Computer Hacking Moral Or Immoral Philosophy Essay

A computer enthusiast, or computerphile, who gains, or attempts to gain, unauthorized access to computers or computer networks and tamper with operating systems, application programs, and databases,. See also hacker.

A person who breaks into a computer system without authorization, whose purpose is to do damage (destroy files, steal credit card numbers, plant viruses, etc.). Because a cracker uses low-level hacker skills to do cracking, the terms "cracker" and "hacker" have become synonymous with the latter becoming the most widely used term.

To copy commercial software illegally by breaking (cracking) the various copy-protection and registration techniques are being used.

A cracker is someone who breaks into someone else's computer system, often on a network; bypasses passwords or licenses in computer programs; or in other ways intentionally breaches computer security. A cracker can be doing this for profit, maliciously, for some altruistic purpose or cause, or because the challenge is there. Some breaking-and-entering has been done ostensibly to point out weaknesses in a site's security system.

A "Cracker" is a computer user who attempts to break into copyrighted software or a network computer system. Sometimes this is done with intent of releasing the software so it can be used without paying royalties. Other times, cracking is to expose a system's security flaws. For the most part, crackers do their craft with the intent to steal confidential data, acquire free software, or perform malicious destruction of files.

The term "cracker" is not to be confused with "hacker". Hackers generally deplore cracking. However, as Eric Raymond, compiler of The New Hacker's Dictionary notes, some journalists ascribe break-ins to "hackers."

A cracker is the one who does cracking. Cracking is the act of breaking into a computer system, often on a network. A cracker can be doing this for profit, maliciously, for some altruistic purpose or cause, or because the challenge is there. Some breaking-and-entering has been done ostensibly to point out weaknesses in a site's security system.

Contrary to widespread myth, cracking does not usually involve some mysterious leap of hackerly brilliance, but rather persistence and the dogged repetition of a handful of fairly well-known tricks that exploit common weaknesses in the security of target systems. Accordingly, most crackers are only mediocre hackers. These two terms should not be confused with each others. Hackers generally deplore cracking.

The simple answer for the response to "ethical hacking" should be to let them do their work. Unethical hackers should be stopped using any ethical means possible.

In security Community, a cracker is someone who breaks encryption and copy protection Schemes. They are malicious programmers.

Similarity of both is that both are very smart people who have in depth-understanding of computer systems and can accurately analyze a difficulty to solve problem.

Once there were computer hackers. These early pioneers of computing were fanatically dedicated to inventing and exploring how things worked. As part of the sixties generation, they were also prone toward being anti-establishment and somewhat disrespectful toward property rights. The early hackers were fond of breaking bureaucratic laws and regulations, particularly if they got in the way of learning something or doing something useful. Eventually a pair of these early hackers, Steve Wozniak and Steven Jobs, hacked together the first commercially succesful personal computer, the Apple, and the computer industry was off to the races. The sixties generation hackers flooded into the new industry and many quickly attained positions of wealth and authority. Most of them maintained a semblance of their early antibureaucratic attitudes but generally settled down to the task of creating the information/communications ecology that dominates Western life.

Meanwhile two things happened:

A new generation of hackers emerged who were not yet part of the establishment. Like their predecessors, they were inventive, curious, and too smart to buy into dumb laws and bureaucratic regulations. As the earlier hackers were influenced by the idealism of the hippie and new-left movements, the new generation hackers were influenced by the nihilism and alienation of the punk movement.

The world economic and social order went completely digital. And so CRIME went digital too.

It is somewhere at the interstices of the new generation of alienated young hackers (they sometimes refer to themselves as "cyberpunks") and the world of sometimes-organized crime that we locate the concept of the cracker. The term is, to some degree, an attempt by the now-established older-generation hackers to separate themselves from computer crime. The debate still rages as to what constitutes the difference between hacking and cracking. Some say that cracking represents any and all forms of rule-breaking and illegal activity using a computer. Others would define cracking only as particularly DESTRUCTIVE criminal acts. Still others would claim that the early hackers were EXPLICITLY anarchistic and that acts of willful destruction against "the system" have a place in the hacker ethos, and that therefore the term cracker is unnecessary and insulting.

