Poll: Is Vigilante Hacking a Good Idea?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
yes
80.00%
4 80.00%
no
20.00%
1 20.00%
Total 5 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Vigilante Hacking - Heroes or Menaces
#11
(05-10-2020, 02:07 PM)DeepLogic Wrote: This thread is for discussing vigilante hacking. By vigilante hacking I mean doing illegal hacking for reasons the vigilante considers morally right. Should vigilante hacking be legal? Is vigilante hacking even helpful or effective?
I think it is helpful and effective also necessary sometimes xd, I dont think it will be legal, them lawmakers are careful to not leave holes for abuse and considering these type of cases I think it would be hard to determine what n what not to justify. Still there are things one can pwn all day long without the need to worry about law, like taking over botnets and marketplaces n so on. Hacktivism on the other hand its risky so one has to consider if the cause is worth it.
Reply
#12
I think it comes down to the question of whether people that have the ability to stop criminal or morally wrong behavior coming from an outside entity should do so or not. What does 'the greater good' mean to the vigilante hacker in question. And if the vigilante hacker feels like they are the only one that can put a stop to what they perceive as heinous crimes on the part of an individual or organization should they be the ones to step up?

I don't think morality is as relative as a lot of people like to think it is. Good or bad isn't really a point of view. I have some philosophical arguments to back that up, but i don't want to get bogged down in the moral relativism debate.

Also, i think exposing bad practices by governments and corporations, is different then when a hacker or anyone for that matter takes the law into their own hands with regards to people they perceive to be evil.

It's a complex subject to be sure.
Reply
#13
(07-14-2020, 04:14 PM)Vector Wrote: I think it comes down to the question of whether people that have the ability to stop criminal or morally wrong behavior coming from an outside entity should do so or not. What does 'the greater good' mean to the vigilante hacker in question. And if the vigilante hacker feels like they are the only one that can put a stop to what they perceive as heinous crimes on the part of an individual or organization should they be the ones to step up?

I don't think morality is as relative as a lot of people like to think it is. Good or bad isn't really a point of view. I have some philosophical arguments to back that up, but i don't want to get bogged down in the moral relativism debate.

Also, i think exposing bad practices by governments and corporations, is different then when a hacker or anyone for that matter takes the law into their own hands with regards to people they perceive to be evil.

It's a complex subject to be sure.

Yes, objective morality exists (Ontological Argument + most of Kant's work on morals and ethics/religion) but we as people don't have the capability to actually understand a significant portion of objective morality given we also have emotions and free will. Take the trolley problem as the best (most easily understood and heavily meme'd) example.

That aside, there's hardly a point to 'exposing' anything anymore. We know about all the shady governmental/elite practices (see: Guantanamo, everything to do with the Vietnam War, Chinese Uyghur camps, recent pedophile scandals, corruption throughout the EU, etc.) and it seems that even when evidence does hit the surface, nothing happens as a result. And even the internet (or the vast majority of the world) doesn't seem to care when it gets brought to light. The CIA can declassify all their documents on MK ULTRA/Bluebird, astral projection, psychedelic drugs used for torture in combination with the Barney theme song, the list goes on, and no one will bat an eye. Press will only cover a story if it aligns with the views of the board of directors owning the news outlet.

So there's an extremely clear distinction between "exposing" a practice versus stopping it.
More often than not, a vigilante can't "stop" a practice, only at very best get enough info to expose it. See everything related to Vault7, Guccifer2.0, and early (pre-2013) Assange leaks like the 'War Logs' from Chelsea Manning as my source for this.
And as we see now, exposing doesn't really do much to change anything, only getting a few people who care to look to see the evidence themselves.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Security/Hacking Ebook Collection Insider 134 200,910 07-18-2020, 08:20 AM
Last Post: Vice
  Is releasing hacking tools a bad idea? DeepLogic 2 1,196 07-16-2020, 09:16 PM
Last Post: Vector
  Is learning Games Hacking useful? Bass_R33v3s 8 2,429 06-16-2020, 12:58 AM
Last Post: Bass_R33v3s
  Detailed Account of Hacking a Spyware Company DeepLogic 0 824 06-05-2020, 06:02 PM
Last Post: DeepLogic