Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Hacker group

A hacker group is an organized or informal collective of individuals with advanced computing skills who collaborate to identify and exploit vulnerabilities in digital systems, networks, and software, pursuing objectives that span ethical security testing, ideological hacktivism, cybercrime for profit, or state-directed operations.^[1]^[2] These groups distinguish themselves from individual hackers through coordinated efforts, often featuring division of labor where members specialize in areas such as reconnaissance, exploitation, or malware development.^[2]^[3] Hacker groups emerged prominently in the late 20th century alongside the proliferation of personal computers and early internet connectivity, evolving from loose online communities into more structured entities capable of executing complex, large-scale operations.^[4] Key characteristics include the employment of sophisticated techniques like zero-day exploits, adaptive malware, and phishing campaigns to evade detection and achieve persistence.^[3] While some groups, such as those focused on hacktivism, publicly justify actions as challenges to authority or corporate overreach, many engage in destructive activities including data theft, ransomware deployment, and infrastructure sabotage, resulting in significant economic and operational disruptions.^[5]^[6] Controversies surrounding hacker groups often center on the blurred lines between purported activism and criminality, with operations frequently leading to legal prosecutions, international sanctions, and heightened cybersecurity measures by targeted entities.^[6]^[7]

Definition and Classification

Core Definition

A hacker group consists of two or more individuals who collaborate to exploit vulnerabilities in computer systems, networks, or software for various purposes, including unauthorized data access, disruption of services, or extraction of sensitive information. These collectives leverage shared expertise, tools, and communication channels to conduct operations that individual actors might lack the resources or coordination to execute effectively. Hacker groups can range from informal alliances formed online to structured entities with defined roles, such as reconnaissance specialists, exploit developers, and operators.^[8]^[3] The motivations driving hacker groups differ widely, encompassing financial gain through ransomware or data theft, political activism via defacements and leaks, and state-sponsored espionage targeting critical infrastructure. While the term "hacker" historically referred to innovative programmers pushing technological boundaries, in modern cybersecurity discourse, it primarily signifies malicious intent, with groups often classified by their objectives—such as black-hat for profit-driven crime or hacktivist for ideological causes. Empirical evidence from cybersecurity reports indicates that coordinated group efforts amplify impact, as seen in prolonged campaigns involving advanced persistent threats.^[9]^[1]^[6] Distinguishing hacker groups from lone actors highlights their reliance on internal trust mechanisms, like encrypted communications and compartmentalized knowledge, to maintain operational security amid law enforcement scrutiny. Credible analyses from cybersecurity firms note that such groups frequently evolve tactics in response to defenses, incorporating zero-day exploits and custom malware to evade detection. This collaborative model underscores causal factors in cyber threats, where group dynamics enable scalability and resilience beyond solitary efforts.^[3]^[5]

Types of Hacker Groups

Hacker groups are classified primarily by their motivations, operational structures, and objectives, which determine their tactics, persistence, and targets. Common categories include financially motivated criminal syndicates, ideologically driven hacktivists, state-sponsored advanced persistent threats (APTs), and collaborative ethical hacking collectives. This classification stems from cybersecurity threat intelligence frameworks that analyze actor behaviors, such as those tracked by organizations monitoring global cyber incidents.^[10]^[7] Financial motivations dominate among non-state actors, with criminal groups responsible for over 70% of detected malware campaigns in some analyses, often structured like businesses with divisions for reconnaissance, exploitation, and monetization.^[11]^[12] Criminal hacker groups, also termed black-hat or cybercrime syndicates, prioritize profit through ransomware, phishing kits, and stolen data markets. These entities, such as ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) operators, exhibit high operational maturity, with affiliates handling attacks while core developers maintain infrastructure; for instance, groups like those behind Conti or LockBit have extorted hundreds of millions in cryptocurrency by 2023. They target vulnerabilities in unpatched systems across industries, leveraging dark web forums for recruitment and tool distribution, and adapt quickly to law enforcement disruptions by rebranding or fragmenting.^[10]^[13]^[12] Hacktivist collectives operate on ideological or political agendas, conducting disruptive actions like DDoS floods or data dumps to influence public opinion or protest policies. Unlike profit-driven actors, their campaigns are often short-lived and publicity-focused, drawing loosely affiliated individuals via online manifestos; notable patterns include spikes during geopolitical events, with tools like low-orbit ion cannon (LOIC) enabling mass participation. Motivations range from anti-corporate stances to support for specific causes, though effectiveness is debated due to limited strategic impact beyond temporary outages.^[10]^[11]^[14] State-sponsored groups, frequently labeled APTs, pursue espionage, sabotage, or economic disruption on behalf of governments, employing sophisticated, long-term intrusions with custom malware and supply-chain compromises. Attributed to nations like Russia, China, or North Korea, these actors prioritize stealth over speed, maintaining access for years to exfiltrate sensitive data; for example, operations linked to Iranian or Russian entities have targeted critical infrastructure since the mid-2000s, escalating in scale amid hybrid warfare doctrines. Resource backing from state intelligence enables evasion of commercial defenses, contrasting with opportunistic criminals.^[13]^[14]^[15] Ethical or white-hat hacker groups form around defensive or research goals, pooling expertise for vulnerability disclosure, bug bounties, or simulated red-team exercises without intent to harm. These include open-source security communities and conference-affiliated teams that collaborate on tools like Metasploit, contributing to industry hardening; unlike malicious counterparts, their activities are sanctioned or disclosed responsibly, with platforms like HackerOne facilitating payouts exceeding $100 million annually by 2024 for reported flaws. Such groups emphasize transparency and legal compliance, aiding organizations in preempting threats.^[1]^[16]^[17]

Historical Development

Origins in the 1970s and 1980s

The origins of organized hacker groups trace back to the phone phreaking subculture of the early 1970s, where enthusiasts exploited analog telephone signaling tones to make free long-distance calls and probe network infrastructure. Pioneers like John Draper, known as Captain Crunch, discovered in 1971 that a toy whistle from Cap'n Crunch cereal emitted a 2600 Hz tone matching AT&T's long-distance signaling frequency, enabling unauthorized access.^[18] These individuals formed loose networks, disseminating techniques through newsletters such as TAP (Technological Assistance Program), established in 1971 by Cheapy Cheapy and others, which served as an early forum for sharing exploits and evading detection.^[19] Phone phreaking laid causal groundwork for computer hacking by fostering skills in signal manipulation and social engineering, transitioning as modems connected telephones to early digital systems like ARPANET in the mid-1970s.^[20] By the early 1980s, the advent of affordable personal computers like the IBM PC (1981) and Apple II enabled the formation of the first explicit hacker groups, shifting focus from telephony to digital intrusions via bulletin board systems (BBS) and nascent networks. The Chaos Computer Club (CCC), founded on October 12, 1981, in Hamburg, Germany, by Wau Holland and Friedrich W. H. K. (FWH), emerged as Europe's oldest hacker collective, emphasizing information freedom and privacy advocacy over malice.^[21] In 1983, CCC members demonstrated vulnerabilities by hacking into the German Bundespost's BTX videotex system, withdrawing 134,000 Deutsche Marks before notifying authorities, an act intended to expose security flaws rather than profit.^[22] In the United States, adolescent hackers coalesced into informal groups exploiting unsecured university and corporate mainframes. The 414s, named after Milwaukee's area code, comprised six teenagers who in 1983 accessed over 60 systems, including those at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, and ARPANET nodes, using simple guessing of default passwords and weak authentication.^[23] Their intrusions, detected after triggering alarms at Sloan-Kettering, prompted the first major federal hacking prosecutions under the Counterfeit Access Device and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, highlighting the era's lax cybersecurity amid rapid computing proliferation.^[24] Concurrently, the Legion of Doom (LOD) formed around 1984 in New York, drawing inspiration from comic book villains; members like Phiber Optik shared phreaking-derived techniques via BBS, influencing underground culture but also escalating inter-group rivalries, such as with the Masters of Deception.^[21] These early collectives prioritized knowledge exchange and boundary-pushing over organized crime, driven by curiosity in an unregulated digital frontier, though their actions catalyzed initial legal responses to hacking.^[22]

Expansion in the 1990s

The proliferation of hacker groups in the 1990s was driven by the rapid commercialization and expansion of the internet, which provided broader access to networks and computing resources previously limited to bulletin board systems (BBS). By 1990, the number of computer hackers surged as personal computers became more affordable and the internet transitioned from academic and military use to public infrastructure, enabling collaborative intrusions and information sharing among dispersed individuals.^[25]^[26] Prominent U.S.-based groups like the Legion of Doom (LOD), active since the 1980s but peaking in influence through the mid-1990s, exemplified this growth through their focus on breaching telephone systems and corporate networks. LOD's rivalry with the New York-based Masters of Deception (MOD), escalating into the "Great Hacker War" around 1990–1992, involved mutual disruptions such as denial-of-service attacks on each other's communication channels and theft of proprietary data, highlighting the competitive dynamics and technical escalation within these collectives. This conflict, which spilled into civilian infrastructure and prompted informant cooperation with authorities, underscored the shift toward more organized, adversarial group behaviors as membership grew and tools like early malware proliferated.^[27]^[28] In response to such activities, U.S. authorities launched Operation Sundevil in May 1990, a nationwide Secret Service-led initiative targeting hacker groups including LOD affiliates, resulting in over 40 arrests and seizures of equipment across multiple states. The operation focused on alleged credit card fraud and unauthorized access but was criticized for overreach, as some targeted individuals were hobbyist phreakers rather than organized criminals, reflecting heightened law enforcement scrutiny amid the groups' expansion.^[29]^[30] Emerging collectives like L0pht Heavy Industries, rooted in Boston's early-1990s hackerspace scene, marked a pivot toward semi-professionalized groups blending intrusion research with vulnerability disclosure. Formed from informal gatherings of phreakers and coders, L0pht gained prominence by 1998 through congressional testimony on internet security risks, demonstrating how hacker groups evolved into influential entities advocating for defensive measures while exposing systemic weaknesses in commercial software.^[31]^[32] Internationally, Russian-led groups conducted high-profile financial hacks, such as Vladimir Levin's 1994 theft of $10 million from Citibank via wire transfers, signaling the transnational scale of organized hacking enabled by global network interconnectivity.^[25]

