- The Ethics of Curiosity: The author questions if satisfying our curiosity through direct-to-consumer DNA testing is worth the risk of a permanent data breach. Do you believe the personal and medical benefits of DNA digitization outweigh the lifelong security risks?
- Corporate and Employment Privacy: Rizkallah raises the concern of where to “draw the line” regarding privacy, such as whether it is acceptable for an employer to request your DNA to see if your genetic makeup makes you a “fit” for a role. Discuss the potential for “genetic discrimination” in the workplace if these databases are accessed by unauthorized parties or used for purposes beyond their original intent.
- The “Hacking Humans” Concept: The text notes that humans remain the easiest “inroad” for hackers to break into corporate networks. How does the permanent nature of biological data change the way we should think about “human factor” security compared to traditional digital passwords?
- I believe initially while working through the kinks of it all there should be limits. Not to sound morbid, but if the medical goal is to cure diseases, why not use peoples DNA who has already passed instead of those already living. At least till it isn’t as dangerous as it is to those who are still walking around on this Earth today. That would take out the lifelong security risks (temporarily at least).
- I absolutely do not believe that it would be acceptable for an employer to ask for your DNA. That feels completely unnecessary and like it would be an invasion of your bodily anatomy. Now I’m not against certain jobs needed you to disclose medical records, but asking for your blood is to far. Would you agree if your employer asked to put a microchip in you? I know I wouldn’t. There is just some things that I don’t believe should belong in both the workplace or should be public knowledge.
- I’m not sure how to view it in comparison to digital passwords, but to try to correlate those. I think about how school accounts have two factor authentication, requires frequent password changes, and also at times security questions. Your banking information requires even more. If things that are physical and attached to you externally should be protected so well, why wouldn’t our biological information be protected tenfold. I think of the saying “you can replace things, but you aren’t replaceable” a simple statement which reminds that things can come and go but you can’t. If we think about our DNA like that, and that is apart of us inwardly that we can’t change, it should be guarded.