Tricks are special ingenious techniques used in a profession or craft, especially those that are little known by outsiders.

For example: To select a complete paragraph in MS Word, make three quick clicks anywhere on the paragraph.

A hack is a creative solution to a problem or limitation.

For example, it is not possible to save a default color in MS Word other than white. If you want to use a different color in your documents, you would have to change it manually every time. However, if you save a blank page, after changing it to your desired color, as a document, every time you open that document it will have your default color.

A tip may be a piece of advice, or a piece of expert or authoritative information.

For example, the two examples above are my two tips for you.

I know this will come as a shock but it's because….. *drum roll*….. language evolves. Constantly. And one person not liking the way it is evolving will not stop it from evolving in the communication patterns of the other ~1.5 billion English speakers.

And- I suppose even more importantly- those words mean different things. Maybe ten years ago they didn't, maybe even five years ago they didn't, but nowadays something new has popped up which was different enough to warrant its own term. The words haven't replaced their predecessors, they're giving more specific labels where there were none before.

Hack vs. Tip

A tip is a suggestion or advice. “Hey Jimmy, a little tip: don't run through a screen door.”

A hack is a suggestion that circumvents a commonly thought way of achieving or doing something by offering an easier way to achieve or a more convenient way of doing. “Here's a hack, Jimmy: get rid of your screen door and put magnet-opening netting over the doorway instead.”

Hashtag Vs. Pound sign

The pound sign is a button on the phone that has various functions typically in automated voice categorizing systems. “Please press pound followed by your account number.” Before that it meant “number”. #1. #2. Etc. How silly would you consider someone who complained that everyone stopped using # to mean number and only know of it as “the pound sign” on phones? Pretty silly, probably. Especially because that is not the case and even with the “newly” designated pound sign button, people still recognize when # means “number.”

Hashtag, meanwhile, specifically designates a word being used as an Internet search categorizing marker. I.E., a tag. You would never hear an automated voice message telling you to “Press Hashtag, followed by your account number.” Because that's not what hashtag means. Pound sign and hashtag are not interchangeable vocabulary. “pound sign whosreadytoparty” makes zero sense in past OR modern English, but “hashtag whosreadytoparty” not only makes sense, it gives the listener (or reader) an innumerable amount of context, connotation, and specific feeling that no word other than “hashtag” could give.

I hope I've helped you overcome, even slightly, your irrational fear of a natural change that not only doesn't negatively affect anyone's lives, but improves it by facilitating more accurate communication between all speakers.

#livealittle #chillout #modernenglishsyntaxisactusllyreallycoolandservesanimportantpurposeotherthanmakingbabyboomersmad

Well, it’s like this. Easy answer, it’s in the context.

When is a door not a door, when it’s ajar, a jar! Get it?

If I bow to someone but they are wearing a bow in their hair, do they know which bow I am referring to when I compliment them on their lovely bow? That’s assuming they bow back to me.

Well, a hack can be a useful trick to accomplish something. That’s a noun.

A hack can also be a writer who churns out unoriginal, boring shit and, maybe, makes money on it. That’s also a noun.

Oh hold on, hack can be a verb, like hacking online, or even hacking down a bush or some tall grass.

So which hack is which?

I’m sure that if I used the wrong hack most people would be able to fathom out what I meant. One thing that helps is that they both sound the same, and the spelling is the same, so maybe nobody would notice.

I think I hacked it.

It sounds edgier. “Tips” are merely interesting and useful. “Hacks” sounds as though you’ve been devious and insightful, perhaps even forbidden.

“Hacker” used to be somebody with exceptional skill at computers. “Hacking in” to a computer system was something that required a lot of knowledge and cleverness.

“Hacks” carries some of that sense of astuteness, along with some of that sense of having inside information that others don’t have. So it makes people feel important.

Me, I think it makes people sound like pretentious douchebags. But then, I was hacking before “hacking” was something done by scr1p7 k1dd13z.

