Essay for 6 to 7 pages

Class: CS-319-A

Prof: McCloud

B. On This Day: Robert Tappan Morris Becomes First Hacker Prosecuted for Spreading Virus

Proposal: Jail time is not appropriate for hackers; so Robert Tappan Morris should not be jailed.

Observations: (Because) Tthe spreading of the virus unveiled major security flaws;.

Robert brought to light how costly insecure systems could be and how to avoid such costs.

In addition, hackers present a lot of potential which should be utilized rather than wasted in jail.

Value judgments: Hhackers can be used to make computer systems more secure and help governments strengthen their systems.

Assumptions: Wwe all need secure systems individually and as organizations.

Hackers are a threat and important too. We are all interdependent;, the threat of hackers pushes for more secure systems which are not easy to bypass.

Alternative argument: Robert Tappan Morris should be jailed to serve as an example to other hackers who sabotage other people’s computers.

Observation: (Because) the virus brought a lot of damage and caused a lot of money to remove it from computers.

The virus sabotaged computers and interfered with normal operations.

Value judgment: Hackers are criminals who get unauthorized access to people’s sensitive systems and data and can cause loss of millions of money.

Assumptions: Ppeople want to live a life of certainty being sure that malicious people are far from them.

I do not support the jailing of hackers because they are an important resource which should be utilized rather than be crippled in jail. Iin addition, the existence of malicious programs push for more innovation in the field of IT. Therefore, hackers can be punished through serving the government as an important resource (Brown, 2003).

Introduction.

Computer fraud and abuse is one of the major problems facing the world today due to the advent of internet. Privacy and computer security is one of the most valued resources therefore, computer programs meant to trespass people’s computer’s and system’s security are highly condemned and united states’ government has come up with laws to punish law breakers in regard to computer fraud and abuse. Robert Tappan Morris was the first hacker to be prosecuted for spreading a self-replicating virus (FindingDulcineaStaff, 2011). Though hackers can be classified as criminals,; they play crucial roles most of the times and hence;, no jail time is appropriate for them. Hackers expose major security flaws and are an important part of innovation evolution.

Ethics of consequence

The jailing of Robert Tappan Morris raises an ethical dilemma whether he is a criminal or actually a good person. The situation can be analyzed using several ethical theories. Using ethics of consequence one can rule out whether hacking has any benefits or not. Robert Tappan Morris is an important person in the history of information and computer technology and did not deserve any jail time but only community service. Utilitarian is a consequence based ethical theory in which the best decision is the one that brings out the most desired outcome. A decision that increases happiness for the majority of the people is the best option. According to utilitarianism hacking seems to be a bad decision since the spreading of the virus brought more harm than good. It infected over 6000 universities, research centers and military centers; systems shut down causing the whole nation and computer users to panic. Comment by Houston, Lynn M.: It seems like you introduce a number of new topics here—try to organize each main topic into a separate body paragraph that all flow logically with one another. Another way to blend together seemingly different topics if to use transition words—you use these well in other parts of your paper (words like “also, however, therefore”…

However, it can be argued that hacking brings more benefits than harm. Though the immediate consequences were devastating, the long-term effects are more beneficial and to a larger group of people. The fact that the Morris virus infected computers implies that computers worldwide lacked proper protection from malicious programs. Most importantly, Robert did not intend for the virus to be self-replicative but was just trying to infect the computers. The action looks malicious though it helped computer users realize something important,; that they need protection from more dangerous programs which could be a threat and very costly if they bypass the security of the computers (Tavani, 2011).

Unveiling the security flaws that the computer users and technology community could be facing makes the hackers an important resource. Therefore, Morris did the computer society a great favor because it taught them to take another move of coming up with advanced security programs. Therefore, compared to the harm he caused by spreading the virus; there was more benefits to every computer user as they realized how costly security flaws could be to the government and individuals. Security flaws meant loss of confidential and sensitive information and even crippling of crucial central systems. The hacking situation was also a lesson that there could be more dangerous malicious people out there with bad intentions and therefore showed, the importance of coming up with a preventive measure worldwide (Lyons, 2015). Comment by Houston, Lynn M.: I see that you are applying ethics, but I don’t see you referencing any ethical theories or explaining specific parts of those theories. I would add some detailed specifics about the readings/theories and weave that info in throughout your paper.

Using the utilitarian ethical theory, there were more benefits of the Morris virus than costs. The aftermath was more happiness for the entire computer society worldwide as antiviruses were innovated to help deal with hackers. Hackers on the other hand present the best coders or programmers; hence, they could be used to innovate secure computer programs. Hackers can be used to test for security flaws too especially by governments to make sure the military and intelligence agencies are secure from terrorists. The costs incurred during the removal of the virus demonstrated the expenses that can result from unprotected systems. Comment by Houston, Lynn M.: You still don’t really tell us what this is or how it works Comment by Houston, Lynn M.: This is not the right word here given the context. Try rewriting the sentence to something like “The aftermath benefitted computer hackers worldwide….”

