Adam D.
Moore
Information School
Hacking, Security, and
Information War
Hacking and Hacktivism
The Hacker Ethic: information belongs to
everyone and putting up fences or restricting
access is wrong. Ideas belong to us all and
intellectual property/privacy rights run
counter to this.
The Hacktivist: attacks on corporate and
governmental sites are sometimes justified
as a form of civil disobedience
What is a hacker?
Hacker: “A person with an enthusiasm for programming or using
computers as an end in itself.” Or, “A person who uses his skill with
computers to try to gain unauthorized access to computer files or networks.”
– Oxford English Dictionary
Self-described hackers – enjoy experimenting with technology and
writing code.
Media-labeled hackers (crackers) – break into systems, cause damage,
and write malware.
Ethical hackers – former hackers or crackers who have joined the security
industry to test network security and create security products and
services.
February 2004…https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CCwQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dartmouth.edu%2F~marionba
%2Fengs69%2FEthics_Law_Privacy_ENGS69.ppt&ei=EN1jVazjKsbpsAXJ9YGACA&usg=AFQjCNEcKho927WDCTtP4ZvlwbcPcAQ75Q&bvm=bv.93990622,d.b2w
Good or Bad Hackers?
Black Hats – break into systems, develop and
share vulnerabilities, exploits, malicious code,
and attack tools.
Grey Hats – are in hacker ‘no-man’s land,’ may
work as security professionals by day and ‘hack’
by night.
White Hats – are part of the ‘security
community,’ help find security flaws, but share
them with vendors so that products can be
made safer.
February 2004…. February 2004…https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CCwQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dartmouth.edu%2F~marionba
%2Fengs69%2FEthics_Law_Privacy_ENGS69.ppt&ei=EN1jVazjKsbpsAXJ9YGACA&usg=AFQjCNEcKho927WDCTtP4ZvlwbcPcAQ75Q&bvm=bv.93990622,d.b2w
Arguments for Hacking
A. Security: Hacker break-ins are ethical on this view
because they illustrate the defects in computer
networks. Morris' internet worm actually helped
create a more secure system.
B. Idle System Argument: According to this
argument, hacker break-ins are ethical because
they are merely using a system that is idle anyway
— if they do not mess anything up it is as if they
were not there at all. What could be wrong with
this?
The Security Argument
P1. It is morally permitted to trespass on the property
of others as long as one’s motives are good and no
harm is done (no harm, no foul).
P2. Many hackers have good intentions and do no
damage.
C3. Some hacking should be permitted
Problems: Fred and Ginger Case
Motives are irrelevant (Dr. Demento)
Doing no harm is irrelevant (Dr. Demento again…)
Imposing unconsented to risks is a harm
Arguments for Hacking
C. The Student Hacker Argument: Suppose we couple
the idle system argument with the good that is
obtained in terms of learning. Students are simply
learning how systems operate.
D. The Social Protector Argument: Hackers break-ins
are justified because they protect civilians against
"big brother" government and corporations. The
government and businesses as well, have lots of
information about us than they should have. The
hacker is merely keeping these institutions honest.
Himma: Hacktivism
Elements of civil
disobedience:
1. Open/public. . .knowing
violation
2. Non-violent (civil), pure
speech acts vs. behavior
3. Violates the law
4. Purpose = protesting the
law, political expression
Greta Pittenger Annie Christensen
Rachel Wishkoski Jeffrey Lopez
Evaluative framework
Justified if:
committed openly
properly motivated
willing to accept responsibility
plausible position
thoughtful justification
no significant damage to innocents
calculated to advance debate
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/Richmond34.jpg
Greta Pittenger Annie Christensen
Rachel Wishkoski Jeffrey Lopez
Evaluative framework
NOT justified:
committed openly
properly motivated
willing to accept responsibility
plausible position
thoughtful justification
no significant damage to innocents
calculated to advance debate
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/63/
WTO_protests_in_Seattle_November_30_1999.jpg/320px-
WTO_protests_in_Seattle_November_30_1999.jpg
Himma: Hacktivism
Pure speech acts vs. behavior
Civil disobedience requires behavior
Thus, civil disobedience requires a stronger
justification
In a properly administered democracy we each
have the right express ourselves
In violating the law (civil disobedience) we are
claiming for ourselves a larger role. . .why are
those who are disobedient so privileged?
Himma: Hacktivism
When is Hacktivism Morally Permitted?
Correct purpose, motivation
Amount of harm? Violent acts are not civil!
Amount of harm to third parties?
Accepting responsibility?
Is the political agenda supported by adequate
reasons?
Greta Pittenger Annie Christensen
Rachel Wishkoski Jeffrey Lopez
Punishment
“Acts of electronic civil disobedience
committed anonymously should be punished
to the full extent under the law.” (p. 23)
Greta Pittenger Annie Christensen
Rachel Wishkoski Jeffrey Lopez
Himma’s conclusion
“Hacktivism is impermissible [and should be
punished] insofar as such acts result in
significant harms to innocent third-parties or
insofar the persons responsible for such acts
conceal their identities to avoid the potential
legal consequences.” (p. 2)
The Case of Aaron Swartz
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dU5JWT0hFlc
Group Work:
Related to PACER or JSTOR:
--Was this hacktivism?
-- Was this ‘taking’ theft or stealing?
--Was there harm done?
-- Does the notion of ‘stealing’ rely on ‘harm?’
--What is ‘harm’?
TOR, The Dark Web, and Bitcoin
Group work:
After watching the video. . .Get into 3-4 person
groups and answer the following questions.
1. What are some of the positives about TOR, the Dark
Web, and Bitcoin (in general, for libraries)?
2. What are some of the negatives about TOR, the Dark
Web, and Bitcoin (in general, for libraries)?
3. Should these technologies be regulated (eliminated)?
Is it possible to regulate/eliminate these technologies?