To go obsidian right out of the gate, a tip would be that people mostly feel a social obligation to be welcomed, and then released from engagement. That means, they need the words, or otherwise, the sentiment “ok, you may leave now. I wish you all the best as you go away from me because we are finished interacting.”

A trick would be knowing most people don’t want to make a scene, so even when you are harming them in public, such as performing a kidnapping or assault, their obligation is to the social environment, not to their own wellness. When you beat a woman, that’s what you’re playing on. Being single on Facebook is far worse than when you grab her wrists and pull her aside, and spit into her ear the charges and commands she needs to continue in your good graces.

Both are about using the chemicals occurring naturally in other people’s bodies to control their outward expression. One utilizes this system, one exploits it.

That’s an important distinction to make in the coming years and some of the passed ones too.

Advice is usually the term used when offering an opinion usually regarding life events.

Such as I advise you stay away from an individual because they are a bad influence.

Tips are often information you might find useful when trying to accomplish a task.

Like you will probably find it easier to use a blue filter when trying to capture a specific image more accurately.

Of course there is often overlap.

The major distinction being that when someone offers advice they often do so with more authority & expect you to take notice of what they have to say.

Those offering tips usually do so out of a genuine desire to help but not be particularly bothered if you do not adhere to what they suggested.

💕

The etymology of the word harkens back to the term "Hack" which means the prolific writer or "[[Hack writer|Hack Writer]]", usually for cheap hire churning out material to be published at a low rate of payment or return. Which in turn comes from the term "Hackney" or hackney horse for hire.

"Hack" also refers to "a rack for feeding cattle" Webster's Dictionary of "Hack" 1828 is the other side of the coin in the print publishing game of widespread consumption of written content. It’s an obvious prolific term, and words do not usually appear out of nothingness. It was looked at as a hire a writer for cheap, back in the 1990s when even the most elite programmers might make twice the minimum wage. (I know I was there, a ComSec officer that was part of the tech transfer that created the internet. I wrote the first social app for law enforcement and the very first web login and user management, as well as forums such as this one. Those existed before in what were called BBS (Bulletin Board Service of individual computers with direct dial-in modems, but of the web, I’m the progenitor.

The basic context of the word hack is easily attributable to computer programming from a text line, to tenaciously keep at an initially unrewarding and terrifically difficult task. Its initially positive connotation became derogatory by those railing against those with authority over computers and the now commercially worldwide accessible Internet which was built by "hackers".

Hack, besides referring to the numerous poorly paid writers of the paper press age, hired by publishers to turn out content, also refers to a “rack to feed cattle from” Websters 1928 (along with nearly 5 dozen definitions), but essentially someone who keeps at something, often beyond the norm, social or peer pressures, or even showing a profit, or someone hired to churn out code. I.E. hard working programmers.

Somehow… through some antagonism of those trying to break or rail against the growing dominance of computers, and those who are their masters, the term was confused with Crackers, those trying to break the “coders” or “hackers” work. “Cracking the code” is as old as encryption or secret messages, notable in computers the famous Alan Turing was a Cracker who broke the NAZI Enigma machine.

They are in no way synonyms. It’s Hacker vs Cracker, Cracker vs Hacker, Farmer/Builder vs Maruader kind of thing. Hackers can exist without Crackers.. but Crackers are a subgroup dependent on what Hackers build… encryption vs cracking basically.

Hack means to keep at something, tenaciously. Computer programming is several times over applicable as requiring a “Hack” or called “Hacker” in that way they are the same word, the ancillary meanings are at best poetic license, the workhorse on which the site, bank, store, program, communication, or social media depends on.

Before SAAS became popular, there was one computer guy per office of publications, the those that drift towards them.

In art and science, tricks are usually orthodox and hacks are unorthodox. For example, there are two uses for hacks in computer science. “That guy’s research is such a hack.” Implying it is highly derivative, unoriginal, unstable, and/or possibly unscrupulous. The other second for a hack is a reference to cyber security: The analyst had hacked into the system and shut down the scammers’ center.