Rise of Hacktivism and Cybercrime in the 2000s

The 2000s marked a pivotal expansion in hacktivism, as improved broadband access and online anonymity enabled loose-knit hacker collectives to execute ideologically driven disruptions on a broader scale. Anonymous, coalescing from 4chan forums in the early 2000s, exemplified this shift with coordinated operations blending digital activism and cyber intrusions. Its 2008 Project Chanology campaign targeted the Church of Scientology, deploying distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, website defacements, and leaked documents to challenge alleged suppression of online criticism, drawing thousands of participants and amplifying hacktivist visibility.^[33] Parallel to hacktivism's ideological surge, cybercrime professionalized into profit-oriented syndicates exploiting e-commerce growth and unpatched vulnerabilities. Underground forums like ShadowCrew, active from 2002 until dismantled in 2004, functioned as hubs for approximately 4,000 members to trade stolen credit card data, hacking tutorials, and identity theft kits, fostering a marketplace for financial fraud that prompted U.S. indictments of 19 operators under Operation Firewall.^[34] This structure reflected organized crime's infiltration of cyberspace, prioritizing monetary gain over mere disruption. Key incidents illustrated escalating threats: In February 2000, Canadian teenager Michael Calce (MafiaBoy) orchestrated DDoS assaults that temporarily paralyzed major sites including Yahoo, eBay, and CNN, inflicting roughly $1.7 billion in global economic losses and exposing infrastructure fragility.^[35] The August 2003 Blaster worm self-propagated across Windows systems via a remote procedure call flaw, infecting hundreds of thousands of machines and causing widespread network outages.^[35] By 2008, the Heartland Payment Systems breach compromised 100 million debit and credit card records through SQL injection, yielding $200 million in damages and underscoring payment networks' risks to organized data theft.^[35] This decade's trends—fueled by malware like the 2007 Zeus trojan, which enabled banking trojan infections on millions of computers—signaled a transition to sustained, economically motivated campaigns backed by criminal enterprises, eroding detection efficacy as zero-day exploits proliferated with only 20-30% capture rates by 2007.^[36]

Contemporary Era from 2010 Onward

The period from 2010 onward witnessed a shift in hacker group dynamics, marked by the dominance of state-sponsored advanced persistent threats (APTs) conducting sustained espionage and sabotage, alongside the rise of organized cybercrime syndicates employing ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) models for profit maximization. These developments were driven by geopolitical tensions, the monetization of cyber tools via dark web marketplaces, and improved attribution capabilities by cybersecurity firms, revealing operations previously obscured. Hacktivist groups, while active, saw reduced cohesion and impact relative to earlier decades, often splintering into ad hoc alliances amid law enforcement crackdowns.^[37]^[38] State-sponsored APTs proliferated, with Russia's GRU-linked APT28 (also known as Fancy Bear) executing the 2016 intrusion into the Democratic National Committee's servers, exfiltrating over 20,000 emails later leaked via WikiLeaks, as detailed in U.S. intelligence assessments. APT29 (Cozy Bear), tied to Russia's SVR, concurrently targeted U.S. government networks, including a 2020 SolarWinds supply chain compromise affecting 18,000 organizations by inserting malware into software updates. North Korea's Lazarus Group, operational since at least 2009 but peaking post-2010, orchestrated the November 2014 Sony Pictures Entertainment breach, stealing 100 terabytes of data including unreleased films and executive emails in retaliation for a satirical movie, and deployed the May 2017 WannaCry ransomware, infecting 200,000+ computers across 150 countries and causing an estimated $4 billion in damages. China's APT41 conducted dual espionage and financial cybercrimes, blending state directives with profit motives, as evidenced by FBI indictments in 2020 for hacking 45 entities including video game firms for virtual currency theft. These groups leveraged zero-day exploits, spear-phishing, and custom malware, often evading detection for months through living-off-the-land techniques.^[38]^[8] Cybercrime groups professionalized via RaaS, where affiliates lease malware for a cut of ransoms, enabling scalable attacks without in-house development. The REvil group, active from 2019 to 2021, demanded $70 million in Bitcoin from JBS Foods in 2021 after encrypting operations across 13 facilities, though the company paid $11 million; REvil was disrupted by U.S.-led operations in June 2021. DarkSide, emerging in 2020, halted operations after the May 2021 Colonial Pipeline ransomware incident, which disrupted U.S. East Coast fuel supplies for days and prompted a $4.4 million payment later partially recovered by the FBI. Conti, peaking in 2021-2022, claimed attacks on over 1,000 victims including Ireland's health service, extorting tens of millions before internal leaks and Ukrainian cyber defenses fragmented it in 2022. LockBit, founded around 2019, became the most prolific by 2023, targeting entities like Boeing and TSMC, with operations spanning 2,000+ claimed victims until a 2024 international takedown seized infrastructure and arrested key members, though remnants persisted. These syndicates operated as franchises with tiered revenue shares (e.g., 80/20 splits), using double extortion—encrypting data and threatening leaks—yielding global ransomware payments exceeding $1 billion annually by 2023.^[37]^[39] Hacktivist efforts persisted but fragmented, with Anonymous conducting decentralized operations like the 2011-2012 anti-Scientology campaigns and 2015-2016 hacks against ISIS websites, doxxing 10,000+ Twitter accounts linked to the group. LulzSec, a short-lived offshoot active in 2011, breached PBS, Sony, and the FBI, leaking data for "lulz" before disbanding amid arrests. The Syrian Electronic Army, aligned with the Assad regime since 2011, targeted Western media outlets like the BBC and Guardian in 2013, redirecting domains to propaganda. Groups like the pro-Ukrainian IT Army, formed in 2022 amid Russia's invasion, conducted DDoS attacks on Russian banks and state sites, claiming disruption of services for millions. Overall, hacktivism declined in scale due to improved defenses and legal repercussions, shifting toward symbolic disruptions rather than systemic breaches.^[21]^[40]

Notable Examples

Criminal and Black-Hat Groups

Criminal and black-hat hacker groups focus on cybercrime motivated by financial profit, utilizing malware, phishing, and exploitation of vulnerabilities to steal data, deploy ransomware, and perpetrate fraud, often operating through decentralized networks or ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) models that distribute risks and rewards among affiliates.^[41] These entities differ from state actors or ideologically driven hacktivists by prioritizing monetary extortion over geopolitical or political objectives, with operations frequently based in jurisdictions with lax enforcement, such as Russia or Eastern Europe.^[42] REvil, also known as Sodinokibi, formed around 2019 and gained notoriety for sophisticated ransomware attacks, including the June 2021 Kaseya supply chain breach that impacted over 1,500 organizations across 17 countries by exploiting a vulnerability in Kaseya's VSA software, leading to widespread encryption and a $70 million ransom demand from Apple.^[43] The group employed double extortion tactics, encrypting victim systems while threatening to leak stolen data on public forums, and was responsible for attacks on entities like JBS Foods, which paid $11 million in June 2021.^[44] U.S. and international law enforcement disrupted REvil's operations in July 2021 through arrests in Romania and seizures of cryptocurrency, though remnants persisted.^[42] Conti, active primarily from 2020 to 2022, operated as a RaaS syndicate that targeted healthcare, government, and critical infrastructure, using custom Trident ransomware and exfiltrating terabytes of data before encryption to enforce double extortion.^[45] The group claimed over 1,000 victims and extorted hundreds of millions in ransoms, with notable incidents including the May 2021 attack on Ireland's Health Service Executive, disrupting hospital systems for weeks.^[44] Internal leaks in 2022 revealed Conti's Russian ties and opposition to the Ukraine invasion, leading to its dissolution, though successors like Black Basta adopted similar tactics.^[46] LockBit, emerging in 2019, represents a persistent RaaS threat, with its modular ransomware infecting over 2,000 victims by mid-2023 through phishing and unpatched exploits, demanding average ransoms of $270,300 and leaking data from non-payers on dedicated sites.^[47] Affiliates handle deployment while LockBit provides tools and infrastructure, enabling scalability; despite U.S. Treasury sanctions in June 2021 and a February 2024 international operation seizing servers and arresting members, LockBitSupp announced a rebuilt version, LockBit 3.0, continuing attacks into 2025.^[41]^[48] DarkSide, which surfaced in 2020, executed the May 2021 Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack, encrypting systems and causing East Coast fuel shortages after the operator shut down operations, prompting a $4.4 million ransom payment recovered partially by the FBI.^[49] The group used similar RaaS methods to REvil and announced cessation in 2021 amid pressure, but analysis linked it to prior operations and influenced groups like BlackMatter.^[42] Carbanak, operating from 2013 to 2018, specialized in financial theft, infecting bank networks via phishing to deploy malware that allowed remote control of ATMs and SWIFT transfers, stealing up to $1 billion from over 100 institutions worldwide.^[8] Targeting employees at banks in Russia, the U.S., and Europe, the group laundered funds through mules and cryptocurrencies, with European law enforcement disrupting the core in 2018, though splinter activities continued.^[21]

