Summary
The Wall Street Journal article discusses the difficulty of monitoring convicted cybercriminals after they are released. Many democratic countries impose post-release restrictions on the use of computers and virtual private networks which may last for years. Although these restrictions are intended to prevent further hacker activity, in reality, such measures reduce opportunities for socialization after prison. Another problem is that some organizations deny employment or legal cyber-activity certificates. The article’s author does not give a definite opinion on the subject. Nevertheless, she frames her discussion in a way that highlights this issue as a social problem.
Relevancy
This article may be useful for small businesses and entrepreneurs specializing in IT technologies and cyber security. Management faces a serious ethical dilemma when considering an application from a previously convicted cybercriminal. On the one hand, an indelible imprint has been left on the reputation of this employee. The reason is that in the future, there may be difficulties in establishing trust and confidence in a person’s good intentions. On the other hand, it may not be right for professionals to close the doors to a profession in which they have invested their entire lives. To consider this case from the article, it is useful to use concepts from academic ethics.
The two key paradigms in ethics are considered to be Kantian deontology and Bentham’s utilitarianism. The deontological theory focuses not on the consequences of an act but on the intentions and desire of a person to act for the benefit of others (Byars & Stanberry, 2018). Commitment to a cause based on good motives is a key criterion for solving ethical problems (Byars & Stanberry, 2018). Extrapolating to the case of cybercriminals, one should find out whether hackers intended to cause harm by their actions. For example, there may be a situation where a hacker has hacked into the website of an authoritarian state or a fraudulent organization. Therefore, context should always be considered when making decisions.
Utilitarianism implies the foundation of ethical decisions in consequences. The main idea is that morally correct behavior should maximize aggregated utility (Byars & Stanberry, 2018). The paradox arises in that even actions with bad intentions that cumulatively bring more happiness will be judged morally correct (Byars & Stanberry, 2018). In the case of small businesses, utilitarianism can be applied in a variety of ways. For example, an experienced hacker knows about the vulnerabilities of IT systems, so the services of this specialist can increase the security of an enterprise. Similarly, hiring a socially vulnerable person can increase the overall amount of social justice in society.
Reaction
When considering the problem of hiring hackers with a criminal record, context is a key decision factor. This student is sure that one should definitely not succumb to paranoia and exclude the possibility of cooperation with such people. Considering solution, it seems that an enterprise should combine the conclusions obtained through deontological and utilitarian analysis. For example, hacking in the early student years may be a sign of a fascination with technology rather than a deliberate desire to harm society. Thus, it is really possible to establish business trust with people with a cybercriminal past. The main external barrier that small businesses need to take into account is legal restrictions. In cases where the court has banned the use of some online features, managers should contact lawyers and find a compromise.
Reference
Byars, S. M., & Stanberry, K. (2018). Business ethics. Openstax.