I often disagree with using the word hack, it comes across as inaccurate and wishy-washy. For cyber security it should be bypass, infiltrated, or penetrated and computer science it should be derivative and unreliable research.

So, a life hack, like , outside of computers ? It's just a clever shortcut , really. Like , you know how you always struggle to find your keys ? I used to , man , it was a nightmare. Then I started putting them on a hook right by the door , a big , obvious hook , and BAM problem solved. That's a life hack. It's not rocket science, its just… smarter. Or , you know that thing where you peel a banana from the bottom instead of the top? Genius ! Less mess , less monkey business , I learned that from my weird uncle , actually . He was a total weirdo, but that banana tip? Gold . I tried that thing with the ice cubes in your wine glass , supposed to keep it cold without watering it down? eh, didnt really work for me . I think it depends on your glass , or maybe I did it wrong? It looked fancy though , you know , in movies and stuff . Life hacks are kinda all about efficiency , I guess , finding ways to make stuff easier , faster, and sometimes a bit more fun, too . Like , I found this awesome way to fold fitted sheets, its on youtube somewhere I should share that, maybe. It's all about those little things that add up , you know ? Little time savers , stress reducers . . . stuff that makes life… I dont know ... *nicer*? Its a vibe. Some dont work , some are pure genius. you gotta experiment, its part of the fun . Its like a little puzzle, you know ? You find one that works for you and you feel really smart. I feel so clever when I find a new life hack and it really works . Its just a little win, but those little wins .. . they matter . Anyway, check my bio if you want to see more of my amazing - or maybe not so amazing - life hacks. I'm constantly trying new stuff , even if they often fail spectacularly , haha .

Coding is like constructing a building. Involves everything from plan approval to construction. So many security structures are also built. Hacking is finding some loopholes in this construction, breaching the security and into the constructed area.

Hackers can be thieves who steal our assets (data). They find vulnerabilities in websites and steal data from it.

Hackers can be some cool guys who breach into the security just to show that they are capable of doing so! They deface some websites just like that!

Learners - who try to find and violate the security measures, for the purpose of learning by experience.

Ethical hackers: Hero who is capable of playing around the security features, but uses it only for the goodness of society.

Let's look at a knife, because a knife has both a tip and an edge. The tip is the point at the end farthest away from the handle. The edge is the part you do the cutting with. It is usually sharp on one of its long sides, and that is the "cutting edge.”

If you are talking about an iceberg, then the tip is at the top. It's the highest point, and it's usually pointy, too. If the iceberg is flat on top like a box, then it does not have a tip. But it could have an edge. A box has an edge. It is where the sides are joined together.

Your finger has a tip and and edge, too. You point with your finger tip. Notice how often “point” and “pointy" are associated with “tip". There's “finger tip" and “the tip of the iceberg,” the tip being the “pointy” part on top.

Edges may be sharp, but are not pointy. You can say, ”I scraped the edge of my finger,” and you know the side of your finger is neither sharp nor pointy. But you can “point" with you finger. You do so by pointing the tip of your finger.

Your nose has a tip and an edge, just like your finger. Sometimes you might hear, “He has a pointy nose.” The point, or tip is the part farthest away from your face. “Santa lays his finger aside of his nose.” That means he puts his finger on the side of his nose, not on the tip. You can also say the side is the edge of his nose.

People often say, “That movie had me on the edge of my seat!” In this case, it is the very front portion of the seat. It means the movie was so intense, that the speaker could not sit back and relax. A chair has a front edge and 2 side edges, and a back. However, you can “tip your chair over". That it's just an idiom. It does not mean that a chair has a tip.

“To tip” in this case is a verb, and I'm assuming you were asking about nouns not verbs. Tip can be a verb, and edge is a verb also.

I hope you find these illustrations helpful!

In this context it stands for useful knowledge of methodology, that helps to improve your life in some area.

For example, my little life hack is to toss coin, when I´m against two equal options and I can not decide, which way to go. Choices seem equal and time is limited. I really toss coin and do as it says.