Hacktivist Collectives

Hacktivist collectives consist of decentralized or loosely affiliated hackers who employ cyber intrusions, such as distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks and data leaks, to promote ideological, political, or social agendas rather than financial gain.^[50] These groups often operate anonymously and fluidly, with members joining or departing based on specific campaigns, distinguishing them from structured criminal syndicates.^[51] Anonymous represents the archetype of such collectives, originating from the 4chan imageboard community in the mid-2000s and coalescing into a hacktivist movement with its 2008 Project Chanology campaign, which involved DDoS attacks and protests against the Church of Scientology over perceived censorship.^[52] The group has since executed operations against targets including government agencies, corporations like PayPal for blocking WikiLeaks donations in 2010, and ISIS networks in 2015, leaking over 10,000 Twitter accounts linked to the terrorist organization.^[53] Its decentralized structure allows global participation but complicates attribution, with activities ranging from defacements to data dumps aimed at exposing corruption or advocating free speech.^[51] LulzSec, a short-lived offshoot of Anonymous active from May to June 2011, blended hacktivism with chaotic disruption, breaching systems at PBS, Sony, and an FBI affiliate to leak data and post mocking messages for "lulz" (amusement).^[54] The group claimed over 50 days of operations, including SQL injection attacks that exposed millions of user records, before disbanding amid arrests; leader Hector Monsegur ("Sabu") cooperated with authorities, leading to convictions of members like Jeremy Hammond.^[55] While ostensibly non-ideological, LulzSec's exposures highlighted corporate vulnerabilities, aligning with broader hacktivist goals of transparency.^[56] The Syrian Electronic Army (SEA), operational from around 2011 to 2016, functioned as a pro-regime collective supporting Bashar al-Assad, conducting phishing and account hijackings against Western media outlets critical of Syria, such as the Associated Press in 2013, which falsely reported a White House explosion via compromised Twitter feeds.^[57] SEA targeted over 100 entities, including the Guardian and BBC, posting propaganda and disrupting coverage of the Syrian civil war; three members faced U.S. indictments in 2016 for hacking conspiracies involving credential theft.^[58]^[59] Unlike apolitical hackers, SEA's actions directly advanced state-aligned narratives, blurring lines between independent hacktivism and sponsored operations.^[60] More recent examples include KillNet, a pro-Russian collective emerging in January 2022 amid the Ukraine conflict, which launched DDoS attacks against over 30 NATO-aligned targets, including U.S. airports and European energy firms, to retaliate against sanctions and aid to Ukraine.^[61] The group claimed disruptions lasting hours to days, evolving tactics from basic DDoS to data exfiltration, and splintering into subgroups for sustained campaigns.^[62]^[63] The Chaos Computer Club (CCC), founded in 1981 as Europe's largest hacker association with over 7,700 members, exemplifies ethical hacktivism through demonstrations of security flaws, such as cloning biometric passports in 2008 and exposing flaws in German voting machines in 2009, advocating for privacy and open information policies.^[64] Unlike aggressive collectives, CCC focuses on legal challenges and public education, influencing EU data protection laws without direct intrusions for disruption.^[4]

State-Sponsored Advanced Persistent Threats

State-sponsored advanced persistent threats (APTs) are cyber operations orchestrated by nation-state actors or their proxies, characterized by prolonged, targeted intrusions into networks for intelligence gathering, economic espionage, or disruption. These groups leverage advanced tooling, including custom malware and supply-chain compromises, to achieve objectives that align with geopolitical strategies, often sustaining access for months or years while minimizing attribution. Unlike profit-driven cybercriminals, state-sponsored APTs prioritize stealth and resilience, drawing on government funding for research into zero-day vulnerabilities and operational security. Attributions to specific states rely on forensic indicators like code reuse, infrastructure patterns, and geopolitical context, as detailed in reports from firms like Mandiant and government agencies.^[65]^[66] China-linked APTs exemplify large-scale espionage. APT1, tied to the People's Liberation Army's Unit 61398, executed campaigns from 2006 onward, compromising over 140 organizations—primarily U.S. defense, technology, and manufacturing firms—and exfiltrating at least 6.6 terabytes of data. Operating from a Shanghai complex housing thousands of personnel, APT1 employed tactics like spear-phishing with malicious attachments and custom backdoors, targeting intellectual property for military advantage. More recent actors like APT41 blend espionage with financial crime, conducting dual-use operations against global telecoms and governments since at least 2019.^[67]^[65] North Korea's Lazarus Group (also known as APT38) pursues revenue generation and retaliation to fund the regime amid sanctions. In November 2014, it breached Sony Pictures Entertainment, stealing terabytes of data including films and emails, in response to the movie The Interview, which prompted distributed denial-of-service attacks and threats. Lazarus deployed WannaCry ransomware on May 12, 2017, exploiting EternalBlue to infect 200,000+ systems across 150 countries, disrupting hospitals and factories and yielding $4 billion in estimated damages, though ransoms collected were minimal. The group has stolen over $2 billion in cryptocurrency since 2017, including $41 million from Stake.com in September 2023 and $100 million from Ronin Network in 2022, laundering funds through mixers and exchanges. U.S. indictments and sanctions confirm ties to North Korea's Reconnaissance General Bureau.^[68]^[69]^[70] Russia-associated APTs emphasize hybrid warfare, blending cyber with kinetic operations. APT28 (Fancy Bear), linked to GRU Unit 26165, conducted the 2016 Democratic National Committee intrusion, exfiltrating 20,000+ emails via phishing lures mimicking Google alerts, which were later disclosed publicly. Active since 2004, APT28 targets NATO members, Ukraine, and elections, using tools like X-Agent implant for persistence. Sandworm (also APT44), from GRU Unit 74455, pioneered offensive cyber against infrastructure: it triggered blackouts for 230,000 Ukrainians in December 2015 via BlackEnergy malware on substations, repeated in 2016, and unleashed NotPetya wiper in June 2017, masquerading as ransomware but destroying data worldwide, with $10 billion in costs to firms like Maersk and Merck. During Russia's 2022 Ukraine invasion, Sandworm deployed wipers like WhisperGate against government networks.^[71]^[72]^[73]^[74] Iranian groups like APT33 (Elfin) focus on critical sectors, targeting aviation and energy since 2013 with Shamoon wipers that erased data from Saudi Aramco in 2012 (attributed retrospectively). These operations often coincide with regional tensions, using destructive payloads to signal capability. Attributions draw from shared codebases and timing, though denials persist; Western intelligence assesses them as Ministry of Intelligence proxies. Overall, state-sponsored APTs have escalated since 2010, with overlaps in tooling across adversaries indicating shared exploit markets, prompting international norms debates via forums like the UN Group of Governmental Experts.^[75]^[76]

Ethical and White-Hat Collaborations

Ethical and white-hat hacker collaborations encompass organized efforts by skilled programmers and security researchers to identify system vulnerabilities through authorized testing, responsible disclosure, and knowledge sharing, thereby strengthening digital infrastructure without malicious intent. These initiatives often involve collectives, non-profits, or platforms that coordinate with organizations, governments, or the public to simulate attacks legally and recommend fixes, contrasting with unauthorized black-hat activities by adhering to legal frameworks and ethical guidelines such as those outlined in hacker codes emphasizing non-destructive access and transparency.^[77] The Chaos Computer Club (CCC), established on October 12, 1981, in Hamburg, Germany, stands as Europe's largest hacker association, comprising thousands of members who engage in ethical testing of technologies like biometric passports, smart metering systems, and electronic voting machines to expose flaws. The group has collaborated with media outlets and policymakers, such as demonstrating in 2009 how Dutch voting machines could be compromised in under two minutes, leading to their discontinuation and influencing election security reforms across Europe. CCC's approach prioritizes public disclosure of findings to drive systemic improvements, while maintaining a stance against data alteration or harm.^[78]^[79] L0pht Heavy Industries, a Boston-based collective active from 1992 to 2000, exemplified early white-hat collaboration by developing tools like the L0phtCrack password auditor and providing security consultations to corporations. In May 1998, seven members testified before the U.S. Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, asserting they could disrupt Internet connectivity for a "partial shutdown" in as little as 30 minutes due to unpatched router vulnerabilities, prompting federal attention to critical infrastructure risks and contributing to the formation of groups like the CERT Coordination Center for coordinated responses. The collective's work bridged hacker subculture with institutional security, influencing vulnerability disclosure norms before its acquisition by @stake in 2000.^[80]^[81] The Honeynet Project, founded in 1999 as a non-profit initiative, operates global chapters that deploy honeypots—decoy systems designed to lure attackers—and analyze captured data to map threat tactics without engaging offensively. By 2023, the project had documented thousands of attack patterns, sharing anonymized intelligence via reports and tools like Cowrie for emulating vulnerable services, which has aided organizations in preempting exploits such as those from botnets. This collaborative model emphasizes open-source dissemination, with volunteers contributing to defenses against real-world threats like ransomware, fostering a community-driven ecosystem for proactive cybersecurity research.^[82] Crowdsourced platforms like HackerOne, launched in November 2012, facilitate large-scale white-hat collaborations by matching independent researchers with over 2,000 client organizations, including tech giants, for bug bounty programs. As of 2024, the platform has coordinated the patching of more than 200,000 vulnerabilities, with payouts totaling over $150 million, and data showing that 70% of users avoided major breaches attributable to disclosed issues. These efforts rely on vetted hacker communities adhering to strict disclosure rules, demonstrating how incentivized, permission-based hacking scales ethical testing beyond individual or small-group capacities.^[83]^[84]

Operational Methods

Technical Techniques Employed

Hacker groups utilize a structured set of technical techniques aligned with phases of cyber operations, including initial access, execution, persistence, privilege escalation, defense evasion, command and control, discovery, lateral movement, collection, exfiltration, and impact, as cataloged in the MITRE ATT&CK framework based on observed adversary behaviors.^[85] These methods vary by group motivation, with state-sponsored advanced persistent threats (APTs) favoring stealthy, long-term infiltration, while hacktivist collectives prioritize disruptive actions like distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks.^[7] Criminal groups often deploy ransomware and cryptojacking for financial gain.^[86] Initial access techniques commonly involve phishing and spear-phishing campaigns, where malicious emails or links deliver payloads to compromised systems; APT groups like APT25 have historically used spear-phishing with attachments or hyperlinks to breach targets.^[65] Social engineering complements these, exploiting human vulnerabilities through methods such as baiting or pretexting to elicit credentials or actions.^[87] Supply chain compromises, where attackers infiltrate trusted vendors to distribute tainted updates, represent another vector employed by sophisticated actors.^[86] Execution and exploitation rely on malware deployment, including custom tools and "living off the land" binaries that leverage legitimate system utilities to minimize detection; groups like APT29 use tailored malware alongside zero-day vulnerabilities for initial compromise.^[7] Brute-force attacks and credential stuffing target weak authentication, while watering hole tactics compromise websites frequented by victims.^[88] For hacktivists, DDoS attacks flood targets with traffic via botnets, often using tools like MegaMedusa for web-based disruptions, as seen in operations by groups like RipperSec.^[89] ^[90] Persistence and evasion techniques include installing backdoors, modifying registry keys, or using rootkits to maintain access; APT actors employ polymorphic malware and encryption to evade antivirus detection, alongside lateral movement via tools like remote access trojans for network traversal.^[91] Command and control occurs through domain generation algorithms or compromised infrastructure to direct operations discreetly.^[92] Exfiltration involves staging data for upload, often compressed and encrypted, while impact phases feature ransomware encryption or data destruction for extortion or disruption.^[86] Web defacement, prevalent in hacktivism, alters site content to propagate messages without deep system penetration.^[6] These techniques evolve with defenses, incorporating obfuscation, steganography, and packed malware to hide activities, as observed in contemporary threat actor operations.^[93] Empirical data from cybersecurity reports underscores their efficacy, with phishing accounting for a significant portion of breaches across group types.^[94]

