[Click Here]

Developing A Hacker's FingerPrint (What's In Common Doesn't Count, We Need
To Find What's Unique)

Step 1 in becoming a "hacker profiler" would be to establish "fields" that
enable you to compare one hacker, or hackgroup, to another. It sounds easy
enough, but I think that it would prove to be a tricky task. These fields
would have to be set up in such a way, that they had fewest occurrences of
"duplications".

For example, one of the "fields" used by the US Justice Department to
identify one individual from another is a fingerprint. The reason they use
fingerprints is that NO duplications would occure in this field. So, if at
a crime scene, a fingerprint was recovered, and is matched against a
national database, it can be assured that there will be no duplicates, or,
if a "duplicate" is found, you can be assured that the "duplicate
fingerprint" belongs to the same person as the one that left the
fingerprint at the crime scene (ie, you haven't found a duplicate, but a
match).

Coming up with fields for "digital evidence" would be much more difficult
of a task than setting up fields for "physical evidence". However, that
doesn't mean it's impossible.

While there may not currently be one field which would prove to have 0
duplications of occurance, several very specific fields may be developed,
and if enough "hits" are found between fields, one may surmise that they're
viewing the same individual or group, as the one located in the database.

I currently have 70 some odd "fields" that I've been playing around with,
to help me keep track of the "underground". I'm going to go into brief
detail of a few of them, so that I can give you a better understanding of
this "field identification" concept.

Back To The Table Of Contents