Its not about giving responsibility to randomness, its about going either way, instead of hesitating and not really picking anything. Sometimes situation is very innocent, like one group of friends invite to dining the other group to diving and I dont have particular mood for either… Coin toss is a fair decision for everyone.

No, and there doesn't need to be.

Like it or not, human consensus defines language. The best thing you can do is not care. I drift towards the phrase "network intruder/intrusion" when possible to describe what I do, but that's not out of any real degree of giving a crap over the pedantry involved. It's mostly just to avoid useless arguments.

I tend to weight the definitions used by people whose skills I respect over those of (most) reporters and the general public, but the war (if there ever was one) for the meaning of the term is lost, dead, and buried.

On a broader scale, I do my best to use what I perceive as proper English, but I'm in a minority there. Say what you want to say. Just don't expect the world to agree with you.

To hack something means to accomplish a goal in a way that was not originally intended. For example, capturing and decrypting someone’s network usage to obtain their password and log into their account is not how you’re supposed to log in to their account; you’re supposed to obtain their password legitimately (e.g. asking them for it).

But hacking is not limited to computers.

This could be considered a “hack”, because water bottles aren’t meant to close doors, they’re meant to hold water.

This may be where the term “life hack” came from. Life hacks are ways to solve problems by unconventional means. The problem is: by now, most “life hacks” are just people hot gluing things together to solve problems that aren’t even problems.

^Things like this are not necessary, because there’s already a way to squeeze lemons. With your hands. And if you want the juice, there’s lemon juicers. This may be useful if you don’t have hands or a juicer, but that’s about the only time.

Hacking, cracking, and phishing are all related to unauthorized access or manipulation of computer systems and data, but they differ in their methods and objectives:

1. Hacking:

• Hacking is a broad term that encompasses a range of activities related to gaining unauthorized access to computer systems, networks, or devices.
• Hackers may seek to exploit vulnerabilities in systems for various purposes, such as gaining information, disrupting operations, or simply proving their skills.
• Hacking can be both ethical and malicious. Ethical hackers, known as "white hat" hackers, work to identify and fix security vulnerabilities, while malicious hackers, known as "black hat" hackers, engage in illegal activities.
• Hacking can involve various techniques, including exploiting software vulnerabilities, using malware, or employing social engineering to trick users into divulging sensitive information.

2. Cracking:

• Cracking specifically refers to the process of removing or bypassing software protection mechanisms, such as license keys or digital rights management (DRM) systems, to gain unauthorized access to software, games, or other digital content.
• The objective of cracking is often to obtain paid software or content without paying for it or to share it illegally.
• Crackers develop or use software tools (cracks) to circumvent the protections in place, allowing them to use the software or content without proper authorization.
• Cracking is generally considered illegal, as it involves copyright infringement and software piracy.

3. Phishing:

• Phishing is a form of cyber-attack that focuses on manipulating individuals into revealing sensitive information, such as usernames, passwords, credit card numbers, or personal information.
• Phishing attacks typically involve deceptive emails, messages, or websites that impersonate legitimate entities, such as banks, social media platforms, or government agencies.
• The attacker aims to trick the recipient into clicking on malicious links, downloading malware, or providing confidential information.
• Phishing can also target organizations through "spear-phishing," where attackers customize their messages to specific individuals or companies to increase the chances of success.
• Phishing is primarily a form of social engineering and is illegal since it involves fraudulent activities and identity theft.

In summary:

• Hacking is the overarching term for unauthorized access to computer systems and networks.
• Cracking is a specific form of hacking related to bypassing software protection mechanisms for illegal access to software or digital content.
• Phishing is a distinct form of attack that focuses on deceiving individuals into revealing sensitive information, typically through deceptive emails or websites.

All three activities are illegal when performed without proper authorization and consent, and they can have serious legal and ethical consequences.

