Customer Reviews

Cyberpunk: Outlaws and Hackers on the Computer Frontier

5 star:		(14)
4 star:		(11)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

To me, what makes this book different from most other "hacker documentary" books is the detached style in which it's written. The authors are both journalists, and it shows: The book lacks the warmth of a normal story told from a normal storywriter. Instead, it's a cold, sterile collection of facts, like a 300-page newspaper article.

This is not necessarily a bad thing. It just means the writing is kind of dry. But that doesn't make it boring. Indeed, most of the book is quite fascinating. In fact, after a while I began to appreciate the objective air that this style lent to the book: Most authors of this kind of book either try to be sympathetic to the crackers, representing them as harmless kids who only try to explore, or an evil menace which must be destroyed for our own safety. Markoff and Hafner, however, write with the unbiased, unopinionated journalism that befits people of their background.

Of course, when writing a book, you don't need to express opinions to make the text biased; You just need to present only one side of the facts. However, I do not feel that this is the case with this book. The book does not try to represent one side as good and the other bad. It just tells you something about both. There's both good and bad there.

So what's with all the people who say that the book is "biased"? I'm really not sure. I notice, however, that all of the people who say that are pointing specifically to Kevin Mitnick's case, and recommending Littman's "The Fugitive Game" (which is more sympathetic to Mitnick and his case) as a "better" book. The only reason I can figure for this is that the FREE KEVIN people are upset because the book does not agree with their ideals that Kevin is innocent and should be praised for being a "hacker". Sounds to me like those reviewers, and not the authors, are the ones with the personal bias.

SCREW KEVIN. He overstepped the line and went too far when he should have known better. Yes, his case has been mismanaged, but... But, I digress. Anyway. This book is not the be-all, end-all for learning about the hack/phreak culture (it's only three case studies, after all), but it's a good place to start if you've never familiarized yourself with that culture before. And even if you have, you'll probably find some tidbits here you didn't know. Score one for investigative journalism.

This book is misleading about the events that lead to the arrest of Kevin Mitnick. If you would like to know the truth read "The Fugitive Game"

Although Markoff is an exceptional writer and the book is both easy to read and entertaining, the content is presented as factual when the truth is that these guys definitely wrote the book with only part of the whole story at their disposal. One of the main "cyberpunks" depicted in the book is Kevin Mitnick, who claims that he has never even met John Markoff. How can the book fairly and accurately speak to the topic of hacking during the early days of the Internet revolution when they never did any investigations with real "hackers"? The story is told only from a law enforcement point-of-view. I am sure that the Rodney King story is told differently by King than the LAPD. Same goes for this case.

Like many works today that seem to be written for financial reasons, it seems very one-sided and sensational.

I read this book last summer and enjoyed it immensely. It's very well-written.

However, having just finished Jonathan Littman's "The Fugitive Game" I have to recommend reading both books to get the full story. Markoff's conflicts-of-interest and questionable journalistic practices aren't apparent from reading just "Cyberpunk." What appears to be a non-fiction account is, in reality, more complicated than that.... You really owe it to yourself to read both sides of the story.

So read this book and enjoy it for what it is -- and then read Littman for another perspective.

First off, John Markoff does NOT tell an unbiased story, especially regarding the Mitnick case. Kevin Mitnick, preferring to keep a low profile, has not promoted his own story, and as a result he has had his name slandered by mediawhores like Markoff. Markoff traveled extensively with Tsutomu Shimomura, the security expert who eventually (and with much government aid) apprehended Mitnick. It is quite clear whose side he is on as he repeatedly demonizes Mitnick as a fat, malicious, juvenile person with no self-control and no respect for anyone else. This typecasting is quite understandable though, once you know that Markoff has a share in the Miramax movie Takedown that details Mitnick's capture. Nobody wants to see such unfair treatment happen to a real, sympathetic person. (Takedown, incidentally, is more slanderous than Cyberpunk and from which the real Kevin Mitnick, whom it is based on, is not getting a dime).

But apart from my distaste for Markoff, this book still failed to be a interesting read. I enjoy reading about the early history of hacking, etc, so I bought it with high hopes. The only reason I didn't put it down was because it was my only reading material on a six hour bus trip. The Internet revolution was fascinating and the people involved in it were interesting, dynamic people. But to hear Markoff tell it, everyone was petty, whining, insecure, and one-dimensional, with no other motivation than to cause trouble for others. He hasn't got a gift for writing novels with well-rounded and interesting characters that the reader can actually sympathize with and care about.

This is the type of book that you will want to read and read again...it is a real page turner and it tells 3 stories of famous hacker cases...I really enjoyed this book...I recommend this to anyone that enjoys computers and the adventures that go with them...

After reading so many badly researched, badly written, self-effacing and / or bloated books on the subject of hacking and computer security, at long last here is a book that is well researched and written. It's a real page turner, and IMHO it is absolutely THE book to read on this subject.

Ironically co-author John Markoff has also co-written the absolutely WORST book on the subject, Takedown, with Tetsuo Simomura.

If your looking for evil hackers mis-leading information and untrue stories. Then by all means read this book. But if your looking for a better account of Kevin Mitnick the most botched story in this book try The Fugitive Game by Littman it's much more acurate.

Three case studies are provided, including one dealing with Robert Morris, son of a distinguished NSA scientist and the person who brought America to a standstill with an epidemic electronic virus. By two distinguished journalists who knew little about hackers but could recognize a great story when they saw one, this is one of the more important early books that erroneously labeled hackers as criminals and electronic criminals as hackers.

Cyberpunk is a unique exploration of three distinct digital security stories. Authors Katie Hafner and John Markoff describe the histories of Kevin Mitnick and friends, Hans Heinrich Hübner and the Hannover hackers, and Robert T Morris and family. This approach is interesting because all three tales are told independently, yet key events occur within a few years of each other and some overlap. The authors write in the third person, with the exception of the epilogue which revisits certain individuals in the Mitnick story.

I really enjoyed Cyberpunk because it examined three very unique sets of characters. Kevin Mitnick's story centers on obsession, manipulation, a quest for knowledge, and betrayal at various levels. Hans Hübner's story involves espionage, but told from the perspective of the spies rather than the defenders. Robert Morris' story describes the ultimate hack gone bad, incorporating elements familiar to most security pros of the current decade. Readers could find elements of all three personalities in the modern world, although criminal and state-sponsored activity is by far the most prevalent.

I'd like to conclude by citing some of my favorite excerpts. First, when describing Digital's Palo Alto security, the authors write:

"[I]n recognition of the open-mindedness back at corporate headquarters, the computer scientists in Palo Alto took great care to operate their precious gateway responsibly. To give the best possible oversight both for maintenance and security, *Ph.D's in computer science* took turns poring over daily log files... So it was *only a matter of hours* after the intrusions into the Palo Alto computers began that the gateway watchers there noticed something amiss." (emphasis added) p 118

Second, when expressing frustration with Digital's inability to counter the intruders, the authors quote "one irate Digital employee":

"We seem to be totally defenseless against these people. We have repeatedly rebuilt system after system and finally *management has told the system support group to ignore the problem...* I want to make sure someone at network security knows that we are being ***** (censored) in broad daylight. These people freely walk into our systems and are taking restricted, confidential, and proprietary information." (emphasis added) p 120

Third, nothing changes:

"Digital might be reluctant to press charges... [F]ew of the computer crimes detected were ever reported to the police and still fewer were made public through criminal charges... [C]ompanies worried about having their vulnerabilities publicized." p 125

Though nearly 20 years old, Cyberpunk still shares many traits with the modern digital security world.