1 of 14

No

Write now Article Tools

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.

Add your voice

Know something about Is hacking morally wrong??
We want to hear your view. Write now!