
Infosec community disagrees with changing 'black hat' term - pabo
https://www.zdnet.com/article/infosec-community-disagrees-with-changing-black-hat-term-due-to-racial-stereotyping/
======
fennecfoxen
It's offensive in the same way as Call of Duty: Black Ops is offensive, which
is "generally not actually offensive". However, it is possible to derive
professional advancement from claiming that it is, so expect to see more of
this in tech.

Also not offensive: Black Friday, black holes, black beans, black tea, black-
eyed peas, black gold (aka oil), Black Mirror, black swans.

~~~
jointpdf
I’m not taking a stance on the issue, but this quote from the article
illustrates how blacklist vs. whitelist is different than the examples you
gave:

> “Others pointed to the dualism between black and white as representing evil
> and good, concepts that have been around since the dawn of civilizations,
> long before racial divides even existed between humans.”

The supporters of the current terminology use this to bolster their argument,
but I believe it’s also at the core of the argument against the use of terms
like blacklist/whitelist. The idea is that the black vs. white = evil vs. good
(like, MTG card colors) can “spill over” into dark skin vs. light skin = evil
vs. good. This is an interesting article related to this effect:
[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-bad-is-
black-...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-bad-is-black-
effect/)

Ok fine, I’ll take a weakly-held stance: this seems like a bit of a stretch,
and distracts from the more serious ways in which systemic racism manifests
itself. On the other hand, I see no need to become outraged—words fall out of
favor all the time (go play with the Google n-grams viewer to see for
yourself).

~~~
tasssko
When I think black and white I think night and day and not evil and good.

~~~
catalogia
It's an unfortunate quirk of human brains that fear of the dark is a familiar
experience to most children and many adults. I suppose it has something to do
with nocturnal tigers hunting our ancestors. Association between nighttime and
fear seems biologically unavoidable.

~~~
tasssko
Agree completely, I remember the books by brothers grimm as a young child.
Trolls and goblins and all manner of imaginative creatures used to keep me up
at night.

------
hprotagonist
_Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims
may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons
than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron 's cruelty may
sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who
torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with
the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven
yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness
stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of
states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who
have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed
with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”_

~~~
hintymad
This is a damn good summary.

~~~
hprotagonist
C.S. Lewis had Dolores Umbridge's number long before she was ever dreamt up.

------
wazoox
Also "MITM" (man in the middle), "Whitelist" and "Blacklist", even "Sanity
Check".

This is all very aligned with a general trend of cheap moralization and virtue
signalling that actually achieves nothing but makes as much noise as possible
and poison every discussion with identity politics, by seeing prejudice and
bigotry everywhere.

~~~
throwaway25789
> actually achieves nothing

It's worse than nothing. It sucks up oxygen that could be used elsewhere.

Outrage/attention is a finite resource, and the more of it is blown on topics
like this, the less is available to spend on things like income inequality,
hiring biases, incarceration rates, police brutality, social programs,
diversity/representation in media/politics, etc. At this moment in time the
Black Lives Matter movement has precious momentum that must not be squandered.

To put it bluntly: distractions like this are actively harmful, and become
more harmful the more attention they receive. Focus is crucial.

~~~
mnm1
Absolutely. BLM asks to put a stop to police brutality/racism and stupid white
people decide to change the phrase "grandfathered" or "you guys" in response.
Or to put down entire languages like Spanish because they use gendered nouns.
A more tone deaf response would be hard to achieve. Even those of us who have
supported the cause against police brutality and racism for years are now
losing interest and energy. If this is the outcome of the protests, they were
indeed all for naught, just spreading corona so a bunch of idiots can feel
better about themselves thinking they made a change in the world by censoring
others' speech. How absurd.

~~~
josteink
> just spreading corona

And causing riots, billions in property damages and innocent civilian lives
lost (even before we’re considering the corona).

At this point the BLM movement is a clear net negative for society.

~~~
sumedh
> At this point the BLM movement is a clear net negative for society.

What is your solution to bring awareness against police brutality and
systematic racism?

~~~
josteink
> What is your solution to bring awareness against police brutality

Unlawful police brutality is bad regardless of who it is being committed
against. Framing this as a "black" issue and not a general issue which
everyone can unite on, is divisive.

The solution is obviously to provide better training for new police officers
and foster a better attitude among the police force (in general, new or old)
towards their role in society.

> systematic racism

I don't believe in unfounded claims. Are there actual data to back this
extraordinary claim of systematic racism today (as opposed to in the past), or
is this just internet-outrage?

