Stuxnet

The Stuxnet virus was launched by the United States and likely Israel, with the United States having officially taken responsibility. The purpose of the virus was to infect centrifuges used by Iran’s nuclear program, spy on them, and interrupt their operations. This action raised a number of ethical questions. Is it ethical for a government to attack another government’s technological infrastructure? There are many valid opinions on this issue, and it is highly dependent on the situation. With technological attacks it is possible for actors, whether terrorists or nation-states, to poison water supplies, or take down the electrical grid, with devastating and life destroying consequences. It is probably agreeable that anything that will kill innocent civilians is unethical, even in a time of war. The Stuxnet virus is easier to consider ethical, as it did not target innocents, and in fact was necessary to get information and possibly stop Iran from creating a nuclear weapon, which would almost certainly lead to greater conflict. It is probably ethical for militaries to fight with technology, when for the purpose of securing the country or lives of people. The attacked country should certainly respond diplomatically and peacefully if possible, but if attacked, it is in their national defense interest to use similar, but not unethical, tactics.
However, there is danger to not carefully considering the ethics of every decision. If one only focuses on the idea of national security, and doesn’t take into account the ethical dimensions, ethical fading can occur where being so focused on an objective, ethics fade from view. Even if the original objective and plan are noble, with ethical fading, the plan can shift without the influence of ethics, and become highly unethical. Another problem that can occur is incrementalism. When one thing is justified as necessary for national security, other similar things can be justified as such, and eventually truly unethical horrors become justified for the same reason.  

https://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/security/the-real-story-of-stuxnet 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Game Dev Tycoon

Image
                     (Sriram,Danely, Alvin, Edwin) In April 2013, Greenheart Games released Game Dev Tycoon, a single-player game in which the player gets to simulate the evolution of the game development industry by starting their own company in the 1980s. Because of huge hit that the gaming industry has taken due to bootleg games, the creators of Game Dev Tycoon released a bootleg version of their game on torrenting sites to toy a bit with the users who downloaded the pirated game. The game logged how many people pirated the game, as well as made the game inside the game get pirated. Piracy is a widespread issue in the software industry, especially for the video game sector. Piracy is the process of distributing and acquiring an illegal copy of a piece of intellectual property without having to pay for it. Essentially, piracy is stealing, with the same consequences to the creator of a work as stealing an item from a store. However, people attempt to justify pirating software thro
Read more

Microtransactions & Lootboxes in Games

Image
(Alan, Danely, Xeon, Sriram) As the video-game industry reached the widespread popularity it is known for today, the overall cost of developing a video game grew, both for large studios and indie-developers. To account for this, many developers started to implement ways of monetization inside their games. These purchases usually cost lower than the game, and as such are called micro-transactions. However, there are many issues that rose from the advent of micro-transactions. One of these issues can be seen in the launch of the popular first-person-shooter game Star Wars: Battlefront II, a game released by Electronic Arts in 2017. The game, while lauded for its beautiful graphics and satisfying gameplay, came under extreme fire throughout the internet for what many saw as extreme monetization at the expense of user experience. Users have repeatedly criticized the difficulty of game progression due to the need to “grind” (spend an extended period of time to acquire in-game bene
Read more

The FBI... to aid or not to aid?

An individual’s privacy in the United States is protected by the Fourth Amendment, in which the “persons, houses, papers, and effects” of the people “shall not be violated”. With the advent of technology, however, the scope of the personal possessions of a person have expanded include digital property as well. The definition of a warrant, a right to access “the places to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized”, has thus been blurred by the ease of access to personal digital property. One main example of the debate over the right to exercise the Fourth Amendment comes from the seizure of technology in order to access information that could assist criminal investigations. Tech companies, although not obligated to assist in such investigations unless summoned by a subpoena, have the option to assist the government. This being said, however, there exists opposing stances on this action. One prominent company that assists in government law enforcement is Best Buy. In a lawsuit
Read more