Course Description:
This course examines ethical issues relevant to computing and information technology, including: privacy; freedom of speech and content control on the Internet; individual and social responsibility; cybersecurity; cybercrimes; social impact of computers and other digital technologies; and ethical obligations of IT professionals. Students will gain a broad understanding of central issues in cyberethics and the ways that fundamental ethical theories relate to these core issues..
Learning Goals:
1) Analyze ethical problems and make decisions based on ethical principles to solve them
2) Apply these skills specifically to issues in cybersecurity
Learning Objectives:
1. Analyze ethical problems related to cybersecurity
2. Apply principles learned from ethical theories to cybersecurity case studies
3. Identify the most common ethical issues in the cybersecurity field
4. Deliberate effectively about issues in cybersecurity ethics by clearly articulating a considered opinion in the context of relevant alternatives
5. Explain ethical principles, problems, and potential solutions clearly
Equifax Breach
Since I started my journey of interest in cyber security until this day, I have asked to know what I think about ethical considerations. I have always been apprehensive about those
companies collecting consumer credit reporting; these companies tend to collect information on
credit histories, repayment histories, and borrowers’ information, and based on this information,
the credit reporting agency determines credit scores. I fear this information can be hacked,
especially in the current era. Equifax is a company that holds and gathers from various sources
such as banks, credit card companies, and creditors; this information will asset banks and other
sectors to examine individual’s financial situations and will determine the FICO score that most
people in America compete to move FICO score up. The FICO score will give individuals the
opportunity to apply for loans. For instance, if I wanted to apply for a loan to pay my college
tuition, the bank would request the information (FICO) from companies like Equifax to
determine the loan amount and the interest fee. Nonetheless, these companies are like deer to lion, which means hackers see those companies as gold mining to hackers. In 2017, Equifax was hit by extreme data breaches that affected 147 million people in the United States. As a result of Equifax data breaches, there were many financial losses, identity theft, privacy violations, and trust-free and psychological impacts. Financial losses can be defined as credit card information and potentially the risk of leading to financial fraud, drained bank accounts, and loans under the victim’s name. Identity theft is one of the issues that victims of Equifax experience; Equifax holds victims’ personal information, such as social security numbers and mailing addresses, obtains and applies for loans, and, most importantly, hackers can ruin victims’ credit card history. Privacy violations will make victims feel uncomfortable due to hackers stalking the victim’s moves. Trust-free will make the individual uncertain of trusting anyone within their circle. Lastly, the psychological impact that the victim experienced, such as anxiety and stress. Friedman’s article aroused heated debate and controversy, calling into question long-held
beliefs about corporations’ social responsibility. Friedman also noted that firms must adhere to
legal and ethical standards. He maintained that, beyond these restrictions, firms should not be
expected to pursue ethical or environmental goals unless they directly benefit shareholders.
While some opponents claim that his perspective is minimal and ignores the broader impact of
businesses on society and the environment, others believe it gives a clear and practical
framework for understanding firms’ roles in a capitalist economy. Friedman had perspectives that
the article showed, such as responsibility; Friedman argued that a corporation’s management or
executives are employees of the shareholders and should thus behave in their best interests. This usually involves maximizing profits, as shareholders have invested in the company to receive a return. In addition, Friedman also noted that firms must adhere to legal and ethical standards. He maintained that, beyond these restrictions, firms should not be expected to pursue ethical or environmental goals unless they directly benefit shareholders. Lastly, Friedman cautioned corporations against taking on more significant social duties, claiming that doing so could result in inefficiencies and eventually harm the company and society. He argued that enterprises needed to be more suited to solve societal concerns effectively and efficiently and that doing so would take away from their fundamental economic function. Friedman’s article aroused heated debate and controversy, calling into question long-held beliefs about corporations’ social responsibility. While some opponents claim that his perspective is minimal and ignores the
broader impact of businesses on society and the environment, others believe it gives a clear and
practical framework for understanding firms’ roles in a capitalist economy. Friedman
acknowledged that ethical limitations govern corporate action, noting that enterprises must
follow the law and conform to ethical norms. However, he contended that, beyond these legal
and ethical limits, firms should not be asked to take on more significant social duties unless they
directly benefit shareholders. Friedman believes that while businesses have ethical commitments, their primary economic responsibility is to earn profits for their shareholders while adhering to the rules of the law and established ethical standards. As a result, Friedman ensures that managers or executives behave in the company’s or organization’s best interests. This usually
provides a prosperous outcome.
