Julian Assange and WikiLeaks
Case 1-Snowden Leaks-http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/10/politics/edward-snowden-profile/index.html
Issues of concern
A future employer’s perspective of these two concerns would definitely make a case to hire Edward Snowden anywhere in the security field a tough to impossible sell. His acts of data leaking were terrible show of knowing his employers intentions. He applied for the job, he knew what the NSA was about, and he chose to accept a contract on these terms. With this is mind, his actions are completely wrong and unjustifiable. Snowden has obviously proved he cannot be trusted with sensitive information. He single handedly may have ruined the single most effective way our nation defends itself. Nation Security thrives on intelligence gathered because usually terroristic attacks have been planned month or years in advance, and the more time the NSA employers have to analyze data and connect the dots, the more likely attack plots will be snuffed out before it can even be close to being executed. Now that these security “leaks” have been leaked, this may make National Security a lot more difficult.
The action employers would have to take about Snowden is to simply never hire him. He is obviously not a loyal or trustworthy employee. He can go into a job with full knowledge of what happens in it, accept the terms, then leaks loads of classified information. Snowden being considered a hero seems absolutely insane seeing how he made compromised the United States’ intelligence operations, and he knowingly accepted a government job only to stab them in the back. I am not saying what our government was doing was completely right, but Snowden was completely wrong for spilling the beans, and if he ever is looking for a job again, I am sure he would have a tough time getting back into the IT world where security is everything. With the decision to never hire him, I would make sure to hold a workshop of some sort to remind people what they signed up for and that if this is truly against your personal beliefs, leave now and there will not be any hard feelings. It is simply not possible to run this kind of operation with leakers; it puts mud in the tires, and does not help the cause one bit.
Argument: Snowden’s leaks were unethical
Conclusion: Snowden’s actions were unethical because he acted in defiance of his responsibilities at the NSA, and his leaks compromised American intelligence which could lead to bigger threats in the future because without as much intelligence, our country may not have the necessary information to stop terroristic tragedies from occurring.
Case #2 Pfc. Chelsea (Bradley) Manning:
List of Concerns
If a future employer were to look back on what Bradley Manning had done, their opinion of him would be a debatable topic. On one hand, he did leaks thousands of secret military documents to wikiLeaks, but in his case, many of them were on the topic of murdering innocent civilians. There is a certain conscious all of us humans have and we know when simply something is not right. Looking at many of the accounts he leaked, it is shameful to our soldiers who represent the country I’m proud to live in, disgracing what our nation stands for by killing for sport, and violating many human rights. In Bradley Manning’s defense, it was a very noble act to stand up for the proper treatment of fellow human beings. I think that most humans would agree that despite the lack of loyalty to his position, he witnessed humans being killed for sport, and their corpses defiled. This is a disgusting display of our nation’s military, and the soldiers who committed these crimes should be prosecuted. Bradley Manning does not deserve the time he is receiving and if I were an employer, I would hire him knowing that he has a great conscious, he knows what is right and wrong, and he is willing to stand up for what he believes in. That sounds like a great, honest, hard-working employee to me and I think his punishments are unfair for simply revealing tragedies involving our own armed forces.
Argument: Bradley Manning decision to leaks US documents was ethical
Conclusion: Bradley Manning’s leak was ethical because his intention was to deter war and to save lives, rather than cause harm to his own nation.
List of Concerns
Julian Assange has to be one of the hottest topics of the last couple of years. He is the founder of WikiLeaks, one of the most controversial websites on the planet, and he himself is a controversial figure on his own. He leads a website that dedicates it’s time to publishing leaks, usually government, for the public to see through normal anonymous sources. He is known for his constant bashing of the western governments and is leader in promoting that data should be free to everyone, and that there should be no secrets. This attitude towards governments has made him a popular target for prosecutors in countries such as the United States and Australia. As an employer, more than likely in a publishing firm, his controversy could be looked at in two different ways. One would be a negative connotation; his controversy is something the company would not want to deal with. The firm would probably be under attack from people who do not agree with his ideals, and their every move would make the news. On the other hand, the controversy could be a great publicity thing! Ecspecially a small firm, or a massive and well known firm could use the controversy to be constantly on everyone’s minds. A lot of publicity would come with the territory of hiring Assange which some companies would love. It all depends on what your company is looking for. Personally, I’d give the guy a job. He is a good journalist, he sparks controversy, and best of all he gets people to read his articles and know about what he does even if they couldn’t care one bit! He could sell a lot of paper, magazines, or whatever the company is for simply having one article in the whole publication. The one concern is the Sexual Assault charge in Sweden. This charge has been widely debated and there is not a lot of evidence to help either side in the case, and Assange has made it clear that this is obviously part of a “smear” campaign against his name. I can actually see this being true, and despite the accusation, I feel like I would hire the guy. His name alone can sell anything.
Argument-Julian Assange operated the website WikiLeaks ethically
Conclusion: Julian Assange and Wikileaks is a completely legal and ethical publishing company that seeks only to publish the truth about the world’s governments.
Cyberethics is an important focus point when it comes to any occupation involving technology. For my occupation, cybertethics takes on even a heavier role. When it comes to hacking as a Certified hacker, cyberethics is a huge deal. Many companies and government agencies have been training in employees as Certified Ethical Hackers or CEH’s. This faces our society with huge moral dilemma, and that is, is it ethical to teach hacking even though it is considered a bad thing? There is certainly two good sides to this dilemma. On one side the security benefits seem like a no-brainer, if companies have CEH’s consistently pointing out weak point in their systems, then the less vulnerable they are to cyber-attacks. The other side easily counters with the fact that people are being taught how to gain access to computers they shouldn’t have access too, which means anyone who wanted too could learn how to hack. This is exactly why ethical use is so involved in this field. Obviously it seem wrong to teach people how to gain access to computers, but at the same time it is easily justifiable as a simple pre-cautionary procedure. This has the potential to became one of the most controversial talking points in the whole computer field! These people who are employed need to know and understand the ethics based around their occupation. It really comes down to how the people who have learned the skills of hacking use their knowledge. Surely more than not will use their skills for good, but what happens when the odd one out turns and therefore ends up significantly undermining his employer? Stories like this scenario seem to happen on a daily basis in today’s world. There are many examples of big name companies being hacked and its a big deal! Organizations such as the Syrian Electronic Army has made a huge name for themselves by instigating countless attacks o n big name companies and even the United States Marine Corps. This just shows how predominant organized hacker groups are in the world today, and CEH’s necessity is only growing exponentially! This is why CEH’s need to be ethically sound when they take the position. Let’s say a CEH finds a big flaw in the security system, but instead of fixing it, he uses it to gain access into all of his employers private documents? Scenarios like this are a daily routine for a CEH and this is why any CEH needs to use their position for a positive manner. Edward Snowden is a perfect example of using his CEH skills unethically. He took CEH classes and obviously used his skills in a seemingly non ethical way, but to a hacker, this was an ethical thing to do. According to hackers, all information should be free, but when a hacker takes on the role as a CEH, should his or her ethics change? I certainly believe so. I am not supportive in any way of what Snowden did, He turned his back on his employer which is ethically wrong in my mind. Stories of him, and the NSA scandals are all prime examples of the ethics behind a position such as a CEH.