning, from Communicationsof the ACM, Volume 34, Number 3, March 1991, pages 24-32..
  3. A copy of the article "Cracker", by David Freedman and Charles Mann, from U.S. News & World Report, June 2, 1997, pages 57-65.
  4. For the instructor, a copy of Hackers - Heroes of the Computer Revolution, by S. Levy, Dell publishing Company, 1984.
  5. For the instructor, chapter 4 from Bowyer's book Ethics and Computing, published by the IEEE Computer Society Press.
Background needed to complete the assignment Students need to be given copies of the readings, or to otherwise be able to locate them. Beyond this no particular knowledge or skills are required to complete the activity.
References
  1. H. Cornwall, The Hacker's Handbook, Century Communications Ltd., London, 1985 (http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Dungeon/9058/hack.htm)
  2. D. E. Denning, The United States vs. Craig Neidorf, Communications of the ACM, Volume 34, Number 3, March 1991, pages 24-32.
  3. D. Freedman, C. Mann, Cracker, U.S. News & World Report, June 2, 1997, pages 57-65.
  4. S. Levy, Hackers - Heroes of the Computer Revolution, Dell Publishing, New York, 1984.
Last modified August 1998
Abstract:
The essence of this assignment is to read three articles that discuss hacking and to develop an understanding of what hacking is and what it is not. The first reading is from the first chapter of the Hacker's Handbook. This reading takes a positive view of hacking and provides an introduction to some of the traditional arguments in favor of hacking. The second reading discusses the case against Craig Neidorf. This particular paper is quite long, but the first two sections of the paper provide an overview of hacking and some definitions. The third paper, Cracker, introduces the term cracker and some of the activities associated with it.

Goals for the activity:
The primary goal of this lab is to teach students what hacking/cracking is. The bulk of the work done in this activity is centered around defining hacking/cracking and the activities associated with cracking. This particular activity does not address the legality of hacking, it only defines the terms and identifies what a cracker does.

Knowledge / skills / attitudes to be developed (behavioral objectives):
After completing this exercise students will understand:

  1. The history of the term hacking.
  2. That there are different definitions of the term hacking and what they mean.
  3. The difference between hacking and cracking.
  4. The basic activities of a hacker.

Procedure:
Prior to the classroom discussion, students should be asked to read the material from the Hacker's Handbook, and the first few sections of Denning's and Freeman's papers.  This will provide them with some background in the subject area.  They should be asked to complete worksheets, such as the ones provided with this document, to guide them along in the readings.   These worksheets can be collected, if desired, during class.

In order to prepare for the discussion the instructor should read the first chapter of Levy's book, "Hackers - Heroes of the Computer Revolution".  This chapter provides an excellent description of the roots of hacking.  Chapter 4 in Bowyer's book details some of the activities that hackers are often involved in.

The class activity should start by dividing the class into small groups with instructions to identify the different definitions of hacking that were found in the articles.  The groups should also be asked to identify the difference between hackers and crackers.

Class should then begin with an open discussion of the different, and sometimes conflicting, definitions of hacking from the readings.  I think an important point to get across to the students is that the term hacker is meant to describe someone who is very competent with computers (the popular press that has placed a negative connotation on the term).  The term cracker should be used to describe someone who is interested only in breaking into computers and typically causing damage (an interesting point that can be made is that crackers are not always hackers).

If time permits, the class as a whole, can be asked to identify some of the activities associated with hacking/cracking. The instructor can supplement this discussion by adding some of the material from Bowyer's book.

This activity should set the stage for a future discussion of the illegal activities of crackers. I think that by clearly differentiating between hacking and cracking it may be easier for the instructor to diffuse some of the arguments from students who will say that hacking is good.

Assessing outcomes:
The simplest assessment of outcome is to grade the responses on the worksheets. The questions are primarily objective/factual which check that the student has read and understood the article.

Additional remarks:
None.

Author contact information:
Paul Tymann
Computer Science Department
1176 Ross Building
102 Lomb Memorial Drive
Rochester, NY  14623-5608
Email: ptt@cs.rit.edu
Home Page: http://www.cs.rit.edu/~ptt

Page maintained by: kwb@csee.usf.edu