Research spotlight – Hackers gonna hack: Investigating the effect of group processes and social identities within online hacking communities

H. Thackray
{"title":"Research spotlight – Hackers gonna hack: Investigating the effect of group processes and social identities within online hacking communities","authors":"H. Thackray","doi":"10.53841/bpsspr.2019.21.1.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hacking is an ethically and legally ambiguous area, often associated with cybercrime and cyberattacks. This investigation examines the human side of hacking and the merits of understanding this community. This includes group processes regarding: the identification and adoption of a social identity within hacking, and the variations this may cause in behaviour; trust within in the social identity group; the impact of breaches of trust within the community. It is believed that this research could lead to constructive developments for cybersecurity practices and individuals involved with hacking communities by identifying significant or influencing elements of the social identity and group process within these communities. For cybersecurity, the positive influence on individual security approaches after the hacker social identity adoption, and the subsequent in-group or out-group behaviours, could be adapted to improve security in the work place context. For individuals involved in the communities, an increase in the awareness of the potential influences from their adopted social identities and from other members could help those otherwise vulnerable to manipulation, such as new or younger members. Further discussion on such information, as well as historical examples, will lead to informed behaviour by these communities. Whilst this may not cause the group behaviour to change, it would ensure there would be understanding and acceptance of consequences to unethical or illegal actions, which is hoped to discourage cybercriminal behaviour. The research employed a mixed methods approach, with online questionnaires and individual participant interviews. This approach primarily utilised the netnographic approach (Kozinets, 2015), with the results providing more qualitative information than originally anticipated. Informal data collection for this research included observation of relevant websites and forum discussions as well as observation at hacking related conferences; the subsequent surveys and interviews were conducted with volunteers from these communities. Formal data collection was initiated through a pilot study, carried out in early 2016, with 44 participants. This was followed by the first study survey in early 2017, completed by 155 participants. The second study was individual interviews, conducted with 14 participants throughout 2017. These interviews were analysed in the context of Social Identity Theory (Tajfel, 1974). The third and final study was another survey, conducted early 2018 with 197 participants. Thematic analysis was conducted on all data. There was limited evidence of manipulation of group process or trust observed in forums or reported by participants. The adoption of a specific social identity does have strong and influential behavioural norms; however, the adoption of a specific social identity category does not prevent individuals from identifying and confirming to multiple categories which may use or accept different behaviours. The majority of particiapnts in these studies appeared to position themselves as positive deviants, acknowledging past or minor “black-hat” behaviour. This work contributes to the development and improvement of methodologies in online environments: this research was exploratory in accessing a hard to reach demographic that is often untrusting of outsiders. Adaptions to ethical procedures ensured complete anonymity for the participants, improving the participant recruitment rate. Key findings from this research demonstrate that hacking communities can be very positive and supportive for their members, functioning primarily as meritocracies. This is regarded by the communities as an important positive trait, in conjunction with online anonymity. The conclusions of this research consistently support the findings of previous studies.","PeriodicalId":278221,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychological Review","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Psychological Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsspr.2019.21.1.8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Hacking is an ethically and legally ambiguous area, often associated with cybercrime and cyberattacks. This investigation examines the human side of hacking and the merits of understanding this community. This