Legit breakins

[Alexires]

First of all, a little background information.

I was reading through the files on my computer the other day (so many of them, I need to read constantly otherwise I forget what is there) and found a transcript of a person who was talking about security flaws in most corporate computer networks.

Corporations hire this man to hack into their systems (if he can), steal their corporate data, return it to them (as proof) and tell them how they can improve their security.

From there, it wasn't too far an intellectual jump to doing it in real life.


Imagine if you will, a company that is hired by banks/corporations/stupid rich persons to break into their bank/corporate headquarters/home of stupid rich person and steal a token object. This object was then returned to the "mark" with a detailed transcript of the operation and how security could be improved.

I'm not aware of any security place actually doing this, but please say if someone has already thought about this idea.

Also, I was reading a newspaper article about how rich people in the USA are hiring a group to "kidnap" them for the thrill of it. Ranging from a simple snatch and over night stay to weeks on end of terror and abuse. Sounds like the BDSM of the financially free.

An interesting concept, yes?

[tmp]

NSA, uses these "tiger teams" to check the basic security of computers in use at
defense contractor facilities. I saw them in operation at the defense contractor
I used to work for. In addition, whenever I wrote a program for the DoD, it had
to be idiot proof. The procedure was to take some Marines fresh out of boot
camp(our work was prinicpally for the U.S. Navy), load up the program, and the
Marines would sit at the terminal and just start pressing keys. If anything went
wrong, such as the program crashing, I was required to correct it. If Bill Gates
and his people at Microsoft had to put up with the same shit, Windows might be
a better product.

[Slinger]

Alexires,
Several months ago, I watched the first episode of a program called "To Catch A Thief", on the Discovery or The Learning channel. On this show, they did exactly what you are talking about.

The team set up hidden cameras throughout this rich family's house, and while one guy sat with the family, watching, another guy broke into the house and commenced to tear it apart, stealing shit.

Of course, nothing was actually stolen, the exercise was to show the family how worthless their security was, and how real thieves operate, and blah, blah.

I, too, however, saw it as a good idea for actual larceny, but my first idea was with a bullshit camera crew and a van to sit in and watch, etc.

I soon thought that might be a little farfetched, especially around my neck of the woods. Still, advertised as a security demonstration, the idea has merit in my opinion.

I'm not certain if the show is still on, as I don't have TV anymore.

[Chris The Great]

Also, I was reading a newspaper article about how rich people in the USA are hiring a group to "kidnap" them for the thrill of it. Ranging from a simple snatch and over night stay to weeks on end of terror and abuse. Sounds like the BDSM of the financially free.

Well, seems you found me a career to my liking! Heh heh heh.

Very interesting, I had heard about the hacking thing before but not this kidnapping thing.

[megalomania]

If memory serves the movie “Sneakers” was about a group of techno nerds that ran a company that would break into the clients site to test their security. It starred Dan Aykroyd and Ben Kingsly I believe. I wanted to get into that business when I saw the movie.

As for anyone doing this sort of thing for real, well I doubt they advertise in the yellow pages. Perhaps the corporate version, the Thomas Register.

I have heard about the kidnapping craze. Are drugs not good enough anymore?

[nbk2000]

This is what 'Red Cell' did for the military back in the 80's-90's.

SEAL teams would break into military bases, kidnap officers, plant bombs, etc.

The higher-ups stopped them from doing this anymore, as it was embarrassing them. Never good to get shown up. :o

I believe the current term is "Penetration Testing", when applied to the sort of thing depicted in the Sneakers movie, which had Robert Redford as the main character, and Ben Kingsly as the protagonist.

Kevin Mitnick wrote about this in a book of his (forgot which one), and the same thing that happened with the Red Cell testing happens in the corporate world.

You get hired to test corporate security, walk-in and rob the place blind, so corporate management tries suing you for breach of contract. :rolleyes:

I can just imagine the potential liability for a 'kidnapper'. What if you grab the wrong person? Or the person is some kind of nutter who gets too deep into it and fights back? Cops see you 'snatch' the customer and blow you away?

Naw...TOO risky.

[megalomania]

I believe I only about the kidnapping for fun because something went wrong (well duh! It was inevitable). The correct term I suppose is "Extreme Kidnapping" of which there are two companies I could find.
A news story about the original: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,768885,00.html
Some rappers knock off: http://www.extremekidnapping.com/

Brock's website is supposed to be http://www.semagoediv.com/ but I could not get it to work right since it is all flash crap. Das ist verboten!

It is interesting to note in this article, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2163666.stm that by having a few video cameras around no one tries to stop the faux kidnappings. An interesting psychological observation if I may say so. By extending that logic, has the reality TV craze essentially desensitized us to any activity, no matter how obscene or violent, that the mere presence of TV cameras legitimizes it? Can you rob a store, pull a heist, even commit a murder in broad daylight with the sheeple milling around and not have them call the cops simply because they think this must be a TV stunt?

[nbk2000]

Since Western culture is programmed to believe that anything that happens in front of a camera is entertainment, and that entertainment is violent, it'd then follow that even the most violent actions, as long as they take place in front of visible and 'obviously professional' cameramen, will be considered to be for entertainment purposes. :p

Scenario1:
Running out of a bank.

Bystanders:
Robbery! Call the cops! :eek:

Scenario2:
Running out of a bank with a cameraman following you out.

Bystanders:
What show are they filming for? Will I be in the background? Hi mom! :)

[LostGunner]

I watched "It takes a Thief" a number of times and though amusing it was essentially the same thing over and over. The idea, though, was a good one.
USE
What was most interesting to me was an episode in which Jon Rainey actually got stopped by the cops as he was pulling out of the driveway. They blocked his van from exiting (after his accomplices got away) and proceeded to put him up against the car as he tried to explain that he was with a tv show, etc.
PARAGRAPH
There was much confusion on the part of the cops but to their [most hated] credit they continued to treat him like he was guilty. The residents and the other host hopped out of the van in front of the house and the camera cut away.
BREAKS
Presumably everything worked out, and it probably did, but it was interesting to see the confusion and the possibility for social engineering your way out of it given some tact and a little credibility.