My understanding of this article was that he pulled off the hack entirely by himself, without having to get someone to visit his page. Maybe I misunderstood.
Oh... my bad. The two sentences above the "Real hacker" statement were my favorite parts of the article. It has no relation to him being a hacker. Sorry for the confusion.
Ok, technically you are correct. Good job. What I meant is he wasn't hacking benevolently to discover vulnerabilities to promote world peace and economic development for poor orphans and endangered species.
No problem. It's still cool, still makes him a hacker, just slightly less impressive than if he had done it while juggling the needs of his Foundation.
This guy wasn't really a hacker, just someone who knew a little bit about tech and figured out a flawed system. I think that sums him up as a scammer instead of a hacker.
I also didn't, but some of the articles on the subject paint "the guy" as a down-on-his-luck hacker in developing country and ancient computer hardware trying to do the right thing. It's presented as almost a charity donation or a scholarship to someone in less than affluent circumstances.
reply