~~~
sumedh
> Framing this as a "black" issue and not a general issue which everyone can
> unite on, is divisive.

Everyone is united, why do you think they are not. A racist person obviously
would not be united on this issue.

> The solution is obviously to provide better training for new police officers

So why wasn't this done earlier?

> (as opposed to in the past)

Ok, so what is your solution to fix the effects of past systematic racism.

~~~
josteink
> Ok, so what is your solution to fix the effects of past systematic racism.

Whats your solution to fixing past inequality of wealth? Shall we disown the
rich of their personal property?

Some problems we just decide not to fix and just move on, trying to create
something with a more fair, and level playing field from here on.

I don’t see how we can handle this any differently.

Implementing systematic _new_ racism in our time to fight racism from past
times obviously won’t work and will just create new sets of problems for
future generations.

~~~
sumedh
I see that you conveniently ignored my question.

> trying to create something with a more fair, and level playing field from
> here on.

Saying it easy, those words are empty if you chose not to implement it.

Who wants to implement new systematic racism, do you?

------
mikenew
Someone please explain to me how labeling the word 'black' as offensive
represents some kind of social progress. It reminds me of that joke from The
Office where Michael acts like the term "Mexican" is problematic.

If there is a real problem here I am genuinely happy to hear about it and try
to understand. I would love to see more diversity in computer science and I
think the entire industry would benefit. But it sure feels like some rich
white engineer taking advantage of a social movement to broadcast their own
virtue.

~~~
el_nahual
Without commenting on whether or not "black hat" is offensive, you're straw-
manning the argument.

The argument isn't that "black" is offensive, but rather that it's connotation
with negative things is.

To use your The Office example, it would be as if "bad" hackers were called
"Mexican hat" hackers, forbidden lists "Mexican lists", etc.

(Except not, because "Mexican" only means a kind of person, whereas "black"
means many things, but that's the argument being made).

~~~
salawat
Boulderdash. There is not a damn thing offensive about a combination of
<color><noun>.

We use constructs like that all the time. Or are we going to start saying "red
lights" are offensive? Or "yellow lights"? Around yellow proceed with caution!
Red means Stop! Danger!

How about "Dark rooms"? Should we avoid that? Change red-black trees to green
purple?

Or hell, lets rope the electrical engineers into it. How dare black be the
color of _the negative cable_. What's white? Oh, ground? You mean where
everything ends up going? Heavens, pull the wiring out!

This moral panic reminds me of a quote from C.S. Lewis.

> _" Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its
> victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber
> barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty
> may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those
> who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so
> with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to
> Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very
> kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will
> and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a
> level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never
> will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals."_

Truly, in these Times have the moral busybodies had their Jimmy's rustled.

~~~
TerminalSystem3
Well said, and I like the quote. I think it's telling that the top response to
your comment completely dodges the substance of the comment and just attacks
your "diction." It seems to me that these moral purists are basically in a
state of war - any rational argument against their position is met with
overreactions, emotional responses, and insults.

Sometimes I wonder whether some of this ridiculousness is put on by foreign
influence operations. Because I could not imagine a more effective strategy to
hand the election to Trump. Most people I know are rather appalled at the
orwellian censorship of the current movement.

------
hintymad
It is offensive because the word "black" in the phrase has negative
connotation, right? If so, the stance Google engineer took was not progressive
enough. I suggest a purge with rigorous examination on at least the following
phrases on top of my mind:

black cat

black money

black sheep

black frost

black market

black humor

black plague

black widow

black monday

black ops

black hand

black death

black magic

black propaganda

black economy

black book

black prince

black eye

black marketeer

blackmail

Oh, and do remember to cancel this website:
[https://www.bourncreative.com/meaning-of-the-color-
black/](https://www.bourncreative.com/meaning-of-the-color-black/), as well as
all the discussion about the sensation of the black color.

In a racist's eyes, everything is about racism.

