Analyzing the Ethical Implications of Research Using Leaked Data

Abstract

<jats:title>ABSTRACT</jats:title><jats:p>Although information made public after a data breach can provide insight into difficult research questions, use of these data raises ethical questions not directly addressed by current ethical guidelines. This article develops a framework for identifying and managing risks to human subjects when conducting research involving leaked data. We contend that researchers who seek to use leaked data should identify and address ethical challenges by considering the process through which the data were originally released into the public domain.</jats:p>

Cyber Peace

“…Although there are some publicly available data on cyber policies and outcomes (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2020; Indiana Attorney General, 2020; National Conference of State Legislatures, 2020), these datasets can be fragmentary, and are few and far between. Data that have become available through less traditional means -such as the leaking of information after a data breach -can provide crucial insights into important, previously unobservable phenomenon, but their use in research raises novel and difficult ethical questions (Boustead & Herr, 2020) projects must rely more heavily on data collection, increasing the time, effort, and resources necessary to conduct research. Data collection in empirical cyber research is further complicated by the range of actors involved in cyber policy, and differences in how these actors document and disclose their cyber decision-making.…”

The Provenance Problem: Research Methods and Ethics in the Age of WikiLeaks

“…Documents taken from governments do not only affect the state or amorphous, collective national security; they can also damage real people. Boustead and Herr (2020) suggest that authors handling documentary sources apply the Belmont principles (US Department of Health 1979) that undergird human-subjects research (HSR): respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. For instance, withholding personally identifiable information by anonymizing research participants guards against risks they might face after publication.…”

“…A global discipline should advance global and reciprocal standards. APSA (2020, 17–8; likewise Boustead and Herr 2020, 508) guidelines permit research to cross legal lines, given sufficient justification, so legal concerns are not automatically paramount. However, they should be significant ethical considerations regarding leaked sources.…”

“…The consequences and analytical challenges of treating unauthorized disclosures as social-science evidence are extensive, complex, and underexamined (see, presciently, Drezner 2010). Political scientists who have addressed leaked documents’ research utility advocate freedom of inquiry, tout possible empirical revelations, and decry self-censorship (Gill and Spirling 2015; Michael 2015; O’Loughlin 2016) or emphasize human-subjects protections during research (Boustead and Herr 2020). In contrast, I argue that despite appearing to offer bountiful evidence, unauthorized sources are flawed and dangerous temptations, to which political science has too frequently and casually succumbed.…”

“…Active deliberation of this trend is overdue: scholars concerned about leaked documents should contest their usage rather than just silently refraining from citing them. Third, the concrete problem of WikiLeaks in security studies should engage political science conversations on transparency and replication (Jacobs et al 2021; Rinke and Wuttke 2021), and research ethics particularly regarding human subjects (APSA 2020; Boustead and Herr 2020; Kapiszewski and Wood 2021; Subotić 2021). How to handle primary-source evidence is increasingly recognized as a widespread and pressing concern.…”