Social implications accompany technological advances. Just as the industrial revolution produced the social problems of pollution and overcrowded cities, the computer revolution also is causing specific concerns. This paper examines some of the more interesting social values of a group of self-proclaimed crackers, or elite hackers. These views are compared to those of non-cracker, computer professionals for moral and ethical balance. The issues discussed in this paper include: the value of information, the reasons for cracking, the morality of cracking, Big Brother, the rights of usees, and the future of cracking. The paper is purposely written without bias toward either side of the issue: The Moral Cracker?

The computer Cracker is like a Hacking because Hacker is "a person who enjoys computer technology and spends time learning and using computer systems" A hacker is a person whose a wizards of computer science who breaks into a system just for the sake of challenge or for profit or some other reasons

They can be classified as

White Hats – one who uses their knowledge for finding and help in removing vulnerability

Black hats – One who uses his knowledge for his personal gains or to destroy others data

Grey hats ( The one I like most ) – they cant be said neither Good or evil. They will hack into your system and use it and may also inform you that they have done this.

A blue hat hacker is someone outside computer security consulting firms who is used to bug test a system prior to its launch, looking for exploits so they can be closed

Crackers on other side break the security of the system. But they can be any of the above mentioned depending on the circumstance

cracker ("criminal hacker") as "a computer-savvy person who attempts to gain unauthorized or illegal access to computer systems" The problem is that most people consider all hackers as criminals; this problem is really the media’s fault, because as a lot of newspapers show, the reporters do not distinguish between "crackers" and "hackers", and they use the term "hackers" whether it’s actually a "cracker" or a "hacker." A general term for both hacker and cracker can be intruders

Hackers are those people who prove their expertise in the

technical field by revealing the vulnerabilities thus its good

for the existence of many software sites etc.

so it will be good to organize those people and made it into a community and should be approved by some committee and make use of hackers.

I don’t know like this exists or not.

The simple answer for the response to "ethical hacking" should be to let them do their work. Unethical hackers should be stopped using any ethical means possible.

"I knew that things but I’ll tell the real time example … if a doctor operates the human body its called hacker, interrupted in others personal matter is cracker. both are without getting permission they r doing "

Some people are using the hacker and cracker for some reason maybe if it a good or bad way because this is the way to earned some money and getting some data for their own , but for the other Hacking is useful because they can hack the files or some data. That’s why Cracking is immoral because they use some info’s in an illegal way

Ryan has always been a very good information technology student in a prestigious computer school. Awards, high grades, fame, everything a student would desire to achieve were all awarded to him. He made his parents proud when he graduated as a magna cum laude. Soon after graduation, he married her girlfriend and was able to have a son.

Apart from the said characteristics, only one knew about his bad way thinking of things around him. That is his best-friend Ivan. Ivan is a fairly knowledgeable student but not as good as Ryan. He did things that are according to his moral preferences and detest things that are immoral.

Since they both have a good communication skill, they decided to work on a call center company under a banking account. They were offered a good salary and they felt ok with it for the first three months of their employment. Being a person with malicious way of thinking, Ryan thought of using the information they acquired from their customer to hack their bank account.

Ryan told Ivan about his plan. Being a good person, Ivan refused to go along with Ryan’s idea and told him that he’s not going to get any support from him. Ryan used everything up his sleeves and started hacking customer’s bank accounts. Much to his expectations, he was able to gain control of customer’s bank account. He can even withdraw their money in full if he wants to. Ryan lived with ease due to what he’s doing. Ivan knew about it but stayed silent though.

The company where they are currently working started receiving complaints from the customers. The complaints reached the proper court and the company needs to be temporarily close. Hundreds of employees are in danger of losing their job if the company will not be able to find the culprit behind the hacking of customer’s bank account.

Ryan and Ivan talked about it. He thought that no one would look up to his family specially his beloved son if he will be abducted and be imprisoned. Conscience has bugged Ryan’s heart since many people would suffer from what he has done. Ryan went to the company’s admin office and confessed about his crime.

Answer: I think Ryan was right It is his prerogative to admit the crime or not. He's genius when it comes to hacking which means to say that there is only a slight possibility that he's gonna be caught. However, the mere fact that his conscience bugged him and he admitted the crime afterwards was a sign that he's changing for good. He may not be able to see his family for quite some time but he gained his honor back. (Ammoral - in the sense of his family and he just wanted to give his family a better life