> Possibly unpopular view: social engineering is not hacking. It is conning.
“Conning" is just hacking systems consisting of one or more people.
> People have been doing it since the beginning of time and one can do it with very little technical skill.
People do other kinds of hacking with very little skill and a few focussed tricks (often borrowed form others), too. OTOH, deep knowledge of social systems allows doing original hacks of more complex social systems with greater theoretical safeguards (often, they are just as weak if you can identify the right point of attack, but that's where the knowledge comes in; just as with systems composed of things other than humans.)
> It's an insult to those who work hard for deep knowledge and technical ability, to call social engineering "hacking".
“Conning" is just hacking systems consisting of one or more people.
> People have been doing it since the beginning of time and one can do it with very little technical skill.
People do other kinds of hacking with very little skill and a few focussed tricks (often borrowed form others), too. OTOH, deep knowledge of social systems allows doing original hacks of more complex social systems with greater theoretical safeguards (often, they are just as weak if you can identify the right point of attack, but that's where the knowledge comes in; just as with systems composed of things other than humans.)
> It's an insult to those who work hard for deep knowledge and technical ability, to call social engineering "hacking".
No, it's not.