Ethics of principle

Ethics of principle are related to a character; theyit deals with moral obligations. In ethics of principle an action is done because it the right action to do at the right place and time. Some actions are more significant than others. A person’s actions determines their principles and morality. In the case of Robert, it would seem morally wrong to argue that he should not have a jail time. However, considering that his action brought more benefits to the computer users, it would be morally wrong to insist that he should be jailed. His spreading virus acted as a test program which established computer security weaknesses at that period (Tavani, 2011).

In accordance to ethics of principle, one should choose a decision which reflects what they do. Robert though should not have a jail time he should be punished through community service. Instead of wasting his potential in jail, he should use it to assist the government to improve the security of the computer systems. Though it is immoral to gain unauthorized access to people’s computers, it is good to be considerate that the spreading virus unveiled the backdoors of the computers and helped them brace themselves for future. Because of that favor, Robert, therefore, does not deserve a jail time but other forms of sentences. Robert made a huge discovery hence;, it would be inappropriate to jail him.

Ethics of purpose

Ethics of purpose are concerned with people’s rights which are at stake when making a decision. The right decision should be chosen which protects those rights. Human rights include: right to privacy, freedom of speech, freedom to own property and other basic rights. The best decision should be harmless and protect people’s rights. The government is responsible for ensuring people get their rights. For instance the right concerning privacy, the government should allow people to have their personal space and not to interfere in things like their personal communications. People’s property should be respected also and not trespassed and it should be protected from damage and theft. Human rights are the contract rights and which should not be interfered with. People are entitled to their rights as long as they abide by the laws of the land (Tavani, 2011). Comment by Houston, Lynn M.: Is this your personal opinion or does it come from your source? Unclear whose ideas these are or how you are applying a theory

Robert’s situation is difficult when it comes to ethics of purpose because by direct observation he interfered with the rights of other people. He placedmade the rights of computer users at stake and that is morally wrong according to ethics of purpose. The Morris worm bypassed computer security and was able to infect thousands of computers affecting people’s privacy and putting properties’ in danger. The Morris worm, therefore, interfered with the people’s privacy and jeapordized and destroyed confidential information and also put it at stake. The worm virus is known to damage computer memory which involves damaging stored data and information.

On the other hand and view, Robert is really a good person who indirectly sent a warning message to the computer users’ community. Even though, computer users can be angry at what happened as a result of the dangerous Morris worm,; on the other hand Morris did them a favor concerning their privacy, property and businesses. He exposed a very crucial fact about the information technology era. It was clear that innovation was taking place on both sides of good programs and malicious programs as well. Hence, rather than blaming Robert for infecting their computers they should have been happy that he exposed how their security could be at stake, including their computer privacy and computer systems supporting their businesses (Floridi & Taddeo, 2014).

There is an undeniable interdependence between computer users and hackers. Hackers can be used to assure the users the security is tight. They can be used to try to hack computer systems by the government to test the security vulnerability. Once a vulnerability is established, the technical team can always keep on improving the security systems. Robert Tappan was not supposed to have a jail time but rather the government should have used him to strengthen their military intelligent systems. One realization or lesson from the Morris virus is that Robert had no bad intentions because he did take advantage of the spreading virus to benefit but it was rather something that got out of control.

Computer users were challenged to come out of their comfort zones and be aware of malicious people who could use similar programs to cripple their organizations or gain access to their computer systems for malicious reasons. The Morris worm exposed the risks of terrorists using such programs even worse ones to attack the government institutions. Though the worm virus caused panic among the computer users, it enlightened them to be aware of computer fraud and cyber-crimes and to take preventive measures to save their privacy, property and businesse4s in future. The cost to the government underwent was just an implication of how even a stronger malicious program can be destructive. Using the ethics of purpose, Robert is not a threat to the human rights especially in the field of technology; instead he helped them have long term plans of safeguarding their computers against such occurrences. Therefore, it is unethical to jail someone for exposing a major security flaw not only affecting individuals but the entire nation including the defense department.

In conclusion, Robert Tappan Morris should not be given jail time but rather be allowed to do community service. Evaluating his situation using the three ethical theories; based on consequentialism, it is clear that Robert did a great favor to the computer users; he just exposed security vulnerabilities which needed to be addressed. The response to the worm virus benefitted not only the affected individuals but the entire world by saving them the cost weak security systems. Regarding the ethics of purpose, Morris ensured future protection of human rights such as privacy and property. On ethics of principle, decisions are made in regard to character and morality and out of obligation. Jailing Robert is hence not appropriate because his action was negative but very beneficial in the long run and Robert represented a great potential which could be exploited in the favor of the government and computer users.

Reference