“The word hack doesn't really have 69 different meanings”, according to MIT hacker Phil Agre. “In fact, hack has only one meaning, an extremely subtle and profound one which defies articulation. Which connotation is implied by a given use of the word depends in similarly profound ways on the context. Similar remarks apply to a couple of other hacker words, most notably random”

Hacking might be characterized as ‘an appropriate application of ingenuity’. Whether the result is a quick-and-dirty patchwork job or a carefully crafted work of art, you have to admire the cleverness that went into it.

An important secondary meaning of hack is ‘a creative practical joke’. This kind of hack is easier to explain to non-hackers than the programming kind. Of course, some hacks have both natures; see the lexicon entries for pseudo and kgbvax. But here are some examples of pure practical jokes that illustrate the hacking spirit:

In 1961, students from Caltech (California Institute of Technology, in Pasadena) hacked the Rose Bowl football game. One student posed as a reporter and ‘interviewed’ the director of the University of Washington card stunts (such stunts involve people in the stands who hold up colored cards to make pictures). The reporter learned exactly how the stunts were operated, and also that the director would be out to dinner later.

While the director was eating, the students (who called themselves the ‘Fiendish Fourteen’) picked a lock and stole a blank direction sheet for the card stunts. They then had a printer run off 2300 copies of the blank. The next day they picked the lock again and stole the master plans for the stunts — large sheets of graph paper colored in with the stunt pictures. Using these as a guide, they made new instructions for three of the stunts on the duplicated blanks. Finally, they broke in once more, replacing the stolen master plans and substituting the stack of diddled instruction sheets for the original set.

The result was that three of the pictures were totally different. Instead of ‘WASHINGTON’, the word ‘CALTECH’ was flashed. Another stunt showed the word ‘HUSKIES’, the Washington nickname, but spelled it backwards. And what was supposed to have been a picture of a husky instead showed a beaver. (Both Caltech and MIT use the beaver — nature's engineer — as a mascot.)

After the game, the Washington faculty athletic representative said: “Some thought it ingenious; others were indignant.” The Washington student body president remarked: “No hard feelings, but at the time it was unbelievable. We were amazed.”

This is now considered a classic hack, particularly because revising the direction sheets constituted a form of programming.

Here is another classic hack:

On November 20, 1982, MIT hacked the Harvard-Yale football game. Just after Harvard's second touchdown against Yale, in the first quarter, a small black ball popped up out of the ground at the 40-yard line, and grew bigger, and bigger, and bigger. The letters ‘MIT’ appeared all over the ball. As the players and officials stood around gawking, the ball grew to six feet in diameter and then burst with a bang and a cloud of white smoke.

The Boston Globe later reported: “If you want to know the truth, MIT won The Game.”

The prank had taken weeks of careful planning by members of MIT's Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity. The device consisted of a weather balloon, a hydraulic ram powered by Freon gas to lift it out of the ground, and a vacuum-cleaner motor to inflate it. They made eight separate expeditions to Harvard Stadium between 1 and 5 AM, locating an unused 110-volt circuit in the stadium and running buried wires from the stadium circuit to the 40-yard line, where they buried the balloon device. When the time came to activate the device, two fraternity members had merely to flip a circuit breaker and push a plug into an outlet.

This stunt had all the earmarks of a perfect hack: surprise, publicity, the ingenious use of technology, safety, and harmlessness. The use of manual control allowed the prank to be timed so as not to disrupt the game (it was set off between plays, so the outcome of the game would not be unduly affected). The perpetrators had even thoughtfully attached a note to the balloon explaining that the device was not dangerous and contained no explosives.

Harvard president Derek Bok commented: “They have an awful lot of clever people down there at MIT, and they did it again.” President Paul E. Gray of MIT said: “There is absolutely no truth to the rumor that I had anything to do with it, but I wish there were.”

The hacks above are verifiable history; they can be proved to have happened. Many other classic-hack stories from MIT and elsewhere, though retold as history, have the characteristics of what Jan Brunvand has called ‘urban folklore’ (see FOAF). Perhaps the best known of these is the legend of the infamous trolley-car hack, an alleged incident in which engineering students are said to have welded a trolley car to its tracks with thermite. Numerous versions of this have been recorded from the 1940s to the present, most set at MIT but at least one very detailed version set at CMU.

