Among those "privileged" people are the ones who are actually capable of leading a revolution in North Korea, and will not be outspoken about it until they have a proper plan. I do not believe in imposing restrictions on them.
The reason we haven't bothered trying, I assume, is because we can very easily see what they _are_ doing if we don't block it, and if we do, they'll just go through China.
So you don't oppose internet access being blocked, you just want to be the one to control who's blocked? Or you are only in favor of blocking access to those who block others, so you're willing to sacrifice your access to block theirs?
This doesn’t make any sense. Are you saying they should block us? The point would be moot if they’re already blocked. Are you saying we should let their elites indulge in our media when their own citizens can’t? Because if so you’ve completely ignored my statement about the paradox of intolerance
I'm saying we shouldn't block people from the internet as punishment for blocking people from the internet, we are committing the crime we're punishing. I realize that there isn't an external power that could block US access like the US can do to North Korea, which is why my original post used "sacrifice."
If you use violence to stop someone from using violence, you either reduced the amount of violence done or kept it the same. There can be some ethical uses there. The concept can be spread to some other areas, but only ones in which the intolerance could hamper the intolerant, which I don't think is the case here.
It's typically known as the "paradox of tolerance" by the way, your mistaken version didn't ring any bells, and I assumed you thought the argument ended in a logical paradox.
The US cyber related sanctions do not seem to forbid educational resources from being accessed in North Korea, with a possible exception related to encryption.
>Those people are pawns though, not curious hackers
Anyone using the site for their government or private job would be then. Practicing for your employment does not mean you don't like your job.
This is an interesting workaround. The people I found were definitely overly part of a university which would explain the potential reason this might be a good technicality.
I didn't realize you had tracked the people registering on the service and successfully tied them to malicious acts. Is their nationality really important at that point?
Or are you just in favor of collective punishment against North Koreans, individual actions are irrelevant?
I'm speaking about nation states, not individuals, I am disappointed with the state of affairs there, and wish there was more we could do to stop the oppression.
I am not speaking in terms of a personal attack against oppressed North Koreans, and it's confusing that you appear to persist in turning this discussion into that.
I want hackers to learn more, I am not personally responsible for whether or not it is legal for a North Korean citizen to use a service offered by a US entity, and I do not have a strong opinion about whether it's OK to regulate that, it's not my speciality.
I was sharing an observation: people from North Korea are training their hacking skills using Hacker Rank. NK internet is strongly regulated, so those people must be using it for state sponsored purposes. Current trends for computing expertise in North Korea have been towards malicious acts by the government (not pointing fingers at individuals, I hope some of these NK hackers find a way to escape their oppression but I suspect they'll just be treated better than others so they'll continue to be oppressed next generation).
Please let me know what you think I'm saying that implies I am in favor of collective punishment against North Koreans based on my statements here so I can more accurately respond to your concern. I'd also love to hear why you have such a strong point of view on this subject, it may add color to help me understand your statements.
>I'm speaking about nation states, not individuals,
Your comments start with "I noticed a lot of people" and continues talking about the individuals.
>Please let me know what you think I'm saying that implies I am in favor of collective punishment against North Koreans based on my statements here
The part where you say a ban would be useless as they'd just circumvent it seems like saying a blanket ban is justified. Or where you wondered why Hacker Rank let them use their platform at all. I will say, I'm less sure that Hacker Rank wouldn't violate the economic restrictions now, visiting the site makes it look a lot more like job recruitment than I thought it was.
Beyond that, I'll paraphrase. For absolutely no reason, you assume that everyone using a computer in North Korea must be using it for hacking. Yet in the society you live in, can you name a single business that does not use some kind of software the tools at Hacker Rank helps improve?
They have plenty of use for the training outside of criminal hacking, and you saying it's a "workaround" for them to access educational resources ignores this.
>I'd also love to hear why you have such a strong point of view on this subject
I hate how people treat North Koreans as either mindless tools of the state or pitiable oppressed masses. None of your comments have acted like any of the people signing up are real humans expressing complex desires in their admittedly somewhat shitty situation. Imagine how you would feel to wake up suddenly blocked from the service because they decided they don't like where you're from.
>Your comments start with "I noticed a lot of people" and continues talking about the individuals.
Fair, but as I've now stated several times, that's not what I intend, so your continuing to read it that way is your choice.
>it seems like saying a blanket ban is justified.
How could an easily circumventable ban be what I am advocating for? That's absurd. I'm saying a ban would be pointless because if the goal is to keep them off the internet, it won't. In stating this I make no statement about the validity of an attempted ban in the first place. To be clear, I do not agree with banning people or countries from the Internet.
