All right! New media allowed a bunch of criminals to humiliate a woman trying to expose their crimes. A banner day for citizen journalism, I say.

(I wonder how long before some sweaty kid in his Mom's basement buys a porn site membership with Madigan's credit card number.)

Hear hear, Clint.

I just love how Madigan (and Dateline) is portrayed as the bad guy here, and the "mole" at NBC as a modern day Paul Revere, saving the hacker rebels from the totalitarian news media before they march from Boston and seize the weapon stores at Concord...

definitely the hive mind at work.

When I first read this post this morning, I wondered how long it would be before someone who is clueless about what Def Con is would make a comment calling the conference attendees "criminals", and defending the reporter. And, whaddya know? First comment was just that!

Sure, some of the people at Def Con are people who use their skills to do bad things, but the same could be said of any gathering of people. Clint, in his comment, shows a clear misunderstanding of just what Def Con is, and who attends.

From Wikipedia:

"Many of the attendees at DEFCON include computer security professionals, journalists, lawyers, federal government employees, crackers, and hackers with a general interest in computer code and computer architecture." *1

Not everyone at Def Con is a criminal, and it is not a conference for criminals.

She was offered a press pass on numerous occasions. She refused, obviously because she wanted to go undercover. If she would have accepted a press pass, she would have had to follow their rules, which included agreeing to get people's permission before photographing them. I'm not sure of all the reasons why they would have that rule (I suspect that isn't a rule at all conventions--for example you can probably take as many pics as you want at a doctors convention), but one good reason for that rule is that undercover federal agents attend Def Con, and they don't need to be outed. Considering that a lot of people share Clint's lack of knowledge (and prejudices) about Def Con (and hackers in general), I wouldn't blame even the non-undercover people for not wanting their photo taken at Def Con.

People hear that Def Con is a "hacker convention", and they automatically think "criminal convention". "Hacker" is not synonymous with "criminal".
 
Again, according to Wikipedia:

"Computer programmers often use the words hacking and hacker to express admiration for the work of a skilled software developer. They frown upon using hacking as a synonym for security cracking -- in distinct contrast to the larger world, in which the word hacker is typically used to describe someone who "hacks into" a system by evading or disabling security measures." *2

Sources:

*1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEF_CON

*2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_definition_controversy

I have to say that I am more disturbed than engaged by this. I feel that this could and should have been handled discreetly between the convention organizers and the reporter.  By publically outing her, they set up a situation where she was followed to her car by a "mob" of upset mostly males.

Fortunately, nothing happened, but I wonder how different everyone's coverage would be and who would be painted the villain if one of the convention goers took it upon themselves to get physical with her.

We know that nothing happened to her, but that walk must have been rather scary. I don't think anyone should take pleasure in that.

Had I been that reporter, I probably would have been rather frightened by a mob of mostly men following me to my car.  However, had I also been that reporter, I probably would not have reacted that way.  She still could have saved the story if she'd simply tried to talk to the guys once she was escorted out.  It probably wouldn't have been the story she'd planned to write, but she could have had a great feature piece if she'd had her wits about her.  Seriously, though, that mob should be glad she didn't have some pepper spray or something...

I read she was offered journalist credentials, but chose to pose as an attendee.  The conference attendees spend large portions of their time anonymously blending into places they don't belong.  It is obvious she was out of her league.

For those naive enough to think all hackers are sweaty kids living in a basement - get a life and read a few tech articles.  This is the real world, not a hollywood movie.

I say good on these guys, they exposed a fraud and a liar.  Most work in the computer and security areas and are probably some of the most upstanding citizens in the country, they have to be, they are always being watched and scrutinized.  They also have a reasonable right to the expectation of privacy, the con's rules clearly state that, and any journalist not acting in condition with those rules and lying and saying they are a programmer while secretly and illegally taping and recording others should be exposed, and they should be humiliated, especially when given at least 4 chances to come clean.

"This is for all those helpless predators."  Wow! Someone that sympathizes with child molestors - now *that's* somebody I want to hang out with!

(The classic nerd laughter in the background throughout is priceless, though)

"get a life and read a few tech articles"

One of the most unintentionally ironic statements I've heard in years.

Wow. We have a convention full of code-kiddies and hackers, many of whom are engaged in illegal activity, getting all indignant over an undercover producer trying to infiltrate their convention. (Which, while dishonest, is not, so far as I know, illegal.)

On top of that, they all act like children.

This is not an something the code-kiddies should be proud of.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):