~~~
hintymad
And I don't understand the downvote. The Google justice fighter didn't ask to
rename "black hat" because of negative connotation? If it is about negative
connotation, why is it wrong to examine all phrases, especially the ones like
"black market" and "black hand"?

~~~
prepend
It’s wrong because of bikeshedding and spends resources on unimportant things.

Racism is important. Hacking is important. Spending cycles working in these
areas is better than helping those who struggle with googling “is blackhat a
racist term?”

In this case the speaker shut off discussion anyway by not participating. So
he’s not “examining all phrases,” he’s issuing judgement on a phrase. And his
judgement seems silly to me.

I don’t know the subject so perhaps his material is great, but based on this
one action it seems unlikely that his judgement would be great on blackhat
hacking, but ridiculous in this area.

------
mike503
I’ve seen a lot of good examples of black being bad, but black also is a
positive thing in many contexts.

Amex Black card? Or other cards? A sign of prestige.

Black limousines and towncars are seen as prestigious.

Black clothes make you look thinner; plenty of women like to outfit themselves
in black as much as possible.

The gothic look primarily deals in black. Never seen or heard anyone try to
link some sort of racial relation to it.

It’s weird that “black <something>” is now being looked at so critically,
especially since “black people” isn’t even a properly descriptive term, but
one that may even have roots itself as the “white man’s N word” back in the
day. However it seems to the acceptable phrase. I’m now going to see what the
epidemiology of that is, I’m curious who came up with it.

~~~
mike503
I should elaborate my point slightly.

Even Wikipedia says this: “For many other individuals, communities and
countries, "black" is perceived as a derogatory, outdated, reductive or
otherwise unrepresentative label, and as a result is neither used nor defined,
especially in African countries with little to no history of colonial racial
segregation” [1]

So to many (maybe not in US) it already is an offensive term. My thought would
be why not move past the term of black people to something more universal with
no historical questionability, and not get caught up in “is black <something>”
offensive. Instead of having to fight and question a lot of black <something>
due to its actual color, embrace a more transcendent new term (much like
Indian vs Indigenous Person vs Native American, that movement)

1\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_people](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_people)

Edit for minor typo

------
burlesona
My understanding is that the terms “black hat” and “white hat” stem from
Western movies where the villains and heroes would typically wear black and
white hats, respectively. I’m not aware of a racial association, but perhaps I
just don’t know about it?

~~~
dmtroyer
I think it is worthwhile to examine why westerns chose to use the symbolism of
black and white hats.

~~~
toyg
Probably because black has been associated to “death” for millennia (it’s the
color of night, which is traditionally dangerous), while white is associated
to cleanliness and light. We’re talking Egyptian times, Ancient Greece, etc,
when there wasn’t really a concept of “white skin” (more or less everyone in
highly-populated European and North-African regions had brown skin, to survive
under the sun; very few people even lived in Northern climates). What do you
wear when somebody dies, in the Mediterranean region? Black. What do you wear
when you celebrate? White.

The symbolism is extremely obvious and pre-dating even the “discovery of
America”.

~~~
Nasrudith
Eastern cultures had the opposite association of white with death but that is
believed to ironically be a skin color association of the pallor of the
deceased.

There are some discussions to be had about different symbolisms but treating
it as a reductive to always good or bad well, calling it childish is an insult
to children.

------
TACIXAT
It is doing the opposite of what it appears to be doing here. Blackhat is
incredibly prestigious, expensive, and largely corporate and government in
attendance. If there really was some association to race (I do not think there
is), this would be a positive example.

What I would like to see all these people do, who are doing find and replace
in repos, is to show up to local city council meetings. They should find out
what changes would be most impactful for minorities in their city and fight
for those.

Changing 100 tech conference names will never negate the economic damage of
them blocking housing development in the single family home neighborhoods that
they live in around Mountain View.

------
DLA
Instead of this cancel culture BS, maybe we dedicate more effort and outrage
to real problems—-remember cancer, inequality, poverty, global warming,
runaway national debt, defense issues, deforestation, plastic waste (and rain,
apparently), clean water shortages, etc. Hey but let’s make sure we rename
that default branch to main or remove specific keywords from code bases (none
of which has anything to do with race). It’s fine. Those real problems can
wait for some day.

------
galvin
It's clear that some of the language we use needed to be changed, the
previously used terms for primary and secondary hard drives are an obvious
example.

It seems to me that the notions related to black and white have broader
cultural associations though. Light and dark or day and night have long been
associated with good and bad. White similarly has associations with good and
innocence hence the use for wedding dresses. I'm not convinced that we can
easily rid ourselves of these deep rooted notions.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
You're still giving the idea too much credit, I think. Black is just a color.
The attitude that all black-colored things are intrinsically associated with
black people is itself bizarre and problematic.