Organizational Structures and Tools

Hacker groups display varied organizational structures tailored to their goals, ranging from decentralized collectives to hierarchical entities. Hacktivist groups, exemplified by Anonymous, function as leaderless, non-hierarchical networks where participants self-organize around shared causes without formal membership or command chains, coordinating via ephemeral online channels like IRC, forums, or social media platforms.^[95] ^[96] In contrast, criminal cybercrime syndicates, particularly those engaged in ransomware, have evolved toward franchise-like models under Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) paradigms, dividing labor among malware developers, deployment affiliates, extortion specialists, and money launderers to scale operations and distribute risk, though recent disruptions have fragmented some into lone operators or hybrid entities blending financial and ideological motives.^[97] ^[98] State-sponsored advanced persistent threat (APT) groups maintain more rigid, compartmentalized hierarchies backed by governmental resources, featuring specialized subunits for intelligence gathering, tool development, and sustained intrusions, enabling prolonged campaigns that blur into proxy criminal activities.^[66] ^[99] These structures facilitate the use of both commoditized and bespoke tools for reconnaissance, exploitation, and persistence. Common off-the-shelf utilities include network mappers like Nmap for vulnerability scanning, exploit frameworks such as Metasploit for payload delivery, and credential dumpers like Mimikatz for privilege escalation, often repurposed from legitimate penetration testing contexts into malicious operations.^[100] Command-and-control (C2) platforms like Cobalt Strike enable remote administration and lateral movement across compromised networks, while anonymity networks such as TOR or I2P obscure communications and data exfiltration.^[100] ^[101] APT groups favor custom malware suites, including backdoors, downloaders, and data extractors like SQLULDR2 for database pilfering or PINEGROVE for cloud uploads, supplemented by zero-day exploits to evade detection in targeted espionage.^[102] ^[65] Groups across categories increasingly leverage dark web marketplaces for tool acquisition and collaboration, adapting to law enforcement pressures by incorporating AI-driven evasion techniques or leaked nation-state code.^[3] ^[6]

Societal and Economic Impacts

Damages from Malicious Activities

Malicious activities by hacker groups have inflicted substantial financial, operational, and infrastructural damages worldwide, often exceeding billions in aggregate costs through ransomware, data destruction, and theft. These impacts encompass direct expenses like ransom payments and recovery efforts, as well as indirect losses from business interruptions, supply chain disruptions, and diminished productivity. For instance, state-sponsored groups such as North Korea's Lazarus Group have been linked to attacks causing global economic ripple effects, while ransomware collectives like Russia's DarkSide have targeted critical infrastructure, leading to temporary shutdowns and heightened fuel prices.^[103]^[104] The 2017 WannaCry ransomware campaign, attributed to the Lazarus Group, encrypted data on approximately 200,000 systems across 150 countries, demanding Bitcoin ransoms equivalent to $300–$600 per victim but yielding only about $140,000 in payments due to a kill switch discovery. Global damages reached an estimated $4 billion, including healthcare disruptions in the UK's National Health Service (costing over $100 million in recovery and lost operations) and manufacturing halts worldwide.^[105]^[106]^[107] Similarly, the June 2017 NotPetya wiper malware, deployed by Russia's Sandworm group (APT44) initially targeting Ukraine but spreading globally via supply chains, masqueraded as ransomware but primarily destroyed data. It caused over $10 billion in damages to entities like Maersk (shipping delays costing $300 million), Merck (vaccine production losses of $870 million), and FedEx (revenue shortfalls of $892.5 million in one quarter alone), amplifying effects through third-party software vulnerabilities.^[104] In May 2021, the DarkSide ransomware group compromised Colonial Pipeline's networks via a leaked VPN password, forcing a six-day shutdown of the U.S. East Coast's largest fuel pipeline and triggering panic buying, fuel shortages, and price spikes up to 20 cents per gallon in some areas. Colonial paid a $4.4 million ransom (of which $2.3 million was later recovered by the FBI), with total operational recovery costs and economic disruptions estimated in the tens of millions, underscoring vulnerabilities in energy sector cybersecurity.^[108] The 2014 Sony Pictures Entertainment breach by the Guardians of Peace (GOP), widely attributed to Lazarus Group operatives in retaliation for a film mocking North Korean leadership, exposed terabytes of data including unreleased films, emails, and employee records. Sony incurred direct costs of at least $15–$35 million in recovery and legal settlements (up to $8 million for employee data claims), with broader estimates reaching $100 million including lost productivity, reputational harm, and canceled projects.^[109]^[110]^[111] Beyond isolated incidents, persistent campaigns by groups like Lazarus have aggregated damages through financial theft and cryptocurrency heists; for example, their 2023 exploits resulted in over $300 million in crypto losses across multiple platforms, funding state activities amid sanctions. These attacks highlight causal chains where initial exploits lead to cascading failures, often exploiting unpatched software or weak access controls, with recovery burdens disproportionately affecting under-resourced sectors like healthcare and logistics.^[112]

Contributions to Security Awareness

Hacker groups have contributed to security awareness by publicly demonstrating exploitable weaknesses in systems, often through unauthorized access that exposes deficiencies otherwise overlooked by organizations. These disclosures, though typically illegal, have compelled entities to implement patches, adopt stronger authentication, and prioritize vulnerability management, as evidenced by subsequent policy and technical upgrades following high-profile incidents.^[113] The Chaos Computer Club (CCC), Europe's oldest and largest hacker association founded in 1981, exemplifies proactive vulnerability revelation. In August 2022, CCC researchers bypassed video-identification protocols employed by German banks and authorities, using basic techniques to forge identities and access accounts, which highlighted flaws in biometric and remote verification reliant on unencrypted video streams. This demonstration prompted financial regulators to reevaluate Video-Ident standards and spurred vendors to enhance encryption and liveness detection mechanisms.^[114] Similarly, at the 2018 Chaos Communication Congress, CCC presented a full fax machine exploitation, achieving remote code execution and network compromise via outdated protocols, raising awareness of persistent risks in legacy communication devices integrated into modern infrastructures and influencing recommendations for their isolation or replacement.^[115] LulzSec's 2011 campaign further illustrates indirect contributions, as their breaches of entities like Sony, the FBI's Infragard, and public broadcasters revealed rudimentary failures such as SQL injection vulnerabilities and default credentials. By dumping credentials and shaming targets publicly, LulzSec warned of inadequate protections, leading affected organizations to overhaul password policies, deploy intrusion detection systems, and conduct comprehensive audits—shifts that industry analysts attribute to heightened executive prioritization of cybersecurity post-exposure.^[116]^[113] While LulzSec's motives centered on disruption rather than reform, the resultant data leaks empowered users to secure personal accounts and forced systemic responses, underscoring how adversarial testing can catalyze defensive advancements despite ethical concerns.^[54]

Legal and Ethical Dimensions

Prosecutions and International Law

Prosecutions of members affiliated with hacker groups have primarily targeted hacktivist collectives and cybercriminal syndicates through domestic laws like the U.S. Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and equivalents in Europe, often resulting in lengthy prison sentences for unauthorized access, data theft, and distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks. In the case of LulzSec, a short-lived group active in 2011 that breached systems including Sony Pictures and the FBI, leader Hector Monsegur (known as Sabu) was arrested in June 2011, cooperated with authorities, and received a sentence of time served in May 2014 after aiding in over 300 investigations. Other LulzSec members faced convictions: Raynaldo Rivera was sentenced to 13 months in April 2013 for the Sony intrusion, while UK members Ryan Cleary received 32 months, Jake Davis 24 months, and Ryan Ackroyd and Mustafa Al-Bassam suspended terms in May 2013 for attacks on public sector targets. Similarly, Anonymous affiliates have seen multiple convictions; in January 2013, UK court sentenced Christopher Weatherhead to 18 months and Ashley Rhodes to seven months for DDoS attacks on PayPal and anti-piracy groups in 2010, marking early successful prosecutions under the UK's Police and Criminal Evidence Act. In the U.S., Jeremy Hammond received a 10-year sentence in November 2013 for hacking Stratfor in 2011 and leaking emails, while four members pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges in August 2014 for Operation Payback DDoS actions against financial institutions.^[117]^[118]^[119]^[120]^[121]^[122] International cooperation under frameworks like the Council of Europe's Convention on Cybercrime (Budapest Convention), ratified by over 60 countries including the U.S. in 2006, has enabled extraditions and joint investigations, harmonizing definitions of offenses such as illegal access (Article 2) and data interference (Article 4) to facilitate cross-border prosecutions. The treaty's extradition provisions (Article 24) supported cases like the 2012 U.S. charges against six hackers from Anonymous and LulzSec spanning multiple countries, with evidence-sharing leading to guilty pleas and sentences. A 2022 Second Additional Protocol enhances procedural tools like emergency data preservation, aiming to accelerate responses to transient cyber evidence. Eurojust-coordinated takedowns, such as the July 2025 disruption of a hacktivist group targeting European critical infrastructure via recruited supporters, demonstrate the convention's role in mobilizing arrests across jurisdictions.^[123]^[124]^[125]^[126] Challenges persist in applying international law to state-sponsored advanced persistent threats (APTs), where attribution difficulties and lack of cooperation from host nations hinder prosecutions; for instance, Russia's non-ratification of the Budapest Convention and refusal to extradite GRU-linked hackers like those in Fancy Bear (APT28) for the 2016 DNC breach have blocked accountability despite U.S. indictments. Chinese APT41 members remain at large despite FBI wanted notices since 2020, as Beijing denies involvement and shields operatives, underscoring sovereignty barriers over universal jurisdiction principles. Proposals for a UN cybercrime treaty face criticism for potential misuse against dissenters rather than enhancing enforcement against shielded actors, while International Criminal Court jurisdiction over cybercrimes as war crimes remains untested and limited by state consent requirements. These gaps highlight that while treaties aid prosecutions of non-state actors, geopolitical realities often exempt government-backed groups, with empirical data showing over 90% of APT indictments unfulfilled due to non-extradition.^[127]^[128]^[129]

