Cybersecurity Ethics

This course examines ethical issues relevant to ethics for cybersecurity professionals, including privacy, professional code of conduct, practical conflicts between engineering ethics and business practices, individual and corporate social responsibility, ethical hacking, information warfare, and cyberwarfare. Students will gain a broad understanding of central issues in cyberethics and the ways that fundamental ethical theories relate to these core issues.

Course Material

Reflective Writing Assignment

 Starting out this course, I felt like I had a mediocre understanding of different ethical principles, and I felt like I wasn’t tied to one in particular. However, throughout the course, and after having to write entire papers using such varied ethical theories, I realized how impartial I am to certain ethical frameworks, and how that can sometimes hinder my ability to understand the bigger picture. Having to write using an ethical theory that doesn’t align with my traditional way of analyzing situations helped me realize that I have an implicit disinclination for certain ethical theories. I initially thought my apprehension was due to the concept being too ambiguous, but after reading more in detail, it was actually caused by my lack of understanding of the theory and its complexity.

I encountered this when learning about Ubuntu. When I first read about Ubuntu, I thought how might anyone be able to analyze a specific action or situation using something as vague as this? After reading more in depth articles on Ubuntu, I realize now that it naturally aligns with my internal compass for decision making more than most theories because it has so many moving parts and provides room for nuances.  I also initially preferred consequentialism; however, after reflecting, I realized that I first preferred analyzing cases using consequentialist theory because it was easier to write about than some of the other theories.

Understanding these different perspectives is vital when analyzing the morality of an action because different contexts produce different results. The right approach in one context might not be in another. It’s through these multiple perspectives that we are able to gain a nuanced understanding of ethics. We can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the ethical implications of an action by analyzing the situation from different angles, taking into account the various factors at play. Because context creates nuance, I argue that the single most important thing when analyzing morality is to remain flexible in your approach and be willing to adjust your stance based on new information or changing circumstances.

After careful consideration, I feel like I do not have-nor desire- to possess the impartiality and decisiveness to successfully practice utilitarianism with fidelity because it lends itself to too many loopholes to justify an action under the guise of “the greater good.” Two key lingering thoughts I had after initially learning about utilitarianism are: 1) At what point does the butterfly effect stop? And 2) What are the universal indicators for happiness that you can accurately quantify?

For writing a case analysis in a class, consequentialism is a useful framework to apply; however, for in-the-moment decision making where the outcome isn’t clearly identified or the situation is more nuanced, it’s more difficult to use such a straightforward ethical model. For example, in some of the case studies I concluded that certain actions would be ethical based on the parameters of the ethical tool I selected; however, my personal beliefs were not in line with the outcome. It’s sometimes okay to dismiss ethical dilemmas by chalking them up to “differences in philosophies.” With that being said, there are limits to ethical cultural relativism, some of which I encountered throughout the course.

This thought process led me to reflect on technological globalization and its implications on ethical standards in society. With global communication comes an intermingling of different cultures and individuals with different moral beliefs and fosters a propensity for moral relativism. This has the potential to lead to the breakdown of moral standards necessary for cohesion and order in a global society. To avoid moral confusion, individuals- especially cybersecurity specialists- must have a deep understanding of their values and morals and anchor themselves to those values using the ethical frameworks that guide them, so as to avoid being swayed by external pressures and influences.

In writing the case analysis papers, I almost always found myself caught in the weeds by overanalyzing the scenarios. Many of my essays were late simply because of my analysis paralysis. I learned a valuable lesson through the case analysis process: when someone becomes overly focused on the nuances of a situation, they may become indecisive or unable to take action. This can lead to a lack of progress or a failure to make necessary decisions. Because of this, I appreciate that universal truths have the power to hold individuals accountable and prevent us from rationalizing unethical behaviors or getting caught in a cycle of “but then there’s…”

In conclusion, through internal reflection, I was able to solidify my stance on my approach to ethical reasoning. There are so many perspectives and lenses to analyze morality and analyzing each case using each of the different lenses has helped me to better consider different perspectives when looking at the actions of a person, organization, or government. After completing the course, the main takeaway I emphasize is that right and wrong does not exist in black and white- there is never a one size fits all approach; however, it does help to identify and adhere to a few non-negotiable moral truths to keep you on task. These moral truths are highly personal and should be rooted in your guiding principles and core values, as they will serve as a compass to keep you focused and grounded in the decision-making process.