Schneier on Security

PeaceHead • August 22, 2018 3:37 PM

I’m not sure why some folks are so eager to discount or attempt to undermine other people’s anecdotes and explanations of what seems totally plausible. Maybe it’s just a “lack of imagination”.

Theft happens a lot and of any and all types of items, regardless of momentary market values, regardless of momentary black market values, regardless of functional value, regardless of depreciation, regardless of potential social repercussions or lack thereof.

The types of motivations are many, too many to list really.

But just to add to the list that echo explained so well…

Notice how each item is distinct from the rest:

• theft as a form of vandalism
• theft as a form of sabotage (to prevent some type of functionality)
• theft as a form of protest
• theft as a form of revenge
• theft as a form of intimidation
• theft as a form of harrassment (not all harrassment is intimidating)
• theft as a form of sabotage (to cause some type of bodily harm)
• theft as a form of sabotage (to cause some type of death)
• theft as a form of defense auditing (to discover what the response activity is or could be)

• theft as a form of punishment (“an eye for an eye”)

• theft as a form of communication (as a warning, or literally as an unrelated channel)

• theft as a form of comedic mischief (such as moving an item to an odd place to be noticed)

• theft as a mental health sickness (kleptomania, for example)

• theft as pre-emptively borrowing before asking for permission to borrow (damages might be a result of something else by the dunderheaded borrower)

• theft to incite social unrest or to instigate social malaise (this is rather important to think about deeply; it doesn’t even all pivot upon police involvement of lack thereof; consider for example chronic theft from a rich property developer designed to lower neighborhood property values, thus paving the way for neighborhood destruction-gentrification-redevelopment; this is very much it’s own thing, distinct yet still possible)

• theft to obtain needed resources

• theft to obtain needed services
• theft to obtain wanted resources

• theft to obtain wanted services

• theft to hide evidence

• theft to plant evidence or to obtain items to plant as evidence elsewhere

• theft to access resources to donate (robin hood style or otherwise)

• theft to access services to donate (robin hood style or otherwise)

• theft to acquire materials involved with the temporary satiation of addiction (not necessarily wanted nor needed, nor for any other purpose)* THIS IS ACTUALLY A VERY BIG ISSUE IN SOME US STATES; THE DRUG PROBLEM IS HUGE.

Even when the stolen item(s) can’t be resold, nor given, nor traded, that doesn’t prevent thieves from taking anyhow. And if the thieves can’t think straight due to drug use or other neurobehavioral problems, they may end up doing a lot of strange stuff including different forms of any of the stuff listed above as well as other wierd behaviors.

And last but not least…

• theft as artistic or cultural expression (This is really not my position, but for the criminally-minded it’s within the spectrum of possibilities; take for example the current state of U.S. politics and geopolitics and military misadventures: much of the corruption and criminal activity and risk and damage serves no purpose whatsoever and is actually bad for everyone… and yet it continues with great regularity and persistence.

This is where anthropology and forensic psychology have some tracktion. Some people do bad things and are proud of it and/or have zero remorse, it’s even been proven in case studies.

This is really important to think about. We are currently living in an era where kleptocrats are openly “expressing themselves” and aggrandizing their cultures of ripping off and trashing everyone and everything else. They just don’t give a damn. And yes, they are an existential risk to the rest of us. They might not steal cars, just the personal data of several millions, military technologies to threaten everyone with, people’s land and jobs and livelihoods, people’s literal health, people’s trust, people’s votes, people’s primary channels of news and communication, and people’s innocence.

Etcetera, etcetera.

Any of the above could be none, or partial, or total.
Any of the above could involve multiple parties too.

Also note that breaking and entering doesn’t always include theft (as the article and discussion already alluded to). It doesn’t even always add up to being a prelude to theft either.

People’s responses to actual thefts and attempted thefts vary alot too, but I won’t delve into partial delineations of those at this time. But it is also worth considering that sentimental value of anything is just enough justification for most people to have some type of response to theft even if that response is to do nothing at all but feel bad.

Anyways, I suppose my point is clear enough.

Thanks for the article. I think the author is maybe a bit too non-chalant about the implications and nuances, but the posting of the article is yet another nice variety of security concept citing which serves to show more of the bigger picture of what the status quo currently is.

PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE REQUIRES EFFORT AND DELIVERS BOUNTIFUL REWARDS.