Debates on Legitimacy and Moral Justifications

Hacktivist groups often justify their actions through appeals to transparency and the public interest, arguing that unauthorized access to systems exposes systemic vulnerabilities or corrupt practices that would otherwise remain hidden. For instance, proponents invoke a "hacker ethic" emphasizing unrestricted information flow and skepticism toward institutional authority as a moral imperative to challenge power imbalances in digital spaces.^[130] This perspective posits hacking as a form of digital civil disobedience, akin to historical nonviolent resistance, where the ends—such as revealing government surveillance or corporate malfeasance—outweigh the means of breaching legal and technical barriers.^[131] Critics counter that such justifications conflate technical skill with moral authority, ignoring the inherent violations of property rights and consent that define unauthorized intrusions. Legal frameworks like the U.S. Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) classify most hacktivist acts as felonies, underscoring that legitimacy derives from due process rather than self-proclaimed righteousness; empirical evidence from incidents shows collateral damages, including data leaks affecting uninvolved parties, which undermine utilitarian claims of net benefit.^[132] Moreover, analyses from information ethics scholars highlight how purported moral rationales frequently serve as post-hoc rationalizations for thrill-seeking or ideological overreach, lacking rigorous proportionality to the harms inflicted, such as economic disruptions or eroded trust in critical infrastructure.^[133] Sources sympathetic to hacktivism, often from activist-oriented academia, tend to downplay these risks, reflecting a bias toward viewing state or corporate targets as inherently illegitimate, whereas security-focused assessments prioritize verifiable causality between hacks and unintended escalations in cyber threats.^[134] Debates intensify over distinctions between hacktivism and outright cybercrime, with some arguing for conditional legitimacy only when actions minimize harm, ensure accountability, and align with broader democratic norms—criteria rarely met in practice due to the anonymity and decentralization of groups.^[135] First-principles evaluation reveals a core tension: while information asymmetry can justify probing for flaws in authorized ethical hacking, the absence of permission in hacktivism shifts the causal chain toward foreseeable violations of individual autonomy and societal order, rendering moral claims precarious without institutional oversight. Prosecutions, such as those following the 2011 LulzSec operations, illustrate how courts reject these defenses, treating intrusions as presumptively illegitimate absent explicit consent, a stance reinforced by international norms against non-state cyber interference.^[136]

Cultural and Media Portrayals

Evolution in Popular Culture

Initial representations of hacker groups in popular culture drew from real-world pioneering collectives at institutions like MIT during the 1960s, where participants were depicted as collaborative innovators pushing technological boundaries through creative problem-solving on early computers such as the PDP-1. Steven Levy's 1984 book Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution codified this view, framing these groups as heroic figures embodying an "hacker ethic" of open information sharing and decentralized access, which influenced subsequent narratives by celebrating their contributions to personal computing and software like Spacewar.^[137] This era's portrayals emphasized curiosity and ingenuity over malice, reflecting the subculture's roots in academic and hobbyist experimentation rather than organized crime.^[137] By the 1980s and 1990s, cinematic depictions shifted toward youthful, rebellious hacker groups engaging in phreaking and unauthorized access, often romanticized as underdogs challenging authority. Films like WarGames (1983) portrayed adolescent hackers inadvertently accessing military systems, blending thrill with cautionary elements about unintended consequences, while Hackers (1995) featured a loose collective of teens uncovering corporate fraud through stylized digital exploits, drawing from events like Operation Sundevil (1990) that publicized suburban-based groups like the 414s.^[138] Pre-9/11 media generally framed such groups with intrigue, highlighting technical prowess and anti-establishment motives, though often sensationalizing their methods for dramatic effect.^[139] Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, portrayals evolved toward viewing hacker groups as existential threats, with media emphasizing criminality, national security risks, and potential terrorism ties in an alarmist tone.^[139] This shift aligned with broader societal anxieties, transforming hackers from quirky rebels to organized adversaries in news and fiction, as seen in increased focus on cybercrime syndicates rather than idealistic collectives. Hacktivist entities like Anonymous, emerging prominently in the late 2000s, received mixed coverage—praised in some documentaries for ideological actions against censorship but critiqued as chaotic vigilantes in mainstream outlets.^[138] In the 2010s onward, television series like Mr. Robot (2015–2019) offered nuanced takes on groups such as fsociety, depicting them as ideologically driven actors targeting corporate power with a blend of realism and moral ambiguity, contrasting earlier Hollywood tropes of flashy interfaces and instant breaches.^[140] Contemporary media increasingly differentiates hacker groups by intent—ethical collectives raising security awareness versus profit-driven ransomware operations like those behind WannaCry (2017)—yet persists in inaccuracies that prioritize visual spectacle over procedural fidelity, perpetuating stereotypes despite input from cybersecurity experts.^[138] This evolution mirrors real-world diversification, from elite tinkerers to global networks, though popular culture often amplifies adversarial frames at the expense of constructive roles in vulnerability disclosure.^[139]

Normalized Narratives and Critiques

Media depictions of hacker groups often normalize a narrative of them as ideologically driven collectives challenging powerful entities, portraying members as technically adept rebels akin to digital Robin Hoods who expose corruption or advocate for transparency.^[141] This framing, prevalent in films, news coverage, and documentaries, emphasizes motivations like anti-corporate activism or opposition to censorship, as seen in portrayals of Anonymous's operations against organizations such as Scientology in 2008 or government targets during the Arab Spring in 2011.^[142] Such accounts frequently highlight symbolic gestures, like data leaks or website defacements, as heroic disruptions while minimizing procedural details or unintended consequences.^[143] Critiques of these normalized narratives argue that they romanticize illegal activities by conflating ethical intent with justifiable outcomes, fostering a misconception that unauthorized access serves the greater good without rigorous scrutiny.^[144] For instance, Hollywood productions depict hacker groups overcoming fortified systems through innate genius or rapid improvisation, which misrepresents the reality that many operations rely on basic social engineering, off-the-shelf malware, or exploited vulnerabilities rather than sophisticated custom exploits.^[145] This exaggeration, echoed in news media, attributes near-mythical prowess to groups, ignoring how opportunistic actors—often loosely organized and profit-motivated—dominate cyber incidents, with ransomware demands averaging around $1,077 in 2016 attacks using readily available tools.^[145] From a causal perspective, such portrayals understate the indiscriminate harms of group actions, including data breaches affecting innocents and disruptions to critical infrastructure, which empirical reviews show rarely yield proportional societal benefits.^[146] Critics contend this selective emphasis stems from media tendencies to valorize anti-authority figures, potentially influenced by institutional preferences for narratives critiquing established power structures over objective assessment of legal and ethical violations.^[144] Accurate depictions, as in select realistic media like certain episodes of Mr. Robot, underscore the tedium, risks, and ethical constraints of computing—such as adherence to codes requiring authorized access—contrasting sharply with glorified vigilantism that can inspire emulation without accountability.^[144]

