, SecurityFocus 2003-04-15
SAN FRANCISCO--Should corporations hire known hackers with criminal records to test and secure their networks?
Expand all |
Post comment
Debate: Should You Hire a Hacker?
2003-04-16
Anonymous (4 replies)
Anonymous (4 replies)
Debate: Should You Hire a Hacker?
2003-04-17
Dmitriy Kropivnitskiy <dmitriy.kropivnitskiy (at) citigroup (dot) com [email concealed]>
Dmitriy Kropivnitskiy <dmitriy.kropivnitskiy (at) citigroup (dot) com [email concealed]>
Debate: Should You Hire a Hacker?
2003-04-17
dmk (at) rarescience (dot) com [email concealed] (1 replies)
dmk (at) rarescience (dot) com [email concealed] (1 replies)

This is a great subject to debate. In my opinion, I don't care if the hacker is convicted or not, as long as he/she is truely an expert. Sometimes in the security industry we "test the limits". Sometimes in the quest for information hackers cross the line. My point is, most supposed whitehats put on their blackhat when they arrive home. So my intention when outsourcing security is to hire the most qualified. Here's an example scenario. I have the option to hire two hackers with the same level of skills. However, one hacker has been arrested and the other has not. My choice would be to hire the hacker who has not been arrested. If I had the opportunity to hire someone with skill no other person could match, such as the S.E. abilities of Kevin Mitnick, then it really wouldn't matter to me that he's been convicted because his style is the best.
[ reply ]
Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/articles/3982/19354#19354