~~~
sukilot
"Black" people aren't black. "White" people aren't white. Having white skin is
a rare disease (albinism). So why did pink people invent the term
"negro"/"black" to describe Africans? And why did the pink people call
themselves "white"?

~~~
thefounder
Btw yellow people are not really yellow either. And albinism is not "pure"
white either.

------
motohagiography
I'm sorry, this is bonkers.

I have presented at more than one Blackhat conference and since then I have
seen the hacker scene reduced to nothing but a farm team for surveillance
companies, domestic spy agencies, and totalitarian movements in academia
because they think merely being against-bad is sufficient to be good. Hacking
was always about individual competence as a check on technological dominion
and absolute political power. Today, it's something you do to get noticed by
people who rent you out for dog and pony shows to sell surveillance
technologies. Security is no longer about protecting innovation and enabling a
perimeter for safe creativity and exploration, it is about inserting a
governance layer over the competent and other technologists, to ensure their
subordination to a layer of interchangeable compromised sycophants.

The movement to change these things has nothing to do with the content of
"blackhat/whitehat." It is only about whether the people militating for the
change have the power to cow others into submission. It is a test of whether
the we will submit to the histrionic bullying by people in this movement. This
is the same mechanism as the myth of Kim Jong Il hitting 11 consecutive holes
in one, which was patently ridiculous, but designed to identify people who
still have enough individual identity to recognize and resist the dominating
absurdity of the movement behind it, who can't help but out themselves, so
that they may be targeted by the movement for liquidation. What's worse, is
people like this researcher aren't insane, they are calculated and cynical.
This entire playbook is described by Hannah Arendt in her essay "Ideology and
Terror," which was appended to her book, "The Origins of Totalitarianism."

If this makes me the first to stop clapping, so be it. The stakes are high
enough that bearing the risk of being honest is a greater service to others
than anything else I will likely achieve.

Good riddance.

~~~
BoiledCabbage
Slow your horses. I happen to agree, and feel that this isn't the most
impactful/helpful place to affect change.

But we all agree that symbols have meanings. Confederate emblems on state
flags have meaning. The fact that you feel this case isn't worthwhile is fine,
and you're entitled to your view and sharing it. But that doesn't magically
change the concept of symbols into some plot of Kim Jong Il totalitarianistic
mythology. You disagree with the changing of that symbol as an effective
method for improving things. That's fine.

Instead of just the symbolic, are you just as fired up about addressing the
structural issues of discrimination that people of color in your field
experience? Is the extent of your ire just the terminology change? Because
many people feel they don't have the luxury of that being the largest issues
they are facing in tech. That's just one small pebble of many issues out
there. Are you helping out in those efforts? Are you only willing to get upset
about a name change but none of the other issues present in our field?

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
I can't speak for the original commenter, but I'm fired up about this issue
_because_ of my fire for addressing structural issues in my field. Do you
remember the controversy last year about the manager who said "I won't hire
anyone who doesn't send a thank-you email"? Language policing is another
manifestation of the same problem. It's a minor hurdle for those of us who
follow the latest trends in upper-middle-class professional culture, and a
huge structural barrier for anyone who can't or doesn't.

------
DyslexicAtheist
_" > Discussions about the topic started late last night after David
Kleidermacher[1], VP of Engineering at Google, and in charge of Android
Security and the Google Play Store, withdrew from a scheduled talk he was set
to give in August at the Black Hat USA 2020 security conference."_

it's usually entitled white people who feel immediately offended by this. With
entitled I mean, finished university working at a top position in a large
company on a 6 figure salary. It's never the worker POC who is slaving away in
an Amazon warehouse or working 3 jobs in the gig economy to feed their family.
It's just a cheap way to get your name in the news and to me (personally)
these people are very misguided. They're well read no doubt but nevertheless
wrong. Guess it's easier as an exec at a multinational company to pander to
this rather than tackling their transfer-pricing crimes they commit with their
Double Irish / Dutch Sandwiches[2].

Banning language like this is a very dangerous path:

 _“Don 't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of
thought? In the end we shall make thought-crime literally impossible, because
there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be
needed will be expressed by eactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined
and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten. . . . The process
will still be continuing long after you and I are dead. Every year fewer and
fewer words, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller. Even now,
of course, there's no reason or excuse for commiting thought-crime. It's
merely a question of self-discipline, reality-control. But in the end there
won't be any need even for that. . . . Has it ever occcured to you, Winston,
that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being will be
alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having now?” _ \--
George Orwell "1984"

[1]
[https://www.linkedin.com/in/davekleidermacher/](https://www.linkedin.com/in/davekleidermacher/)