References

[1]
What Is Hacking? Types of Hacking & More - Fortinet
Hack Prevention. FAQs. FL Definition. Definition. Types of Hackers. Most Vulnerable Devices. Hack Prevention. FAQs ... Some hacker groups are very well organized ...
[2]
Top 10 Most Notorious Hacker Groups in History | EM360Tech
A hacker group is an organization that collaborates to commit cybercrime. They operate like a typical business with a structured hierarchy, with members ...<|separator|>
[3]
Famous Hacker Groups: Their Methods and Tools - StormWall
Advanced Technologies: Hacker groups use zero-day exploits, sophisticated phishing techniques, and adaptive malware that can bypass standard security measures.
[4]
What is Hacktivism? Definition, Examples & More | Proofpoint US
Also an early 1990s hacker group, Masters of Deception (MoD), exploited telephony companies. Chaos Computer Club: The first large hacktivist group, Chaos ...
[5]
What is Hacktivism? - Check Point Software Technologies
In general, hacker groups aim to question, provoke, and challenge governments, organizations, and companies who go against their moral position. Who Are ...
[6]
Understanding Hacktivists: The Overlap of Ideology and Cybercrime
Feb 4, 2025 · Today's hacktivist groups increasingly engage in “hack-and-leak” attacks, which are more sophisticated than DDoS, and web defacements. They hack ...
[7]
Groups | MITRE ATT&CK®
Organizations' group definitions may partially overlap with groups ... UNC788 is a group of hackers from Iran that has targeted people in the Middle East.
[8]
Top 10 Most Notorious Hacker Groups in History - Cobalt.io
Jul 31, 2023 · Hacker groups exploit weaknesses in software and systems. They're clandestine collectives whose size can range from a few operators to ...
[9]
What Is a Hacker? - Cisco
A hacker breaks into computer systems. There are hackers who exploit weak security for malicious intent, and ethical hackers who help find vulnerabilities.How does hacking work? · What makes someone a hacker?
[10]
What are the types of cyber threat actors? - Sophos
Cyber threat actors include career cybercriminals, hacktivists, state-sponsored actors, insiders, script kiddies, organized crime, and terrorist groups.
[11]
What is a Threat Actor? | IBM
Some of the most common types of threat actors include hacktivists, nation-state actors, cybercriminals, thrill seekers, insider threat actors and ...
[12]
How Microsoft names threat actors - Unified security operations
Oct 15, 2025 · This category includes ransomware operators, business email compromise, phishing, and other groups with purely financial or extortion ...
[13]
4 Main Threat Actor Types Explained for Better Proactive Defense
Jun 5, 2024 · The main 4 types of threat actors organizations can encounter are cybercriminals, hacktivists, state-sponsored attacks, and insider threats.
[14]
A Comprehensive Guide to 5 Types of Threat Actors - Teramind
Jul 25, 2024 · There are several types of threat actors, including cybercriminals, hacktivists, insider threats, and nation-state actors.What are Threat Actors? · Nation-State Actors · Hacktivists and Ideological...
[15]
7 Types of Cyber Threat Actors: Motivations, Methods, and Mitigation ...
Discover 7 key types of cyber threat actors, what motivates them, and how to defend against their tactics—from insider threats to state-sponsored groups.
[16]
15 types of hackers + hacking protection tips - Norton
Dec 19, 2024 · Other types of hackers · 4. Red hat hackers: Ethical hackers · 5. Green hat hackers: Educated novices · 6. Script kiddies: True newbies · 7.
[17]
Types of Hackers Explained: White Hat, Black Hat, and More
Sep 15, 2025 · What Are the Different Types of Hackers? · White Hat Hackers (Ethical Hackers) · Black Hat Hackers (Malicious Actors) · Grey Hat Hackers.Black Hat Hackers (malicious... · Grey Hat Hackers · Insider Threats<|separator|>
[18]
A Brief History of Hacking | Cobalt
Dec 5, 2022 · The world of hacking as we know it today began in the early 1970s, after the popularization of early computers.
[19]
Phone Phreaking: Hacking Before The Internet - Cybercrime Magazine
Feb 13, 2025 · They were the precursors to today's network hackers, sharing tips and tactics not by closed and encrypted message groups but by printed ...
[20]
Phreaking 101: The History and Evolution of Hacking Telephone ...
Phreaking can trace its origins back to the late 1960s and early 1970s when a group of young enthusiasts discovered that they could manipulate the telephone ...
[21]
15 infamous hacker groups to look for [1981 to 2024] - Norton
Jun 21, 2023 · 1. Chaos Computer Club · 2. Legion of Doom · 3. Lazarus Group · 4. Tailored Access Operations (TAO) · 5. Dragonfly · 6. LulzSec · 7. Morpho · 9. Lizard ...
[22]
The History Of Hacking - Help Net Security
Apr 8, 2002 · The infamous hacker groups the “Legion of Doom,” based in the USA and the “Chaos Computer Club,” based in Germany, were founded and are still ...
[23]
The pioneers of hacking: legendary groups that shaped hacker culture
Feb 9, 2025 · The 414s were a group consisting of six teenagers who were crazy about technology and had a passion for experimenting with early computer ...
[24]
414s - AndreaFiori.net
Named after area code; gained notoriety in the early 1980s as a group of friends and computer hackers who broke into dozens of high-profile computer systems ...
[25]
Hackers of the '90s - Purdue cyberTAP
Aug 13, 2024 · In 1990, the turn of the decade saw a massive uptick in the number of computer hackers as the internet evolved into the tool we know it as today.
[26]
How cybercriminals have evolved | Cybersecurity
These hackers appeared in the late 1980s and early 1990s when personal computers and the internet became more accessible and affordable. Among them were ...
[27]
Great Rivalries in Cybersecurity: Legion of Doom vs. the Masters of ...
In Hacker Wars, Civilian Systems Are Weapons and Casualties. This case is unique in that it happened between two separate groups of black hat hackers, and not ...
[28]
1990s: Masters Of Deception (MOD) Member On The Great Hacker ...
Dec 3, 2024 · John Lee, aka John Threat, used the name “Corrupt” as a member of Masters of Deception (MOD), a New York based hacker group in the early '90s.
[29]
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/9781315155852-11/operation-sun-devil-bruce-middleton
[30]
Operation Sundevil - MuckRock
Jul 16, 2023 · Operation Sundevil has also been viewed as one of the preliminary attacks on the Legion of Doom and similar hacking groups. The raid on ...
[31]
Phreaks and l33ts: Inside the early '90s tech scene that created ...
Feb 5, 2023 · The hackers of LOpht testified before Congress and went on to shape today's cybersecurity industry. This is the story of how it started.
[32]
Malicious Life Podcast: The Story of L0pht Heavy Industries, Part 1
'L0pht' was one of the most influential hacker collectives of the '90s: they were even invited to testify in front of Congress on the state of Internet ...
[33]
What is Hacktivism | Types, Ethics, History & Examples - Imperva
In the 2000s, the hacktivist landscape became more diverse and sophisticated with the formation of groups such as Anonymous and LulzSec. These groups carried ...
[34]
#726: 10-28-04 NINETEEN INDIVIDUALS INDICTED IN INTERNET ...
Oct 28, 2004 · ... Shadowcrew,” a website with approximately 4,000 members that was dedicated to facilitating malicious computer hacking and the dissemination ...
[35]
The Biggest Cyber Attacks in the Last 20 years - AppSecEngineer
Oct 10, 2023 · The 2000s: Cybercrime Activities Intensifies · MafiaBoy (2000) · Blaster Worm (2003) · Heartland Payment Systems (2008) · Operation Aurora (2009).
[36]
The History Of Cybercrime And Cybersecurity, 1940-2020
Nov 30, 2020 · From the 1940s to the present, discover how cybercrime and cybersecurity have developed to become what we know today.<|separator|>
[37]
A Brief History of Ransomware [Including Attacks] | CrowdStrike
Oct 9, 2022 · Ransomware first cropped up around 2005 as just one subcategory of the overall class of scareware. Learn how it's evolved since then.
[38]
Most Dangerous State Sponsored Hacker Groups in 2021
Feb 16, 2021 · The world's most dangerous state-sponsored hacker groups ; Russia · 2008 · 2015 attack on the Pentagon, FireEye hack (allegedly), SolarWinds hack ( ...Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s
[39]
The History of Ransomware I Arctic Wolf
Jun 5, 2024 · Pre-2010: Ransomware has existed since the 1980's, with the first recorded attack occurring in 1989. This inaugural attack was known as the AIDS ...
[40]
Top 3 Notorious Hacking Groups | Kiuwan
Aug 18, 2022 · Syrian Electronic Army. The Syrian Electronic Army (SEA) is a pro-Assad hacking group of hackers active since 2011. One of their most famous ...
[41]
Understanding Ransomware Threat Actors: LockBit - CISA
Jun 14, 2023 · LockBit ransomware operation functions as a Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) model where affiliates are recruited to conduct ransomware attacks using LockBit ...Missing: famous | Show results with:famous
[42]
8 Most Dangerous Ransomware Groups: M.O., Victims, and More
Sep 29, 2025 · The strategic adaptation of these gangs has not only elevated ransomware attacks from minor annoyances to critical national security threats but ...
[43]
Ransomware Double Extortion and Beyond: REvil, Clop, and Conti
Jun 15, 2021 · Ransomware-stricken organizations grapple with multilevel extortion schemes that are advancing at an alarming rate. What exactly happens in ...Missing: famous | Show results with:famous
[44]
History's Most Notorious Ransomware Gangs - Cybereason
The actual ransomware payload is the very tail end of a RansomOps attack, so there are weeks or even months of detectable activity prior to the payload ...
[45]
The top 15 most infamous ransomware groups (2025) - NordStellar
Jun 8, 2025 · Conti is one of the most notorious ransomware gangs that operated between 2020 and 2022. Known for its aggressive double extortion tactics, the ...<|separator|>
[46]
Inside Ransomware Groups: An Analysis of their Origins, Structures ...
Oct 11, 2025 · These span the Conti Leaks, the takedown of LockBit and exposure of LockBitSupp's identity, and the law enforcement action against BlackCat/ ...Missing: famous | Show results with:famous
[47]
Your Guide to High-profile Ransomware Gangs & Culprits
Sep 28, 2022 · Average ransom demand: $270,300. LockBit launched in 2019, and unlike other spotlight-stealing ransomware groups, they managed to fly under ...Missing: famous | Show results with:famous
[48]
Ransomware: biggest groups responsible for attacks in 2024 - Lumiun
Oct 3, 2024 · A recent report highlighted six main groups that dominated the landscape of cyber threats, and Lockbit 3.0 remains the biggest threat.Missing: famous | Show results with:famous<|separator|>
[49]
Significant Cyber Incidents | Strategic Technologies Program - CSIS
This timeline records significant cyber incidents since 2006, focusing on cyber attacks on government agencies, defense and high tech companies, or economic ...
