Home > Computers & Technology > Internet > Internet Security & Safety > Hacking
Is hacking morally wrong?
Results so far:
| Yes | 72% | 961 votes | Total: 1343 votes | |
| No | 28% | 382 votes |
Yes
by Steven Singletary
Created on: January 24, 2012 Last Updated: February 19, 2012
Imagine for a moment walking down 8th street in the heart of New York City. In front of you, a fifty dollar bill lays flat against the concrete. The color of the bill glistens in the morning sun; the number "50" jumps out at you. There are no bystanders, no onlookers. What do you do? If you are morally just, you continue on your journey. If you are morally just and fortified with dignity, you pick up the bill and hope that the owner is nearby; if he isn't, you turn it in to the nearest shop or police station. If you lack integrity and feel that you are able to get away with taking the fifty dollar bill without anyone noticing, then your morality is in the red.
Now excogitate this: imagine you are computer literate and an expert in every aspect of computing. You can see holes in software created by others. Your skills allow you to exploit these holes. The potential incentive for doing so is highly profitable. What do you do? If you are morally just, you continue on your journey. If you are morally just and fortified with decency, you take note of the holes and notify the owner of the software. If you lack integrity and have difficulty conducting yourself morally and subsequently think that you are able to get away with exploiting these holes without anyone noticing, then you are in the wrong, if not a criminal.
The culprit is aware of several key points:
• An issue that can be potentially exploited
• Security holes, or gaps created involuntarily by the developer of the software
• A lucrative pot of gold (metaphorically speaking)
• Vulnerabilities that exist only briefly and must be exploited as soon as possible
Why am I propelling you into practical scenarios? Why am I asking you to brand yourself with sole integrity, candor and compassion, or no integrity at all? What difference does it make? The difference dictates a fine line between a righteous and just citizen and a borderline criminal. I am trying to make a point - one that will hopefully convince potential opponents of this article to diversify their conviction.
Among professional programmers, the word hacker can be either complimentary or derogatory, although it is developing an increasingly unfavorable connotation. Why is that? What exactly does the word hacker mean? In computer lingo, the word means to alter a computer program; it is that simple. Does a hacker always do so with malicious intent? Not all of them are ill-conceived. Does the prospect of a ruthless hacker, subsidizing a program for personal gains, outweigh the contingency of a morally sound hacker, exploiting a program for just reasons? The recent proliferation of malicious hacking incidents suggests it does. Hackers (proficient ones) are astonishingly computer literate. They know how computers work, how 0's and 1's intertwine to perform a set of instructions. Hackers are familiar with programming methodologies and committed to finding holes that programmers have neglected to secure.
The hacker has two choices: either (1) exploit the hole(s) and gain an incentive, whether reputational or monetary, or (2) exploit the hole(s) and alert the programmer or software owner of the exploitations, thus promoting the reduction of future vulnerabilities. If the hacker chooses (1), he is expressing immorality. If he chooses (2), he is a saint and can, consequently, be a labeled a white hat hacker.
Is hacking morally wrong? I would have to say yes. Are there exceptions? There certainly are. I lean towards the former, because the odds are unparalleled, leaving the latter outweighed by a ratio of 1:3.
You could say the same for abortion. Is it morally wrong? Are there exceptions? Statistics certainly justify a resounding yes. So for those of you who think abortion is morally wrong, is it because of the majority of the former, the fact that, in a general sense, abortion is immoral and so because of societal consensus, or is it because you personally and independently believe for it to be wrong? Make your case.
There are exceptions to murder; consider your life threatened. Would you kill someone to save yourself, your child? I certainly would not hesitate. Would you kill someone for the pure sake of it? No, think about it...
Hacking is morally wrong, especially because you are (1) manipulating someone else's code (whether subjugated by altruistic or fraudulent intentions), (2) jeopardizing the stability of someone else's program, and most notably, (3) conceivably decimating someone else's financial, professional, or personal life.
Even if your intentions are innocuous and exist for pure, moral reasons, the art of hacking consists of circumventing someone else's code to accomplish a task. The only time such behavior could be considered moral is when you have the permission of the software owner to exploit security holes that may or may not exist. If there is no sanction whatsoever, you are conducting yourself in an IMMORAL manner – plain and simple.
Learn more about this author, Steven Singletary.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
by David Kramer
Created on: March 11, 2010
Inquisitive children will often be found taking apart a toy or two, just to see how it works or looks on the inside. Other than the parent worried about it not going back together the same way, or the product liability department of the manufacturer, most people praise a child who has such curiosity and thirst for ingenuity. Yet, when it comes to hacking other forms of technology, like a computer, there exists a negative stereotype.
Hacking is not just about computers, it’s the art of improvising, discovery, and pushing something to the limits in order to learn, explore, understand, and to make it better. The term hacking, however, has been limited by the movie and news media to computers with stories of people breaking into government systems with the power to annihilate the world – if only it were that easy, all our problems would be solved.
Even the true computer hacker is not interested in embezzling from banks and corporations, stealing people’s identities, disrupting power grids, or shutting down the security around the Hope diamond, or even reading the email of the pretty girl next door. These people are criminals and clearly unethical.
The true hacker focuses on discovery of constraints and limitations of technology and how it applies to human life and social interaction. While a hacker may discover exploits and test them, it is for the knowledge and understanding of it and not the abuse. A true hacker helps to make technology more robust and safe from the criminal types that might otherwise use the exploits to their advantage.
No system or technology is completely safe; there are always vulnerabilities to be found. It has been said a lock is designed only to keep an honest person honest, and the very same thing applies to a hacker. A hacker may know the lock can be picked; even have the knowledge of how to pick it, and at times picked a lock or two. It is the dishonest person who takes that knowledge and breaks in for self-serving motives that harm other people or entities.
Unethical people will always exist. A hacker, helps inform the public of threats the public can protect themselves against.
Consider the two schools of thought when it comes to computer security. The first school of thought is to keep all vulnerabilities as secret as possible, thereby minimizing the threat to the small handful of people who happen to figure the vulnerabilities out. The second theory is to openly disclose vulnerabilities so people can know what to look for and detect when an attack has occurred.
The ethical hacker typically prescribes to the second school of thought and will share and publish his or her findings. This makes sense, for example, most people do not want to find out on accident that their car has an issue with sudden acceleration. Making potential problems public knowledge weakens the ability of the potential because people are alert to the possibility and can adjust behaviors accordingly or seek help to limit their risks.
Whether one decides hacking is ethical or unethical, the fact is undeniable that there are unethical people. Having a group of ethical hackers knowing what the bad guy knows is the best way to combat potential threats. It is therefore not the act of hacking that should be up for moral debate, but rather the motive behind the hacking.
Learn more about this author, David Kramer.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Write and get published
Share with other writers
Polish your freelancing skills
Quality articles from proven freelancers
Exclusive rights, fast turnaround
Brand engagement, business blogging -- our writers do it all
INFORMATION
Copyright © 2002-2012 Helium, Inc. All rights reserved.
Helium.com: A Service of RR Donnelley