includes group processes regarding: the identification and adoption of a social identity within hacking, and the variations this may cause in behaviour; trust within in the social identity group; the impact of breaches of trust within the community. It is believed that this research could lead to constructive developments for cybersecurity practices and individuals involved with hacking communities by identifying significant or influencing elements of the social identity and group process within these communities. For cybersecurity, the positive influence on individual security approaches after the hacker social identity adoption, and the subsequent in-group or out-group behaviours, could be adapted to improve security in the work place context. For individuals involved in the communities, an increase in the awareness of the potential influences from their adopted social identities and from other members could help those otherwise vulnerable to manipulation, such as new or younger members. Further discussion on such information, as well as historical examples, will lead to informed behaviour by these communities. Whilst this may not cause the group behaviour to change, it would ensure there would be understanding and acceptance of consequences to unethical or illegal actions, which is hoped to discourage cybercriminal behaviour. The research employed a mixed methods approach, with online questionnaires and individual participant interviews. This approach primarily utilised the netnographic approach (Kozinets, 2015), with the results providing more qualitative information than originally anticipated. Informal data collection for this research included observation of relevant websites and forum discussions as well as observation at hacking related conferences; the subsequent surveys and interviews were conducted with volunteers from these communities. Formal data collection was initiated through a pilot study, carried out in early 2016, with 44 participants. This was followed by the first study survey in early 2017, completed by 155 participants. The second study was individual interviews, conducted with 14 participants throughout 2017. These interviews were analysed in the context of Social Identity Theory (Tajfel, 1974). The third and final study was another survey, conducted early 2018 with 197 participants. Thematic analysis was conducted on all data. There was limited evidence of manipulation of group process or trust observed in forums or reported by participants. The adoption of a specific social identity does have strong and influential behavioural norms; however, the adoption of a specific social identity category does not prevent individuals from identifying and confirming to multiple categories which may use or accept different behaviours. The majority of particiapnts in these studies appeared to position themselves as positive deviants, acknowledging past or minor “black-hat” behaviour. This work contributes to the development and improvement of methodologies in online environments: this research was exploratory in accessing a hard to reach demographic that is often untrusting of outsiders. Adaptions to ethical procedures ensured complete anonymity for the participants, improving the participant recruitment rate. Key findings from this research demonstrate that hacking communities can be very positive and supportive for their members, functioning primarily as meritocracies. This is regarded by the communities as an important positive trait, in conjunction with online anonymity. The conclusions of this research consistently support the findings of previous studies.
研究焦点-黑客将进行黑客攻击:调查在线黑客社区中群体进程和社会身份的影响
黑客行为在道德和法律上都是一个模棱两可的领域,通常与网络犯罪和网络攻击有关。这项调查考察了黑客行为的人性一面,以及了解这个社区的优点。这包括以下方面的群体过程:在黑客行为中识别和采用社会身份,以及这可能导致的行为变化;社会认同群体内部的信任;违反社区内信任的影响。据信,该研究可以通过识别这些社区内的社会身份和群体过程的重要或影响因素,为网络安全实践和参与黑客社区的个人带来建设性的发展。在网络安全方面,采用黑客社会身份后对个人安全方式的积极影响,以及随后的群体内或群体外行为,可以适应于提高工作场所环境中的安全性。对于参与社区的个人来说,提高对其所采用的社会身份和其他成员的潜在影响的认识,可以帮助那些容易受到操纵的人,例如新成员或年轻成员。对这些信息以及历史实例的进一步讨论将导致这些社区采取知情的行为。虽然这可能不会导致群体行为的改变,但它将确保人们理解和接受不道德或非法行为的后果,这有望阻止网络犯罪行为。该研究采用了混合方法,包括在线问卷调查和个人访谈。该方法主要利用了网络学方法(Kozinets, 2015),其结果提供了比最初预期更多的定性信息。本研究的非正式数据收集包括观察相关网站和论坛讨论,以及观察黑客相关会议;随后的调查和访谈是对来自这些社区的志愿者进行的。正式的数据收集是通过2016年初开展的一项试点研究开始的,共有44名参与者。随后是2017年初的第一次研究调查,共有155名参与者完成。第二项研究是在2017年对14名参与者进行的个人访谈。这些访谈是在社会认同理论(Tajfel, 1974)的背景下进行分析的。第三项也是最后一项研究是2018年初进行的另一项调查,共有197名参与者。对所有数据进行专题分析。在论坛中观察到或参与者报告的操纵群体过程或信任的证据有限。采用特定的社会身份确实具有强大和有影响力的行为规范;然而,采用特定的社会身份类别并不妨碍个人识别和确认可能使用或接受不同行为的多个类别。这些研究中的大多数参与者似乎将自己定位为积极的越轨者,承认过去或轻微的“黑帽”行为。这项工作有助于在线环境中方法的发展和改进:这项研究在接触难以接触的人口方面是探索性的,这些人口往往不被外界信任。对道德程序的适应确保了参与者的完全匿名,提高了参与者的招募率。这项研究的主要发现表明,黑客社区对其成员来说可以是非常积极和支持的,主要是精英主义。这被社区视为一个重要的积极特征,与在线匿名相结合。这项研究的结论与以前的研究结果一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信