[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_Islands:_Tax_Havens_a...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_Islands:_Tax_Havens_and_the_Men_Who_Stole_the_World)

~~~
tdeck
Whether the term "black hat" perpetuates racial prejudices or not (I'm
unconvinced), I think this kind of comment has the potential to take the whole
thread down the wrong path. It asserts (without evidence) that no working-
class Black people care about this¹, then argues that the author is "no doubt
nevertheless wrong", and then quotes a work of fiction without any explanation
of why the analogy is apt. Why is it that every time there's a discussion
about language like this people try to shut it down with hyperbolic
comparisons to totalitarianism rather than actually engaging? We can have
these kinds of discussions while _also_ pushing companies to put their money
where their mouth is.

¹ Could it be instead that when working-class Black people complain about this
they don't get national press?

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
People make hyperbolic comparisons because the previous hyperbolic comparisons
keep coming true. A decade or two ago, "activists want us to examine all
black-colored things to make sure they're not racist" was a ridiculous
hyperbolic claim.

~~~
tdeck
As far as I can tell, that's a bad-faith misrepresentation of the position.
The position is more like "we've got lots of expressions that associate
`black` with `bad`, and maybe we should move away from them in a professional
context." The claim isn't that the origin of these terms itself is necessarily
racist (e.g. a black sheep is a sheep whose wool can't be dyed), only that
their use helps to an unconscious climate of anti-blackness. Again, I'm not
really convinced that this is true, but it's not the same as saying we should
examine every "black-colored thing" to make sure it's not racist.

And crucially, I'm not irrationally upset over the mere suggestion that we
should rethink certain language, and someone withdrawing from a conference
doesn't immediately make me think of a fictional evil regime that tortures
people for reading a book or saying the wrong thing.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
Can you go into more detail? I'm not sure I see how it isn't the same. If we
think any use of the word "black" to describe something negative causes "an
unconscious climate of anti-blackness", it seems like that implies a
commitment to examine every black-colored thing.

~~~
tdeck
I think "thing" is too broad a term, the focus is specifically on a small set
of negative expressions. For example, if I walk down the street and see a
black mailbox or a black manhole cover, I don't see anyone arguing that those
things might be racist.

------
abellerose
I'm white so I can only postulate from other experiences where I can actually
relate.

I think the question of "black hat" may in fact be offensive is valid
criticism of our culture using "black" to be on the opposite side of a
spectrum compared to white; where humans think the white side is possibly
noble while the black side deserves some form of contempt.

I think it's a red herring to think about other combinations of words having
"black" before the following word and where no negative feeling exists from
it. Example: black swan

Should people care? IDK

~~~
tridentlead
My herring is deeply offended.

------
SpicyLemonZest
If someone sees the phrase "Black Hat" and immediately thinks of negative
stereotypes about black people, I really feel like they're the one with
unconscious bias that needs to be broken down.

------
claudeganon
Does this sudden upswell in irrelevant language policing not seem like some
kind of coordinated op to discredit BLM? I don’t question that real people
fall for it, but considering how wildly successful it’s been at distracting
from material demands, like ending police violence, and how much the media has
embraced these stories while ignoring ongoing protests, has me a little
tinfoily...

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
I think it's an inevitable consequence of the well-intentioned demands that
everyone should take action. If you're a conscientious big company VP, with a
strong belief that you should take action but no actual power to reform the
police, doing something performative but splashy is the obvious choice.

------
heynow12
The only thing offensive about this is the way white people are hijacking the
narrative and making the actual point of what peope of color are actually
asking for get lost in bullshit.

------
mindslight
The inanity is best summed up in an image macro:
[https://imgur.com/gallery/QR1UXz1](https://imgur.com/gallery/QR1UXz1)

------
pinkhatoperator
These Red Guards 2.0 seriously need to chill out.

------
lawnchair_larry
No, it isn’t.

~~~
dang
The submitted title was "Is the title of the Black Hat conf offensive? Google
sec. researcher withdraws", which broke the HN guidelines.

Submitters: " _Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or
linkbait; don 't editorialize._"

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

------
fzeroracer
I'm not sure what the problem is.

I've refactored methods and functions all the time to try and improve clarity.
Removing words, changing meaning so that people who read it grok it.

I don't have a problem with changing terms. But people take a hard-line
ideological stance against it because they perceive change as being weak or a
slippery slope or something.

~~~
Nasrudith
It is because of the actor really. Conceptually their strategy is "if they
give an inch take a mile and keep on taking" while using every bit to beat
them with it over every little petty issue. The way to shut them down is to
tell them to take a hike from the start to deny any leverage. Reconsider if
they have anything worthy of consideration.

Part of effecfive communication is not looking like a bad actor with an
approach.

