Hacking: Cross Ethical and/or Criminal Boundaries
The term hacking describes actions along a continuum between right and wrong. Individuals may engage in non-malicious hacking for entertainment or out of curiosity, not considering that, at some point, their actions become illegal. When determining the ethicality of a hacking case, consideration of the motivation and decision-making involved can aid in determining the illegality of the situation.
In this Discussion, you will examine case studies and determine the motivations of these offenders. Where do they cross ethical and/or criminal boundaries? In addition, what are the characteristics of a situation that cause it to cross the threshold into illegal territory?
1. Explain the motivation of the offender(s) in your selected case study. Support your response.
2. Determine whether the act is a crime or innocent experimentation. Justify your reasoning.
3. Identify the ethical and moral considerations that need to be made when experimenting with hacking.
THESE ARE THE CASE STUDIES THAT WE HAVE TO PICK FROM:
Week 2 Case Studies
Case 1
Consider the tragic case of Jonathan James, who, in 1999, at age 15, hacked into the computer systems of Bell South, the Miami Dade school system, and the Department of Defense that gave him access to the International Space Station’s source code controlling physical aspects of its operation. He was arrested and placed on 6 months house arrest and probation until his 18th birthday (an adult could have easily received a 10-year sentence) (Stout, 2000). While on probation, he tested positive for drugs and spent 6 months in prison. A few years later, he explained that his motivations were about the excitement and thrill he felt to be able to gain access to such systems. Therewere no financial, political, or otherwise criminal motivations. He hacked solely for the experience. In 2008, fearing he would be prosecuted for ongoing Internet intrusions for which he claimed he was not involved, Jonathan committed suicide.
Stout, D. (2000, September, 23). Youth sentenced in government hacking case. New York Times.
Retrieved from http://www(dot)nytimes(dot)com/2000/09/23/us/youth-sentenced-in-government-hacking-case.html
Case 2
Ryan opens his computer one morning to discover that he cannot access any of his files. A flashing warning sign informs Ryan that his computer has been hacked, and in order to free his files, he will need to call the number listed and pay $300. If he fails to pay in the next 3 hours, his computer will be wiped clean of all files. Ryan now realizes that he must have mistakenly opened an attachment on his computer that was infected with some type of ransomware. All of his personal files, including tax filings, family photos, and other valuable documents are at risk of being erased. But Ryan is not convinced this is a credible threat. He has seen ransomware before, and this appears to be rather amateurish and unsophisticated.
Case 3
Smith has worked at a large firm for several years but, due to a sexual harassment complaint, is forced to either resign or be fired. Angry and bitter, Smith wants revenge but is not going to commit a crime to do so. Instead, he asks two friends at his place of employment to supply him with passwords giving him access to documents not meant to be accessed by persons outside the firm. He assures his former coworkers that he simply wants to view the documents, but instead Smith downloads hundreds of files. Smith never uses the information for financial gain nor does he use the information against another person or his former employer.
Discussion: Where Do We Draw the Line?
Student Name
College/University
Course
Professor's Name
Due Date
In the second case scenario, the ransomware attack is tailored to deny Ryan access to essential files on his computer. The offender's motivation is financial gain, as they demand that the victim send a ransom. The attacker encrypted the files and demanded a ransom payment of $300 for the decryption key. In this context, the cyber attacker has placed Ryan in a position where sending the $300 ransom is the cheapest and easiest way to regain access to their files. The act should be understood as a crime rather than simple experimentation. Research indicates that roughly fifty percent of the ransomware attack victims sent money to the attacker, which averaged to over $800,000 (Bekkers et al., 2023). In addition, it took the firms nearly a month to recuperate from the incident (Bekkers et al., 2023). Although $300 might seem a small ransom compared to the national average, the attack is a crime because Ryan is likely to suffer long-lasting implications of the attack, including financial and psychological problems. In addition, the attack amounts to victimization as Ryan appea...