Brian Leibowitz has researched MIT hacks both real and mythical extensively; the interested reader is referred to his delightful pictorial compendium The Journal of the Institute for Hacks, Tomfoolery, and Pranks (MIT Museum, 1990; ISBN 0-917027-03-5). The Institute has a World Wide Web page athttp://hacks.mit.edu/Hacks/Gallery.html. There is a sequel entitled Is This The Way To Baker House?. The Caltech Alumni Association has published two similar books titled Legends of Caltech and More Legends of Caltech.

Here is a story about one of the classic computer hacks:

Back in the mid-1970s, several of the system support staff at Motorola discovered a relatively simple way to crack system security on the Xerox CP-V timesharing system. Through a simple programming strategy, it was possible for a user program to trick the system into running a portion of the program in ‘master mode’ (supervisor state), in which memory protection does not apply. The program could then poke a large value into its ‘privilege level’ byte (normally write-protected) and could then proceed to bypass all levels of security within the file-management system, patch the system monitor, and do numerous other interesting things. In short, the barn door was wide open.

Motorola quite properly reported this problem to Xerox via an official ‘level 1 SIDR’ (a bug report with an intended urgency of ‘needs to be fixed yesterday’). Because the text of each SIDR was entered into a database that could be viewed by quite a number of people, Motorola followed the approved procedure: they simply reported the problem as ‘Security SIDR’, and attached all of the necessary documentation, ways-to-reproduce, etc.

The CP-V people at Xerox sat on their thumbs; they either didn't realize the severity of the problem, or didn't assign the necessary operating-system-staff resources to develop and distribute an official patch.

Months passed. The Motorola guys pestered their Xerox field-support rep, to no avail. Finally they decided to take direct action, to demonstrate to Xerox management just how easily the system could be cracked and just how thoroughly the security safeguards could be subverted.

They dug around in the operating-system listings and devised a thoroughly devilish set of patches. These patches were then incorporated into a pair of programs called ‘Robin Hood’ and ‘Friar Tuck’. Robin Hood and Friar Tuck were designed to run as ‘ghost jobs’ (daemons, in Unix terminology); they would use the existing loophole to subvert system security, install the necessary patches, and then keep an eye on one another's statuses in order to keep the system operator (in effect, the superuser) from aborting them.

One fine day, the system operator on the main CP-V software development system in El Segundo was surprised by a number of unusual phenomena. These included the following:

• Tape drives would rewind and dismount their tapes in the middle of a job.
• Disk drives would seek back and forth so rapidly that they would attempt to walk across the floor (see walking drives).
• The card-punch output device would occasionally start up of itself and punch a ‘lace card’ (card with all positions punched). These would usually jam in the punch.
• The console would print snide and insulting messages from Robin Hood to Friar Tuck, or vice versa.
• The Xerox card reader had two output stackers; it could be instructed to stack into A, stack into B, or stack into A (unless a card was unreadable, in which case the bad card was placed into stacker B). One of the patches installed by the ghosts added some code to the card-reader driver... after reading a card, it would flip over to the opposite stacker. As a result, card decks would divide themselves in half when they were read, leaving the operator to recollate them manually.

Naturally, the operator called in the operating-system developers. They found the bandit ghost jobs running, and killed them... and were once again surprised. When Robin Hood was gunned, the following sequence of events took place:

!X id1 
 
id1: Friar Tuck... I am under attack!  Pray save me! 
id1: Off (aborted) 
 
id2: Fear not, friend Robin!  I shall rout the Sheriff 
     of Nottingham's men! 
 
id1: Thank you, my good fellow! 

Each ghost-job would detect the fact that the other had been killed, and would start a new copy of the recently slain program within a few milliseconds. The only way to kill both ghosts was to kill them simultaneously (very difficult) or to deliberately crash the system.