I wanted to read Anshen due to the similarities in our perspectives. For instance, Anshen
explores the changing link between businesses and society. Anshen contends that firms should
take a more active role in addressing society’s concerns than simply seeking profit. He contends
that the traditional social compact, which prioritizes business maximization and shareholder
value, needs to be updated in today’s complex environment. Anshen advocates a new social
compact in which firms accept greater responsibility for social and environmental challenges. He
pushes for a change toward a stakeholder-centric strategy, in which firms consider the interests
of multiple stakeholders, including employees, customers, communities, and the environment, in
addition to shareholders. Anshen emphasizes the importance of corporate social responsibility
(CSR) efforts and ethical company practices in building trust and ensuring long-term viability.
He believes firms may add value to shareholders and society by connecting their objectives with
broader societal requirements. Anshen advocates for a reevaluation of businesses’ position in
society, asking corporations to adopt a more holistic strategy that helps their bottom line and the
well-being of communities and the environment. Anshen has mentioned integrity and ethical
leadership at all levels of the organization. This involves promoting a culture of honesty,
fairness, and ethical behavior and holding leaders accountable for their actions and decisions.
Anshen supports a comprehensive approach to corporate ethics that considers the interests of all
stakeholders and aims to create long-term value while adhering to ethical standards and societal
norms. Anshen may argue that firms must protect the data they collect from consumers,
employees, and other stakeholders. This includes implementing strong cybersecurity safeguards,
encryption procedures, and data protection rules to secure sensitive information from
unauthorized access or intrusion. Anshen emphasized the value of trust and reputation in commercial partnerships. Data breaches
can undermine trust among consumers, investors, and other stakeholders, resulting in
reputational harm and a loss of credibility. As a result, he may suggest that organizations
prioritize data security and transparency to maintain trust and a good reputation. I think Anshen
had some insight into the legal and regulatory repercussions of data breaches. Businesses may
face legal ramifications, including penalties and litigation if they fail to appropriately protect
customer data or comply with data protection rules such as the General Data Protection
Regulation (GDPR) or the California Consumer Privacy Act. He might emphasize the need for
firms to follow these policies to avoid legal ramifications and maintain ethical standards. Ethical
concerns around data use. He may argue that firms should only acquire and utilize data for legal
objectives and with consumers’ agreement, avoiding unethical behaviors like data mining,
profiling, and selling personal information without permission.
In conclusion, we must apply high standards regarding companies such as Equifax and
TransUnion. These standards must be implemented laws, inspections from our US defense
department, and strict laws that Equifax and TransUnion must follow. Hence, these laws and
regulations will comfort users when sharing their identities with these organizations. I had a
heated argument last week with my company’s chief of technology regarding the firewalls that
we had lately. Weeks ago, we had bidding from the Department of State regarding certain
services that our company conducts. Unfortunately, our state department has not received an
email on the bidding process and procedure. Our chief of technology has implemented new
firewalls and specific cyber devices with suspicious email attachments. Our contact in the
Department of State sent an email with multiple attachments, including zip files; due to our
information technology’s numerous files, the email for suspicious, and the IT department should
have notified me. As a result, we lost the contract, and we tried to speak with our contractor, but
they refused due to fair market share with other competitors. Lately, our company experienced
high cyber attacks due to our high-profile contractors. Since I am a cyber security student, I
understand the reason for my chief of technology concerns, but losing a contract for a year
reminds me of the phrase, “This is a stab in the back.” From our contractor, and our contractor
could not understand even though they understood the safety concerns that similar companies
need to apply. We need guidelines, strict laws, and cybersecurity inspections from our defense
department, and most importantly, people need to know when it comes to cybersecurity
guidelines.