MIS2101 Section 702 – Amy Lavin – Spring 2014

British Man Charged with Hacking NASA and US Military Computers

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2058740/british-man-charged-with-hacking-nasa-and-us-military-computers.html

1) Most Americans give information to the government and, for the most part, they think that it is secure and there will not be a chance to have that information hacked.  And given that the United States has gained more access to their citizen’s personal information and data, do you think that this person being able to hack into the government systems is reason for concern and why?

2) Certain hackers like Edward Snowden feel that they are doing the ethical thing by exposing the government to the people and that the citizens have a right to this information.  Do you think that this is true or false?  Why?

3) In the article, this man faced up to 5 years in prison and $250,000 in fines.  Do you think that these punishments are stern enough?  Do you think that the punishments should be based on the magnitude of the breach?

13 Responses to British Man Charged with Hacking NASA and US Military Computers

  • 1. The fact that this many major government agencies can be hacked by a group of four people is a huge concern. It just goes to show that nothing is completely safe on the internet and we still have a very long way to go in regards to internet security.

    2. I believe that there are definitely things that the government keeps from its citizens that the people have a right to know. The government keeps it under wraps because it may be unethical or something the general public would not agree with. However, there is also plenty of information that the government must keep secret from its citizens in order to keep them safe.

    3. This punishment does not fit the crime of hacking into multiple national agencies and putting thousands of employees at risk. People who can cause that much damage from their laptop should face a much harsher penalty. Depending on what material was hacked into, it could even be considered espionage.

  • 1. It is always a reason for concern when anyone is able to hack into a system and retrieve personal information from anywhere.

    2. I disagree with Edward Snowden. It is not the job of hackers to expose any business, especially in the name of being ethical. Let’s just say they never talked about it on Twitter, all those employees would not have been unaware.

    3. When someone’s privacy is violated, I believe the punishment for the perpetrator should not be based on the magnitude of the breach. Those that chose to violate the privacy of others should suffer the consequences and should be made an example of what not to do. If violators know that there is a standard according to the level of breach, some will still take the risk if its minimal, verses knowing that the punishment could be severe.

  • 1) Most Americans give information to the government and, for the most part, they think that it is secure and there will not be a chance to have that information hacked. And given that the United States has gained more access to their citizen’s personal information and data, do you think that this person being able to hack into the government systems is reason for concern and why?
    Of course it is but it’s not surprising, it’s hard for anyone to stay on top of new developments in hacking. I like the idea of taking hackers and trying to use them to develop better systems. Make them break in and then try to fix your security.

    2) Certain hackers like Edward Snowden feel that they are doing the ethical thing by exposing the government to the people and that the citizens have a right to this information. Do you think that this is true or false? Why?
    I think it’s good to know how far they go to spy on us since we never wanted a government that could control us. Someone has to keep them in check.

    3) In the article, this man faced up to 5 years in prison and $250,000 in fines. Do you think that these punishments are stern enough? Do you think that the punishments should be based on the magnitude of the breach?
    I don’t feel these punishments were stern enough. I actually thought that while reading it. This is a serious violation. Who knows who he taught to do this and they could take this type of breach to the next level.

  • 1)I definitely think that a person being able to hack into government systems is reason for concern. We are told everyday to protect our personal info because people can use it in ways that could ruin us. Most of this information helps the government keep a track record of us so if others can gain access to it and potentially ruin our track record, then yes it is a reason for concern. If they have access to personal information of citizens, then they have access to other classified information on other governmental databases which makes it a national security issue and that is a very big concern for American citizens especially after what happened on 9/11.

    2)Then again if the government was working on something that endagers its citizens or could potentially cause certain problems for the “People” then I feel like we deserve a right to know but unfortunately, there are laws and thats just not how the world is set up or run. Hence if u break a law, even if it waas for the greater good, you will or must still face the consequences. I mean to make a change in any situations, things like these happen and the rest of the people, especially future generations reap the benefit.

    3) I thik the punishment could be a bit more stern to ward off future hackers. However maybe they dont think he meant to harm the country on the whole so thats why they gave him that punishment but yes it could or should have been more stern

  • It’s interesting, isn’t it, the level of the punishment? Since this area is still so unregulated and undetermined it is hard to put numbers around a punishment of what is fair – however, I would think 5 years for the amount of damage done is not enough… Great article Daneen!

  • 1) Most Americans give information to the government and, for the most part, they think that it is secure and there will not be a chance to have that information hacked. And given that the United States has gained more access to their citizen’s personal information and data, do you think that this person being able to hack into the government systems is reason for concern and why?

    Yes, I think it is a great concern to the citizens of United States, because if hackers can easily able to access the U.S government’s data they can easily steal private information of the citizens and used it for their own purpose.

    2) Certain hackers like Edward Snowden feel that they are doing the ethical thing by exposing the government to the people and that the citizens have a right to this information. Do you think that this is true or false? Why?

    I think it is false, because the intention of collecting information from private citizens by the government is for public safety and wellbeing of its citizens.
    3) In the article, this man faced up to 5 years in prison and $250,000 in fines. Do you think that these punishments are stern enough? Do you think that the punishments should be based on the magnitude of the breach?

    Yes I think the punishments are appropriate for this type of crime, and I also agree that the punishment always should be based on the magnitude of the crime.