Finally, the system programmers did the latter — only to find that the bandits appeared once again when the system rebooted! It turned out that these two programs had patched the boot-time OS image (the kernel file, in Unix terms) and had added themselves to the list of programs that were to be started at boot time (this is similar to the way Windows viruses propagate).

The Robin Hood and Friar Tuck ghosts were finally eradicated when the system staff rebooted the system from a clean boot-tape and reinstalled the monitor. Not long thereafter, Xerox released a patch for this problem.

It is alleged that Xerox filed a complaint with Motorola's management about the merry-prankster actions of the two employees in question. It is not recorded that any serious disciplinary action was taken against either of them.

Finally, here is a wonderful hack story for the new millennium:

1990's addition to the hallowed tradition of April Fool RFCs was RFC 1149, A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on Avian Carriers. This sketched a method for transmitting IP packets via carrier pigeons.

Eleven years later, on 28 April 2001, the Bergen Linux User's Group successfully demonstrated CPIP (Carrier Pigeon IP) between two Linux machines running on opposite sides of a small mountain in Bergen, Norway. Their network stack used printers to hex-dump packets onto paper, pigeons to transport the paper, and OCR software to read the dumps at the other end and feed them to the receiving machine's network layer.

Here is the actual log of the ping command they successfully executed. Note the exceptional packet times.

Script started on Sat Apr 28 11:24:09 2001 
vegard@gyversalen:~$ /sbin/ifconfig tun0 
tun0      Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol   
          inet addr:10.0.3.2  P-t-P:10.0.3.1  Mask:255.255.255.255 
          UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST  MTU:150  Metric:1 
          RX packets:1 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 
          TX packets:2 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 
          collisions:0  
          RX bytes:88 (88.0 b)  TX bytes:168 (168.0 b) 
 
vegard@gyversalen:~$ ping -i 450 10.0.3.1 
PING 10.0.3.1 (10.0.3.1): 56 data bytes 
64 bytes from 10.0.3.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=6165731.1 ms 
64 bytes from 10.0.3.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=255 time=3211900.8 ms 
64 bytes from 10.0.3.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=5124922.8 ms 
64 bytes from 10.0.3.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=6388671.9 ms 
 
— 10.0.3.1 ping statistics — 
9 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 55% packet loss 
round-trip min/avg/max = 3211900.8/5222806.6/6388671.9 ms 
vegard@gyversalen:~$ exit 
 
Script done on Sat Apr 28 14:14:28 2001 

A web page documenting the event, with pictures, is athttp://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/. In the finest Internet tradition, all software involved was open-source; the custom parts are available for download from the site.

While all acknowledged the magnitude of this achievement, some debate ensued over whether BLUG's implementation was properly conformant to the RFC. It seems they had not used the duct tape specified in 1149 to attach messages to pigeon legs, but instead employed other methods less objectionable to the pigeons. The debate was properly resolved when it was pointed out that the duct-tape specification was not prefixed by a MUST, and was thus a recommendation rather than a requirement.

The perpetrators finished their preliminary writeup in this wise: “Now, we're waiting for someone to write other implementations, so that we can do interoperability tests, and maybe we finally can get the RFC into the standards track... ”.

The logical next step should be an implementation of RFC2549.

Source: Catb , Google

Old school security guys like me, still find it offensive that the term hacking has become a negative term. Hacking computers comes from an old concept of people who are interested in something and do it all the time for the love of the game. A hacker in golf was a person who would play in any weather under any circumstances just because they love the game. 10+ years ago, a hacker was the only guy on the staff who could figure out all of the problems with all of the hardware and software on the network. A cracker was a person who cracked systems, or passwords or routers. These days, mostly because of movies and public reports, the term hacker has been entirely relegated to people who attack networks for nefarious ends.

hacker |ˈhakər|
noun
1 a person who uses computers to gain unauthorized access to data.
• informal an enthusiastic and skillful computer programmer or user.

Fundamentally they are synonymous. Those geeks that can tweak and handle very technical computer programs, can also easily abuse that power.

The original term hacker, refers to those people. A great detective can also be a terrific criminal mastermind.