>Or where you wondered why Hacker Rank let them use their platform at all.
Yep! That's pretty much it. I know that Github, for example, has been made to limit access to Github where sanctioned. I thought that maybe such a thing would apply to other SaaS companies. I am not at all surprised they are on there, most startups aren't wrapped up in government level regulations. Github didn't seem to have a lot of trouble with this until Microsoft acquired them, as an example.
What surprised me maybe a little was that the profiles (I'm avoiding saying individual now) I found were very blatant so I doubt would have flown too far under the radar to anyone looking (government authorities) and would potentially have caused them to talk w/ Hacker Rank, given the nature of the site. Yes, it's basically a recruiting agency, but it's also a place to practice red team skills. This kind of information is available in MANY places, so I'm not even implicating Hacker Rank as being an accomplice in any way, just sincerely curious about how some North Korean hackers ended up on a US hacking site :)
>you assume that everyone using a computer in North Korea must be using it for hacking.
I mean, maybe? I'm not equipped to make that assertion. I think the profiles I saw were an indication that those profiles existed to practice hacking on behalf of the North Korean government. I don't think that's particularly controversial. I saved the names on the profiles I came across somewhere, and if they're reading this and feel wronged because that's not why they used Hacker Rank I'll buy them dinner if they reach out to me.
I do believe that computers and internet access are limited in North Korea, and that makes them a valuable commodity, one controlled by the North Korean government, and I expect them to use those resources in an economically viable way, so it is my intuition that running large scale red team trainings would be a great thing for them to be doing.
>They have plenty of use for the training outside of criminal hacking, and you saying it's a "workaround" for them to access educational resources ignores this.
I didn't know there was an educational exemption, and I very much appreciate your pointing it out to me. I used the word workaround because I still believe these profiles were created on behalf of work for the government of North Korea. This is a reasonable assumption, and you've provided no counter examples as to what kind of non-government run hacker culture exists in North Korea, if there is one, it must be fascinating and I'd love to learn more about it from you.
>They have plenty of use for the training outside of criminal hacking
Absolutely, these hackers are likely learning a defensive skill as well, and even if acting on behalf of the government of North Korea, I don't claim they don't deserve to develop these skills, never have.
>I hate how people treat North Koreans as either mindless tools of the state or pitiable oppressed masses. None of your comments have acted like any of the people signing up are real humans expressing complex desires in their admittedly somewhat shitty situation. Imagine how you would feel to wake up suddenly blocked from the service because they decided they don't like where you're from.
Thank you, this is much appreciated context. I apologize that the way I spoke diminished the individuals involved, that's clearly a theme here, but I think you should ask more questions before jumping into the many assumptions you've made, we could have had a lot more productive and interesting conversation if you stated your last paragraph in any of my other responses!
Thanks again for responding, and I'll keep this in my pocket when thinking and speaking of marginalized and oppressed people in the future.
I could nitpick some things, but by stating in no uncertain terms you don't agree with a blanket ban we mostly are in agreement. So just a bit confused now
>Yes, it's basically a recruiting agency, but it's also a place to practice red team skills
I've never used Hacker Rank, but the Wikipedia page does not make it seem like that's one of the focuses of the site. It says it "focuses on competitive programming challenges for both consumers and businesses, where developers compete by trying to program according to provided specifications." Which may explain much of our misunderstanding, I would not assume a member of the service was engaging in "hacking" at all.
I've somewhat wondered if there's a second Hacker Rank, but the first page of search results showed nothing.
> but I think you should ask more questions before jumping into the many assumptions you've made
Your first reply to me said "those people are pawns though, not curious hackers," I didn't think it was an assumption to think you actually thought that.
You are 100% right. I got Hacker Rank confused with Hacker One. Bone head move.
Looking back I may change a few things about what I said but better to just put it out there. I think using hacker rank to train algorithmic and programming skills is none the less (under my opinion that these skills are being developed for malicious purposes, which I think we agree could be defensive, or even just personal curiosity), and doesn’t change my surprise at finding the profiles, given my assumptions about the sanctions. Hopefully this somewhat closes the loop on our back and forth, and i appreciate, again, your willingness to talk this out :)
Edit to be clear: found profiles on hacker rank. Confused with hacker one because of age and time. Still curious about NK hackers training up algorithms, it’s fascinating. I owe you a big apology for the confusion. I also agree that it feels like we are in agreement on the important parts.
Hacker rank is an American company. US has sanctions against NK and they treat this very seriously. They could shut down hacker rank for not complying.