[50]
Hacktivism: Types, Goals, and Real-World Examples - Investopedia
Some of the most widely known hacktivist groups include Anonymous, Legion of Doom (LOD), Masters of Deception (MOD), and Chaos Computer Club.Missing: collectives besides
[51]
What is Anonymous? The group went from 4chan to cyberattacks on ...
Mar 25, 2022 · The "hacktivist" group Anonymous has been around for nearly two decades, and no one knows who's behind it. Here's what you need to know ...
[52]
Anonymous: what to know about a worldwide hacking group - Telsy
Mar 15, 2021 · Anonymous is the most famous hacktivist group in the world. It gained international attention when it attacked the Church of Scientology's website in 2008.
[53]
https://www.redentry.co/en/blog/anonymous-full-cyber-attack-history/
[54]
LulzSec: what they did, who they were and how they were caught
May 16, 2013 · From May 2011, the hackers targeted organisations, including the FBI, around the world – now many group members face jail.
[55]
LulzSec - Radware
The now disbanded group consisted of six core members, some of which were originally leaders in another hacking group, Anonymous: Sabu, their leader (who acted ...
[56]
A timeline of hacking group LulzSec's attacks - NBC News
Jun 24, 2011 · It's a little over three weeks since LulzSec first broke into PBS and posted a fake story about dead rapper Tupac Shakur. Here's what's happened ...
[57]
Who is the Syrian Electronic Army? - BBC News
Apr 25, 2013 · The group's website posts the latest details of its hacks in English and Arabic, accompanied by screen grabs of hacked Twitter accounts and ...
[58]
Pro-Assad Syrian hackers launching cyber-attacks on western media
Apr 29, 2013 · The Syrian Electronic Army (SEA) claimed responsibility for the weekend Twitter attack on the Guardian, having previously targeted the BBC, ...
[59]
Computer Hacking Conspiracy Charges Unsealed Against Members ...
Mar 22, 2016 · Three Syrian nationals, all current or former members of the Syrian Electronic Army (SEA), were charged with multiple conspiracies related to computer hacking.
[60]
What is the Syrian Electronic Army? | CNN Business
Aug 28, 2013 · The Syrian Electronic Army, a group of pro-Syrian regime hackers that has aggressively targeted major news organizations and activists.
[61]
https://www.socradar.io/dark-web-profile-killnet-russian-hacktivist-group/
[62]
KillNet Showcases New Capabilities While Repeating Older Tactics
Jul 20, 2023 · Key Judgments. Mandiant Intelligence assesses with high confidence that operations for which the pro-Russia hacktivist collective KillNet has ...
[63]
Killnet - Flashpoint.io
What is Killnet? Killnet is mostly known for DDoS and data exfiltration attacks against Western entities and Dark Web markets.What is Killnet? · Killnet's structure · Killnet's modus operandi
[64]
Hacktivism: The Chaos Computer Club - Purdue cyberTAP
Nov 21, 2024 · The Chaos Computer Club, founded in 1981, is Europe's largest association of hackers. As an organization they stand for 'freedom of information'.
[65]
APT groups and threat actors - Google Cloud
APT41 is a prolific cyber threat group that carries out Chinese state-sponsored espionage activity in addition to financially motivated activity potentially ...Missing: credible | Show results with:credible
[66]
Nation-State Threats | Cybersecurity and Infrastructure ... - CISA
For examples of APT listings, see MITRE ATT&CK's Groups , Mandiant's APT Groups , and Microsoft's Threat Actor Naming Taxonomy . Note: Although CISA uses the ...Missing: credible | Show results with:credible
[67]
[PDF] APT1: Exposing One of China's Cyber Espionage Units | Mandiant
Oct 25, 2004 · Mandiant continues to track dozens of APT groups around the world; however, this report is focused on the most prolific of these groups. We ...
[68]
FBI Identifies Lazarus Group Cyber Actors as Responsible for Theft ...
Sep 6, 2023 · The FBI is issuing this release to warn the public regarding the theft of approximately $41 million in virtual currency from Stake.com, ...<|separator|>
[69]
Treasury Sanctions North Korean State-Sponsored Malicious Cyber ...
Sep 13, 2019 · Today's actions identify North Korean hacking groups commonly known within the global cyber security private industry as “Lazarus Group,” “ ...
[70]
FBI Confirms Lazarus Group Cyber Actors Responsible for ...
Jan 23, 2023 · The FBI confirmed that the North Korean malicious cyber actor group Lazarus (also known as APT38) was responsible for the theft of $100 million of virtual ...
[71]
APT28 - MITRE ATT&CK®
APT28 is a threat group that has been attributed to Russia's General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) 85th Main Special Service Center (GTsSS) ...
[72]
Fancy Bear Hackers (APT28): Targets & Methods | CrowdStrike
Feb 12, 2019 · Fancy Bear (APT28) is a Russian-based hacker group that targets a variety of organizations across the globe. Learn how to prevent Fancy Bear.Missing: motivations | Show results with:motivations
[73]
Unearthing APT44: Russia's Notorious Cyber Sabotage Unit ...
Apr 17, 2024 · APT44 is a threat actor that is actively engaged in the full spectrum of espionage, attack, and influence operations.
[74]
Sandworm Disrupts Power in Ukraine Using a Novel Attack Against ...
Nov 9, 2023 · In late 2022, Mandiant responded to a disruptive cyber physical incident in which the Russia-linked threat actor Sandworm targeted a Ukrainian ...
[75]
Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs): What They Are and How to ...
Jun 18, 2025 · Popular early examples of APTs include the 2009 Operation Aurora attack against tech companies and financial institutions, and the 2003-2009 ...Missing: credible | Show results with:credible
[76]
State-aligned APT groups are increasingly deploying ransomware
Jan 7, 2025 · One example is Iranian group Pioneer Kitten (aka Fox Kitten, UNC757 and Parisite) which has been spotted by the FBI “collaborating directly ...Missing: sources | Show results with:sources
[77]
CCC | Hacker Ethics - Chaos Computer Club
Hackers should be judged by their acting, not bogus criteria such as degrees, age, race, or position. You can create art and beauty on a computer. Computers can ...Missing: activities | Show results with:activities
[78]
Top 10 Most Famous Hacker Groups and Their Deeds
Feb 12, 2025 · Ah, the Chaos Computer Club , Europe's largest association of white hat hackers and security experts. Unlike some of the most dangerous hacker ...
[79]
Chaos Computer Club (CCC) - Cyber Security Intelligence
The Chaos Computer Club is Europe's largest association of hackers. For more than thirty years we are providing information about technical and societal issues.Missing: activities | Show results with:activities
[80]
L0pht - Bugcrowd
L0pht members ultimately founded L0pht Heavy Industries, a hacker think tank that authored and released various security advisories. In October 1999, L0pht ...Missing: history | Show results with:history
[81]
Space Rogue: A Security Rebel Turned Pen Tester | IBM
White Hats Go to Washington. In 1998, Thomas and other members of attacker think tank L0pht Heavy Industries testified to Congress. L0pht is infamous for ...
[82]
About Us - The Honeynet Project
The Honeynet Project is a leading international 501c3 non-profit security research organization, dedicated to investigating the latest attacks and developing ...
[83]
Ethical Hackers at the Heart of HackerOne's Cyber Strategy
Feb 5, 2024 · HackerOne's Hacker-Powered Security Report found nearly three-quarters (70%) of its customers avoided a significant cybersecurity incident ...Missing: facts | Show results with:facts
[84]
White Hat Hackers: Techniques, Tools, and How to Become One
White hat hackers have permission from the organization to conduct security testing, and they work within the boundaries of legal and ethical frameworks. Their ...Missing: collaborations | Show results with:collaborations
[85]
MITRE ATT&CK®
MITRE ATT&CK is a globally-accessible knowledge base of adversary tactics and techniques based on real-world observations.Get Started · Tactics · Enterprise Matrix · Groups
[86]
3 Common Hacking Techniques and How to Avoid Them - Withum
Sep 28, 2021 · 3 Hacking Techniques Today – What's New? Why Worry? · 1. Cryptojacking · 2. Supply Chain Hack · 3. Ransomware.
[87]
Hacking Your Brain: Top 13 Social Engineering Techniques
Here is a list of all the main threat vectors and some of the methods attackers use to hack their victims without using high-skill hacking techniques.<|separator|>
[88]
What Techniques Do Hackers Use to Steal Information? - NEBRC
These methods include phishing, fake WAP's (Wireless Access Point), waterhole attacks, brute forcing, bait & switch, and clickjacking.Missing: groups | Show results with:groups
[89]
Hacktivism Unveiled Q1 2025: How Hacktivists Zeroed In on the US
Apr 4, 2025 · RipperSec members rely primarily on a Web DDoS attack tool named MegaMedusa for their DDoS attacks. The tool's source code is maintained and ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[90]
Tactics and Motivations of Modern Hacktivists - CYFIRMA
Aug 20, 2024 · Anonymous is one of the oldest and most well-known hacktivist groups, originating in the early 2000s and gaining renown for high-profile ...
[91]
Advanced Persistent Threat (APT): Examples and Prevention
Jan 17, 2025 · Learn about advanced persistent threat (APT)s, including examples and key prevention strategies.Missing: sponsored credible
[92]
Put Down Your Dukes: Hunting For Hacking Group APT 29/APT 37 ...
Tailored Phishing Attacks: · Exploiting Software Flaws: · Stealthy Malware Installation: · Credential Harvesting: · Command and Control Infrastructure: · Data ...
[93]
6 ways hackers hide their tracks | CSO Online
Aug 7, 2025 · In my research, I observed that in addition to using obfuscation, steganography, and malware packing techniques, threat actors today frequently ...
[94]
Five notable examples of advanced persistent threat (APT) attacks
This point of entry method to corporate and government systems, known as spear-phishing, is the most commonly used tactic in APT attacks.
[95]
What is a Hacktivist? - United States Cybersecurity Magazine
There is no formal membership, hierarchy or structure to the group. Members join Anonymous because the group represents and fights for what the hacktivist ...
[96]
Hacktivism: Anonymous - Purdue cyberTAP
Dec 19, 2024 · Anonymous, founded in 2003, is a decentralized hacktivist group opposing internet censorship and defending privacy, and is the best example of ...
[97]
The organizational structure of ransomware groups is evolving rapidly.
May 1, 2025 · The landscape as of Q1-2025 is dominated by: (1) unaffiliated, lone operator extortionists, (2) a tranche of new-ish ransomware brands that blur the lines.
[98]
The organized activities of ransomware groups: A social network ...
Our study examines how cybercriminals organize and operate within Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) networks by analyzing connections between 96 cybercriminals ...