The problem arises when there are hackers as in crackers that are not technically sophisticated, that use a bunch of tools to gain unauthorized access, and then we cross-reference those with hackers as in computer geeks that have no idea about computer security but can only solve rigorous digital problems.

That intersection is almost zero, but the original definition fully intersects.

In this context, a hack is short for life hack which is a supposedly easier or better way of doing everyday things.

This comes from the verb to hack which means to re-engineer household items- especially consumer electronics - to perform different tasks from those they were originally designed to do. This kind of hacking is often done by hobby electronics enthusiasts.

The term was formerly used to describe how hobby computer enthusiasts wrote computer code, but the term hacker was originally computer department slang for a computer programmer in the 1960’s and 1970’s.

The term hacker was also used in the 1980’s to describe computer enthusiasts who attempted to defeat computer security to gain unauthorised access t corporate or government computer systems - whether for bravado or otherwise. It is now used to refer to the criminals who gain illegal access to any kind of computer system, especially for fraud or extortion, or for other illegal purposes.

Coding is basically building. You build software, applications, websites, scripts.

Hacking, on the other hand is penetration testing. You test other's coded softwares, websites, apps to find loopholes.

Note: Coding involves a variety of fields where you can work. Application developement, Full stack developer, DevOps, Data analyst, and many more.

Like coding, Hacking also has its fields. Kali pen testing , SQL injections, Brute Force script attack, and the list goes on.

PS: Hacking is not as cool as you think. Its the most boring and toughest job. You can end up attacking for a week and getting nothing.

There is not much but countable difference between coding and hacking.

Coding means you are building something i.g website or some type of app.You don’t need to analyse someone’s code bcoz you just need to start coding everything from the beginning and you can write and code everything that you want.

And then,

Hacking means You need a keen observation,analysing skills,coding skills in various language because hacking is finding vulnerabilities in code’s that are written by someone,if you want to analyse code,first you must understand the language,in which language source code are written and then start searching vulnerabilities by experiments .

Conclusion is Coding is part of hacking,it is essential that you must know coding before start career in hacking,but you don’t need to be hardcore coder for hacking,You just need knowledge about programming languages like How they work,about syntax and how much capable they are.But if you can code you can become badass hacker,hacking is lifetime journey.

“ Good” as successful ??? Well it depends. Are we talking about cyber hack? A human hack? What or who is the target? in general, “ any repetition by the adversary is liability the target has to recognize & leverage”. Cyber model has been introduced by major security firms. In nutshell here is some of the steps conducting a successful cyber hack.

1. Reconecance: Resaerch, identification, and selection of target/s. For example: crawling internet websites looking for names, email addresses. Looking target’s into job sites gather information on technology they use.
2. Weaponization: In short, gathering a right tools for delivery and infiltration the target.
3. Delivery: It depends on tools you gathered and target’s defensive architecture. Sometimes you have to send small agents and sometimes you need a heavey artilary to hide your malicious code/ weapon in middle of hodgepodge of fake attacks.
4. Exploration: Trasmission of a wron into a target environment ( Check ). Let's assume you’ve done a good job delivering a right weapon exploiting targets major vulnerability. You have two options ( leave for time being or getting back to work almost immediately with installation of your malicious code).
5. Installation: You can start with Creating Backdoor, (well your malicious code should be intelligent enough taking care of the Backdoor from it by itself!!) You can also, install your malicious code in right place while you're moving around your target’s environment grabbing other credentials from the target.
6. Command & control (C2): Let's say you had no time and you wanted to proceed with installation right a way. Now it's time to see if you can conduct communication with your already compromised target. No matter how sophisticated your malicious code is, getting the code to send signals out ‘to you’ & only to you, you're malicious code still depends on many other factors, let's say, (targets vulnerability, malfunction, corruption, etc.) if not, go to drawing board (repeat step 1,2,3).
7. Hand on keyboard: You code is ready and waiting receiving commands from the master! target has been compromised with success, passing all security parameters, planting itself in right place, established hidden tunnel for deception and communication.