Immorality of Hacking

Immorality of Hacking

         Imagine for a moment walking down 8th street in the heart of New York City. In front of you, a fifty dollar bill lays flat against the concrete. The color of the bill glistens in the morning sun; the number "50" jumps out at you. There are no bystanders, no onlookers. What do you do? If you are morally just, you continue on your journey. If you are morally just and fortified with dignity, you pick up the bill and hope that the owner is nearby; if he isn't, you turn it in to the nearest shop or police station. If you lack integrity and feel that you are able to get away with taking the fifty dollar bill without anyone noticing, then your morality is in the red.

         Now excogitate this: imagine you are computer literate and an expert in every aspect of computing. You can see holes in software created by others. Your skills allow you to exploit these holes. The potential incentive for doing so is highly profitable. What do you do? If you are morally just, you continue on your journey. If you are morally just and fortified with decency, you take note of the holes and notify the owner of the software. If you lack integrity and have difficulty conducting yourself morally and subsequently think that you are able to get away with exploiting these holes without anyone noticing, then you are in the wrong, if not a criminal.

         The culprit is aware of several key points:

         •          An issue that can be potentially exploited
         •          Security holes, or gaps created involuntarily by the developer of the software
         •          A lucrative pot of gold (metaphorically speaking)
         •          Vulnerabilities that exist only briefly and must be exploited as soon as possible

         Why am I propelling you into practical scenarios? Why am I asking you to brand yourself with sole integrity, candor and compassion, or no integrity at all? What difference does it make? The difference dictates a fine line between a righteous and just citizen and a borderline criminal. I am trying to make a point - one that will hopefully convince potential opponents of this article to diversify their conviction.

         Among professional programmers, the word hacker can be either complimentary or derogatory, although it is developing an increasingly unfavorable connotation. Why is that? What exactly does the word hacker mean? In computer lingo, the word means to alter a computer program; it is that simple. Does a hacker always do so with malicious intent? Not all of them are ill-conceived. Does the prospect of a ruthless hacker, subsidizing a program for personal gains, outweigh the contingency of a morally sound hacker, exploiting a program for just reasons? The recent proliferation of malicious hacking incidents suggests it does. Hackers (proficient ones) are astonishingly computer literate. They know how computers work, how 0's and 1's intertwine to perform a set of instructions. Hackers are familiar with programming methodologies and committed to finding holes that programmers have neglected to secure.

         The hacker has two choices: either (1) exploit the hole(s) and gain an incentive, whether reputational or monetary, or (2) exploit the hole(s) and alert the programmer or software owner of the exploitations, thus promoting the reduction of future vulnerabilities. If the hacker chooses (1), he is expressing immorality. If he chooses (2), he is a saint and can, consequently, be a labeled a white hat hacker.

         Is hacking morally wrong? I would have to say yes. Are there exceptions? There certainly are. I lean towards the former, because the odds are unparalleled, leaving the latter outweighed by a ratio of 1:3.

         You could say the same for abortion. Is it morally wrong? Are there exceptions? Statistics certainly justify a resounding yes. So for those of you who think abortion is morally wrong, is it because of the majority of the former, the fact that, in a general sense, abortion is immoral and so because of societal consensus, or is it because you personally and independently believe for it to be wrong? Make your case.

         There are exceptions to murder; consider your life threatened. Would you kill someone to save yourself, your child? I certainly would not hesitate. Would you kill someone for the pure sake of it? No, think about it...

         Hacking is morally wrong, especially because you are (1) manipulating someone else's code (whether subjugated by altruistic or fraudulent intentions), (2) jeopardizing the stability of someone else's program, and most notably, (3) conceivably decimating someone else's financial, professional, or personal life.

         Even if your intentions are innocuous and exist for pure, moral reasons, the art of hacking consists of circumventing someone else's code to accomplish a task. The only time such behavior could be considered moral is when you have the permission of the software owner to exploit security holes that may or may not exist. If there is no sanction whatsoever, you are conducting yourself in an IMMORAL manner – plain and simple.