[99]
How Nation-States and Organized Cybercriminals Are Becoming Alike
Jan 7, 2025 · The distinction between nation-state actors and organized cybercriminals is becoming increasingly blurred in our rapidly evolving cyber landscape.
[100]
Publicly Available Tools Seen in Cyber Incidents Worldwide | CISA
Jun 30, 2020 · The tools detailed in this Activity Alert fall into five categories: Remote Access Trojans (RATs), webshells, credential stealers, lateral ...
[101]
Anonymous Ransomware Attack Tools - BlackFog
TOR, ZeroNet, and I2P are the most frequently used to access it. All of these are used for staging coordinated ransomware attacks. What is I2P?
[102]
APT41 Has Arisen From the DUST | Google Cloud Blog
Jul 18, 2024 · APT41 used publicly available tools SQLULDR2 for copying data from databases and PINEGROVE to exfiltrate data to Microsoft OneDrive ...
[103]
Ransomware WannaCry: All you need to know - Kaspersky
The WannaCry ransomware attack had a substantial financial impact worldwide. It is estimated this cybercrime caused $4 billion in losses across the globe.
[104]
How Did NotPetya Cost Businesses Over $10 Billion In Damages?
In June 2017, a cyberattack known as NotPetya unleashed unprecedented havoc across global networks, crippling infrastructure, halting business operations, ...
[105]
"WannaCry" ransomware attack losses could reach $4 billion
May 16, 2017 · Global financial and economic losses from the "WannaCry" attack that crippled computers in at least 150 countries could swell into the billions of dollars.
[106]
Total WannaCry losses pegged at $4 billion - Reinsurance News
Sep 25, 2017 · Ransomware attacks have reached a new peak this year, with WannaCry causing estimated global financial and economic losses of up to $4 billion ...
[107]
Ransomware News: WannaCry Attack Costs NHS Over $100 Million
Oct 18, 2018 · According to estimates from the UK's Department of Health and Social Care, the initial damages from the attack were about $25 million, but the ...
[108]
[PDF] Lessons Learned from the Colonial Pipeline Ransomware Attack
Aug 7, 2021 · Although Federal authorities eventually recovered $2.3 of the. $4.3 million ransom paid, the DarkSide hacking group still gouged a seven-figure ...<|separator|>
[109]
Cyber attack could cost Sony studio as much as $100 million | Reuters
Dec 9, 2014 · Mark Rasch, a former federal cyber crimes prosecutor, estimated costs could run up to $70 million. Losses in that range would not mean a big ...
[110]
Cyber Case Study: Sony Pictures Entertainment Hack
Nov 8, 2021 · In the final months of 2014, Sony Pictures Entertainment (SPE)—a ... Recovery costs. SPE is estimated to have spent at least $35 million ...
[111]
Sony pays up to $8m over employees' hacked data - BBC News
Oct 21, 2015 · Sony has agreed to pay up to $8m over employees' personal data lost in the 2014 hacking scandal surrounding the release of The Interview.
[112]
North Korea–linked Lazarus Group responsible for nearly ... - Fortune
Dec 14, 2023 · The North Korea–linked hacker group Lazarus was responsible for over $300 million in losses across crypto hacking incidents in 2023, representing 17.6% of the ...Missing: damages | Show results with:damages
[113]
Are High-Profile Hacks Spurring Your Security Business? - CRN
Nov 7, 2011 · "LulzSec and Anonymous certainly raised awareness to a problem that's existed for a long time regarding inadequate security," said Derek Manky, ...
[114]
Chaos Computer Club hacks Video-Ident - CCC
Aug 10, 2022 · Researchers with the Chaos Computer Club (CCC) have successfully circumvented established solutions for video-based identification online (Video-Ident)Open Source Software And A... · Only A Minor Effort · Fundamental Concerns About...
[115]
What The Fax?! - media.ccc.de
Dec 27, 2018 · We give a live demonstration of the first ever full fax exploitation, leading to complete control over the entire device as well as the network.
[116]
Hacktivism: The Short Life of LulzSec - Purdue cyberTAP
Dec 5, 2024 · LulzSec came onto the scene in 2011 after their first recorded hack against Fox.com's website. 'Lulz' stands for laughs while 'sec' is shorthand for security.Missing: history | Show results with:history
[117]
Leading Member Of The International Cybercriminal Group “Lulzsec ...
May 27, 2014 · Monsegur Cooperated With Law Enforcement To Reveal Structure And Methods Of Numerous Criminal Cyber Groups, And Enabled Authorities To ...
[118]
Lulzsec hacker group handed jail sentences - BBC News
May 16, 2013 · The four men, Ryan Cleary, Jake Davis, Mustafa al-Bassam and Ryan Ackroyd, were part of the Lulzsec hacking group. Cleary was jailed for 32 months, Davis for ...
[119]
Member Of LulzSec Hacking Group Sentenced To Over Year In ...
Apr 18, 2013 · ... conviction on federal computer hacking charges related to an extensive computer attack that compromised the computer systems of Sony ...
[120]
Anonymous hacker group: Two jailed for cyber attacks - BBC News
Jan 24, 2013 · Two men who carried out cyber attacks for the Anonymous hacking group are jailed, in what are believed to be the first convictions of their ...
[121]
Hacker tied to Anonymous gets 10 years in prison for cyberattacks
Nov 15, 2013 · Hacker tied to Anonymous ... But U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska said Hammond's previous hacking conviction and arrests for other smaller ...
[122]
'Anonymous' hackers plead guilty to minor charge in U.S. ... - Reuters
Aug 19, 2014 · 'Anonymous' hackers plead guilty to minor charge in U.S. for cyberattacks ... ALEXANDRIA Va. (Reuters) - Four members of the hacking group ...
[123]
About the Convention - Cybercrime - The Council of Europe
The Budapest Convention is more than a legal document; it is a framework that permits hundreds of practitioners from Parties to share experience and create ...
[124]
United States Signs Protocol to Strengthen International Law ...
May 12, 2022 · The Second Additional Protocol to the Budapest Convention will accelerate cooperation among parties to protect our citizens from cybercrime and hold criminals ...
[125]
Hacktivist group responsible for cyberattacks on critical infrastructure ...
Jul 16, 2025 · To execute their attacks, the group recruited supporters through a messaging service. It is estimated that the hackers were able to mobilise ...
[126]
Six Hackers in the United States and Abroad Charged for Crimes ...
Mar 6, 2012 · Five computer hackers in the United States and abroad were charged today, and a sixth pled guilty, for computer hacking and other crimes.Missing: major | Show results with:major
[127]
Cyber Gangs Aren't Afraid of Prosecution - Dark Reading
Oct 16, 2024 · The Budapest Convention of 2001 is probably the most important international treaty designed to combat cross-border cybercrime. But even ...
[128]
APT 41 GROUP - FBI
ZHANG Haoran, TAN Dailin, qian Chuan, FU Qiang, and JIANG Lizhi are all part of a Chinese hacking group known as APT 41 and BARIUM.Missing: major | Show results with:major
[129]
https://lawfaremedia.org/article/hackers-in-the-hague-the-prospects-of-prosecuting-international-cyber-crimes-before-the-international-criminal-court
[130]
[PDF] Ethics of Hacktivism - The Simons Center
Hacktivists use digital tools for political ends, and the question is whether they have ethics. The "hacker ethic" includes freedom of information and mistrust ...
[131]
[PDF] The Ethics of Cyber Conflict - Faculty
One area where hacktivism may be morally justified is civil disobedience, which is the active refusal to obey certain laws and demands of a government ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[132]
Is Hacktivism Legal? When Activism Becomes a Security Concern
Oct 8, 2024 · Hacktivism is generally considered illegal under the CFAA, though academics debate it, and it's often seen as a cybersecurity threat.
[133]
Information Technology and Moral Values
Jun 12, 2012 · Kenneth Himma largely agrees that the activity of computer hacking is unethical but that politically motivated hacking or “Hacktivism” may have ...
[134]
[PDF] Human Rights in an Information Age
Jan 17, 1991 · These putative moral justifications for hacking are flawed and are invoked far too often in order to legitimate immoral hacker behaviour ...<|separator|>
[135]
Hackers with a Cause: Navigating the Ethics of Hacktivism in ...
Mar 5, 2024 · Hacktivism is often deemed ethical only when it adheres to core principles of minimizing harm, promoting transparency, and ensuring accountability.
[136]
The Difference Between Ethical Hacking and Hacktivism - Superprof
Rating 4.0 (3) Sep 18, 2023 · The key difference between ethical hacking and hacktivism is license. Ethical hackers have permission to hack while hacktivists generally don't.
[137]
When Hackers Were Heroes - Communications of the ACM
Apr 1, 2021 · Hackers were a subculture of computer enthusiasts for whom programming was a vocation and playing around with computers constituted a lifestyle.
[138]
A history of hacking and hackers | Computer Weekly
Oct 25, 2017 · During the early 90s, the US government decided to crack down on criminal computer crimes in a series of raids dubbed Operation Sundevil.Missing: 1990s | Show results with:1990s
[139]
View of The media's portrayal of hacking, hackers, and hacktivism ...
The most frequent form of the word hack* was hacker or hackers (74 percent). Table 1: Distribution of forms of the word "hack." During the analysis, I ...
[140]
Top Five Hacking Portrayals in Movies and TV - Infosecurity Magazine
Aug 10, 2021 · These engaging but inaccurate depictions allowed movie makers and TV show producers to portray hacking in a way that was visually exciting.
[141]
Everything you know about Anonymous is wrong | Opinions
May 8, 2012 · Whether viewed as heroes or villains, much of what is stated about Anonymous is exaggeration.Missing: critiques | Show results with:critiques
[142]
The Truth About Anonymous's Activism | The Nation
Nov 11, 2014 · Members of this group endorsed criminal hacking as political resistance. They dropped acid and spoke of online experience in trippy language ...
[143]
Anonymous as the (Super)heroes of the Internet?
Mar 6, 2019 · Up to the present, Anonymous continues to be a very secretive group that organizes and operates in the shadows and strictly controls the ...
[144]
What Hollywood gets right and wrong about hacking
Jul 20, 2018 · The depictions of hackers up against “The Man” or a large company with dubious moral values sets up a romanticised view of hacking, which ...<|separator|>
[145]
It's a myth that most cyber-criminals are 'sophisticated' - BBC
Jul 26, 2017 · News reports and pop culture continually paint cyber-criminals as cunning and devious hackers, with almost magical computer skills.
[146]
Full article: Tracing controversies in hacker communities: ethical ...
Hackers and hacking communities have been described as influential actors in digital societies: as activists monitoring IT corporations and policymakers ...