keep it that way. We wanted to get his version of the story. He refused to talk about the matter (merely giving himself an out by mentioning he thought Khalid was a Fed just posing as a terrorist). If I were in his posi- tion, I probably wouldn't want to be interviewed on the subject either.
The Harkat ul-Mujahideen While searching the Internet Relay Chat logs, reporter McKay found that Khalid had at one point described himself to the young hackers as a mem- ber of Harkat-ul-Ansar.3 According to the South Asia Intelligence Review, "the Harkat-ul-Ansar was termed a terrorist organization by the US due to its association with the exiled Saudi terrorist Osama bin Laden in 1997. To avoid the repercussions of the US ban, the group was recast as the Harkat ul-Mujahideen in 1998."4
The U.S. Department of State has repeatedly warned about this group. One item from State reads, "Pakistani officials said that a U.S. air raid on October 23 [2001] had killed 22 Pakistani guerrillas who were fighting alongside the Taliban near Kabul. The dead were members of the Harkat ul-Mujaheddin ... [which] had been placed on the State Department's official list of terrorist organizations in 1995."5
In fact, the Harkat is today one of the 36 groups designated by State as foreign terrorist organizations. Our government, in other words, con- siders them among the baddest actors on the face of the globe.
The young hackers, of course, didn't know this. To them, it was all a game.
As for Khalid, a major general of the Indian armed forces, giving an address on the topic of information security in April 2002, confirmed Khalid as a terrorist, telling his audience about hacker links with "Khalid Ibrahim of Pakistani-based Harkat-ul-Ansar."6 The general seemed trou- bled, however, that Khalid himself was based not in Pakistan but in the general's own country, at Delhi, India.
In the Aftermath of 9/11 Some hackers manipulate and deceive. They fool computer systems into thinking they have authorization that they have in fact stolen; they practice Chapter 2 When Terrorists Come Calling 35
social engineering to manipulate people in order to achieve their goals. All of this means that when you talk to a hacker, you listen carefully to see if what he's telling you, and the way he's saying it, suggest that he can be believed. Sometimes you're just not certain.
My coauthor and I weren't certain about what ne0h told us of his reac- tion to 9/11. We believe it just enough to share it:
Do you know how much I cried that day? I felt for sure my life
was over.
This was accompanied by a curious nervous laugh -- signifying what? We couldn't tell.
To think that maybe I had something to do with it. If I had gone
into Lockheed Martin or Boeing and got more information, they
could have used that. It was a bad time for me and for America.
I cried because I never thought to report him. I didn't use my best
judgment. That's the reason he hired me to do all these things ...
If I had even a pinkie-finger of a hand into the Trade Center ...
[The thought] was absolutely devastating.
Actually I lost three friends in the World Trade Center; I never
felt so bad.
Many hackers are in their teens or even younger. Is that too young to recognize the potential danger of responding to requests from someone who could pose a threat to our country? Personally, I'd like to think 9/11 has made American hackers -- even very young ones -- suspicious, unlikely to be suckered by a terrorist. I just hope I'm right.
The White House Break-in The history of computer security in one way parallels the ancient history of cryptography. For centuries, code makers have devised ciphers that they labeled "unbreakable." Even today, in an age of computers that can read- ily encrypt a message using a one-time pad, or a key containing hundreds of characters, most codes are still breakable. (America's code-making and code-breaking organization, the National Security Agency, boasts