Slide 28. What does "IR" mean?
The White Hat's Dilemma
21–30 of 115 posts
Re: The White Hat's Dilemma
#22Here's an alternative vantage point, my vantage point, one I think makes these kinds of ethical quandaries easier to navigate: * I'm not a "white hat" or a "black hat" * I'm not deliberately involved in any kind of "cyber" conflict * I don't do what I do because I'm battling the forces of evil, or organized crime, or anything else Instead: I do engineering. The same way a contract driver developer does, or a Rails de…
What about this vantage point leads you to say no when Narus asks you to help with their spy software or whatever?
Re: The White Hat's Dilemma
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks. Still my favorite game ever.
What class did you get?
I don't remember what I got the first couple of times I answered honestly. I do remember manipulating the system to become a Paladin, which perhaps negates the entire point of the morality system and makes me a rogue in real life.
Re: The White Hat's Dilemma
#24Slide 28. What does "IR" mean?
Incident Response
Re: The White Hat's Dilemma
#25Here's an alternative vantage point, my vantage point, one I think makes these kinds of ethical quandaries easier to navigate: * I'm not a "white hat" or a "black hat" * I'm not deliberately involved in any kind of "cyber" conflict * I don't do what I do because I'm battling the forces of evil, or organized crime, or anything else Instead: I do engineering. The same way a contract driver developer does, or a Rails de…
What about this vantage point leads you to say no when Narus asks you to help with their spy software or whatever?
It's categorical rejection. Instead of opening up that venue and having to navigate the murky waters of cognitive dissonance and moral obligations against lucrative opportunity, you simply don't open the door. You stick to a client base that is meaningful (relatively so) but not highly impactful and potentially dangerous down the road.
Re: The White Hat's Dilemma
#26Slide 28. What does "IR" mean?
[deleted]
Re: The White Hat's Dilemma
#27Here's an alternative vantage point, my vantage point, one I think makes these kinds of ethical quandaries easier to navigate: * I'm not a "white hat" or a "black hat" * I'm not deliberately involved in any kind of "cyber" conflict * I don't do what I do because I'm battling the forces of evil, or organized crime, or anything else Instead: I do engineering. The same way a contract driver developer does, or a Rails de…
Reading what you just wrote reminded me of the famous Edmund Burke quote: "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing".
If it had not been for the acquiescence of engineers who took part in the creation of PRISM, XKeyscore, etc. we... well, we would not have PRISM, XKeyscore, etc. Increasingly there is no such thing as an "amoral" position when it comes to a lot of these things -- you're either an entity who willingly chooses profit over principles, or you do something to defeat the evil as you see it (or, at least refuse to take part in it). In this day and age the conscientiousness of man is one of the last remaining defenses to fight the many evils, new or old, mercurial or familiar. It falls on all of us to think of the moral ramifications of our actions, in the workplace and off, and choose carefully and to the extent we comfortably can to see humanity continue prosperously.
I don't mean this to be a thoughtless, idealistic anti-NSA tirade, I'm frankly very okay with folks working on hip new technology that catches the bad guys, I just think your decision framework which is devoid of any ethical considerations is highly, highly dangerous and I wish for the good of us all that it doesn't catch on.
Re: The White Hat's Dilemma
#28Why do people even sign NDA's ?
Re: The White Hat's Dilemma
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I might have been branded as a coward If you have an ethical choice to make, consider the reaction of your esteemed colleagues (get counsel if you feel you can), not that of the mainstream news. The general support for those such as Snowden and Manning among my peers would prove that indeed they are held in high regard among those to whom it matters. The decision you made was your decision and you should not curse y…
I think it would be great if someone with money in Silicon Valley were to make public statements along the lines of, "If you blow the whistle, and it's legit, you won't have to worry about your career. We want people who are driven to do the right thing. We want to hire heroes." If Google really wants to make a statement about being not-evil, make Snowden a generous offer for employment while he's in Russia.
Eh...well intentioned, but no. There would be severe consequences for just offering employment to such sensitive individuals.
People like Snowden are not branded untouchable because people are ideologically opposed to his actions - that's a misrepresentation of what's actually going on. Whistleblowers become shunned because whoever they come into contact with will be elevated to accomplice status.
Google doesn't want that kind of fire under their ass. Altruism is all well and good, but there's a reason wh you're instructed to put your own oxygen mask on in a airplane emergency.
If a company like Google did that, they would immediately: 1. Place Snowden in United States lawful jurisdiction, 2. Endanger their own fiscal well-being, 3. Draw political attention and divisive sentiments to themselves.
I believe tech companies have a responsibility to take a stand, but being the hero and standing up to the man like that is essentially taking out Snowden and your company in a massive kamekaze attack that benefits only his detractors.
Re: The White Hat's Dilemma
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's what it means to be an ideologue - willingness to die for your values. Don't be ashamed about your decisions, a strong sense of self-preservation is perfectly natural.
What s/he did can be perfectly natural and not imply that s/he's a worse-than-average person, but still be worthy of shame. I don't mean to be an asshole here, but it's important for all of us to recognize that normal humans (ie. we) have a capacity to do awful things if circumstances encourage it - the Stanford Prison Experiment would be a famous illustration. That's why these slides are helpful.
I agree, and I'd also like to mention the other usually cited experiment along those lines - the Milgram obedience experiment.