Computers & Technology >
Hacking
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedIs hacking morally wrong?
Results so far:
| Yes | 75% | 527 votes | Total: 705 votes | |
| No | 25% | 178 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesHacking is morally wrong on the grounds that it is invading another's privacy and affairs without permission. Hacking has led to criminal acts such as stealing bank account numbers, having knowledge of secret codes and safes, having access to docoments which are confidential and selling this information at a high cost. Hacking is equivalent to using one's expertise to extort, manipulate, or steal. It is a form of theft to say the least.
Hacking takes genius, and many hackers pride themselves in knowing what to do and how to break into secret codes. For some hackers, it is their constant study, night and day. When they have succeeded in their feat, there is as much rejoicing with them as there is when one person has achieved a long pursued goal in life. It is sometimes even celebrated and a cause for bragging. Of course, this is deplorable, but hackers may not see it that way.
Hackers know that they are wrong in commiting this act. They cannot conscientiously say that they are doing anything right. Those who work in criminal investigations even hesitate to use this mean to gain information. They restort to this invasive procedure when many other options fail. No one likes to be a victim of hacking. No matter how private we feel our Internet connections are kept, there is always the possibility that a hacker can get into a system and corrupt it. That is why software companies are continuously trying to upgrade their spyware and firewall equipment to present to the consumers as safe a product as possible. Hackers, however, who confront newer equipment just spend their time day and night seeking ways to circumnavigate the new systems.
Many high school and college age students have been found guilty of this devious practice. The judge, in most cases, puts restrictions on the ones found at fault, however, the penalty has yet to be made more stiff to help the hackers to understand that they are making themselves enemies of the very society in which they live. It's almost a joke to them to be able to crack the codes and go into highly confidential records. Imposing more fines, restrictions and Internet access might help, but more prison time would be enough time for hackers to rethink what they are doing to others and themselves. Can you imagine a lawyer who serves in defense of a hacker. Of course, the lawyer might even feel at risk himself of having his privacy infringed upon by his own client. What a feeling!
Hacking is morally wrong on the grounds that it does not respect others' right to privacy and secrecy. It is morally wrong on the grounds that if the tables were turned, it would not be funny or fun. It is morally wrong because it is a crime which is hard to detect and hard to punish. It is an offense to society at large, and based on these reasons, hackers might do well to be put behind bars and given codes to crack . The codes they need to crack can be nonsensical ones, with no meaning or results. . Then they will understand that this is how their life will be if they continue- one without worthwhile meaning and one with no good results.
Learn more about this author, Toni Doswell.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
The biggest problem with hacking is the representation of it in the media and consequently in the minds of far too many computer users. Even using the term and its variations into "White Hat" versus "Black Hat" creates an aura around these people that simply plays into the hype.
Ultimately the question has no meaning, since by any definition, the "hacker" is simply an expert whether in a narrow niche, or across a broad spectrum of technologies. From this, it is simple to see that some people may elect to exploit this knowledge for their own benefit, while others can use that same skill to protect the environment.
A locksmith is not synonymous with a burglar. A pharmacist is not a drug dealer. While there may be individuals that cross those lines, that isn't the general case and similarly it isn't for computer experts either.
So let's call it what it is; criminal behavior. A criminal on a computer behaves no differently than a criminal in virtually any other context, so this isn't particularly surprising. What is disconcerting is how quickly the public perception of "knowledge" as being the source of evil is being perpetrated.
It is also a concern that the term "hacking" is being used to focus on individuals and tends to obscure the much more serious issues regarding security in larger organizations.
It would be quite nave to believe that there are no outside agencies or individuals that could and would exploit computer security holes for their own gains. In particular, it isn't difficult to imagine foreign governments or even unscrupulous competitive businesses that would engage in forms of espionage that would result in penetration of computer systems.
While I won't go so far as to credit the "hacker" with doing anyone favors, there is some legitimacy to the argument that if a system can be penetrated, then how much easier would it be for a well-financed technologically sophisticated attack to succeed. This has actually pointed out that the most severe security exposures over the last few years have been the result of businesses and government, as the trustees of the data, being lax in protecting it. The loss of Veterans Administration data (26.5 million veterans) from a laptop was the result of sloppy and extraordinarily casual attitudes towards copying private data and accounting for its whereabouts. The primary problem was that the data was copied to the laptop in violation of security policies, and when the employee's home was burglarized, the computer was stolen.
When 40 million credit cards were compromised at CardSystems Solutions Inc. the problem was not due to hacking, but rather the result of the company not following required security standards. In addition, it is significant that the problem originated because the company kept data on its computer which it wasn't even supposed to possess!
Most people understand why banks have vaults and alarms with sophisticated monitoring mechanisms. When there is a means available to gain personal enrichment, some people will attempt to take advantage. Let's not be so nave regarding computers, that we lose sight of the fact that this is an identical situation to the bank vault, and that the people that collect data have a higher responsibility to take the steps to protect it.
At present, hacking in all its forms is pointing out the exposures in systems that should be better secured and should also serve as a reminder that the free and casual maintenance of personal data is not something that should be taken lightly. Don't give the hackers too much credit. Most of the security penetrations that have occurred are due to poor security practices and not technologically advanced attacks.
Learn more about this author, Gerhard Adam.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