  • 1. I think online security is a huge concern no matter if it is through a government site or not. We would probably expect a higher level of security from a government site but the truth is that the internet is not safe and I doubt it ever will be completely safe. That’s a risk that we will always have to consider while using the internet. The key is to be able to quickly recognize when it’s been compromised and handle it in a way that minimizes the blow.

    2. I believe that the government withholds information that we are entitled to and I realize that some information is not shared for our safety. I can appreciate the hackers are trying to be ethical in exposing the government because if not them, who will? Maybe I’ve read too many books on dystopian societies but I can’t condemn the Snowden’s of the world too harshly.

    3. I think it’s hard to determine the right punishment for these crimes. It should definitely be base on the magnitude of the crime but I’m no expert so I honestly can’t say.

  • 1) Most Americans give information to the government and, for the most part, they think that it is secure and there will not be a chance to have that information hacked. And given that the United States has gained more access to their citizen’s personal information and data, do you think that this person being able to hack into the government systems is reason for concern and why? ​
    It is very unnerving that our government systems get hacked so often. I think these systems should be
    ​ one​ the mo​s​t heavily guarded.

    2) Certain hackers like Edward Snowden feel that they are doing the ethical thing by exposing the government to the people and that the citizens have a right to this information. Do you think that this is true or false? Why? ​
    To a certain extent I think it is good for hackers to exposure the governments online weaknesses. In fact the government should hire more people like Edward Snowden. Hackers are constantly evolving to defeat our system defenses.

    3) In the article, this man faced up to 5 years in prison and $250,000 in fines. Do you think that these punishments are stern enough? Do you think that the punishments should be based on the magnitude of the breach?
    ​ In situations like these, I think the punishment should be harsh because it is hard to calculate the ​full ​
    severity of their crime. Especially if he sold people’s information, who then sold it another third party. I definitely the perpetrator should get the maximum sentence and hopefully that will discourage others from doing the same.

  • 1) Yes, I believe it is a reason for concern because these hackers not only targeted government websites, they did it for the main objective to obtain personal information i.e., social security number, date of birth, etc. Also, I believe the only reason for hackers to seek out individual’s personal information on government websites, would be to use the information to commit identity theft. Furthermore, the federal government network should not be that vulnerable.

    2) False. The Freedom of Information Act does just that, it provides government information to its citizens. I don’t think that all the information is being released, i.e., classified information, but that is to be expected. I believe the federal government is more transparent now than it has ever been.

    3) I believe the time in jail is excessive, i.e., in Pennsylvania the standard for discharging a hand gun is 5 years. How can you equate shooting a gun to hacking into a company’s computer system? I believe unless the breach caused bodily harm then the hacker should be fined based upon how much damage the breach resulted in.

  • 1.) This is a matter of concern for me. For the most part, people don’t really have a choice about whether the government has their information or not(unless you leave the country and or go off the grid). Because of this the government should have the best security available. As far as I know no one is hacking into military computer systems, citizen information should be treated as equally important.

    2.) Whether or not it is ethical is very debatable. However, I do think it is a good thing that he poked a hole in the security system. It shows where our government could beef itself up in terms of internal security.

    3.) I am not an expert in the legality of hacking but from what I know I don’t think his punishment fits the crime. If he managed to steal 100,000 physical credit cards,let alone every US citizens, the sentence would be much worse. This case should show little difference in the eyes of the law.

  • 1) Most Americans give information to the government and, for the most part, they think that it is secure and there will not be a chance to have that information hacked. And given that the United States has gained more access to their citizen’s personal information and data, do you think that this person being able to hack into the government systems is reason for concern and why?
    Yes we like to assume that the government should have the highest level of security for many reasons. The first reason is mentioned in the question, the government has a lot more access to its residents and those employed. Not only for monetary reasons but also for safety, it is very disturbing to hear that the hacking seemed relatively easy to an educated IT person.

    2) Certain hackers like Edward Snowden feel that they are doing the ethical thing by exposing the government to the people and that the citizens have a right to this information. Do you think that this is true or false? Why?
    I feel that it is beneficial to have hackers employed by the government to see what holes they have that needs to be fixed. I do not think it should be publicized because we can’t deny the government information. Exposing the government publicly just ensues chaos, and worry in the peoples mind.

    3) In the article, this man faced up to 5 years in prison and $250,000 in fines. Do you think that these punishments are stern enough? Do you think that the punishments should be based on the magnitude of the breach?
    We do not have the details of the case and I feel that the fine should be higher if he risked more financials. I also think that jail time won’t do much since the jail system is so overcrowded. I think he should have to be in some sort of work/arrest program to help the government improve their systems from future hackers like himself.

  • I think that it is a huge concern that this individual was able to break into the governments systems and beat the firewalls. Our government should have some of the most secure systems with all of our sensitive information out there.I think that you could go either way on the debate about whether the hackers are doing good or bad. It goes both ways because the government should be more open with us, but in reality they should not be hacking the system. I think that the fines are stern enough and provide him with enough punishment to not one to do it and stop others from doing it.

  • Question 1-There is always concerns because we have a person who create a system, and another person who is smarter, and can interrupt it. So the government should update a better secured system.

    Q2-It depends on how severe of the harm is? The Government can decide expose the case and how much information should be exposed because the exposure could cause too much rumors which make our country looks weak.

    Q3-I have no ideas about the prison time, but i think the fine should be higher so it can cover the damage.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 14 other subscribers