The Ethics of Hacking 2023
DOI: 10.51952/9781529231847.ch002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Ethical Framework for Hacking Operations

Abstract: In recent years the power and reach of prominent hacker groups such as Anonymous and LulzSec has been clearly demonstrated. However, in a world where hackers are able to wield significant online power, can they do so ethically as legitimate agents? To answer this question this paper will develop an ethical framework based on the premise that hackers have exhibited instances where they have acted to protect people from harm at a time when there was no one else to do so. At its core this paper will argue that po… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 12 publications
0
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…By leveraging this framework, limitations, and constraints often associated with the hacking processes can be easily remedied. This further supports the assertion postulated by Bellaby (2023) which posits that the development of a methodical process could help alleviate the frequent limitations associated with the hacking lifecycle. Ultimately, the goal of ethical hacking is to evaluate the security measures of an organization and potentially gain access to sensitive information.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…By leveraging this framework, limitations, and constraints often associated with the hacking processes can be easily remedied. This further supports the assertion postulated by Bellaby (2023) which posits that the development of a methodical process could help alleviate the frequent limitations associated with the hacking lifecycle. Ultimately, the goal of ethical hacking is to evaluate the security measures of an organization and potentially gain access to sensitive information.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%