Description
Topic 1: Freedom of Speech
In 2008, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)
obtained a temporary restraining order barring three Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT) students from publicly displaying what
they claimed to be a way to get “free subway rides for life.”
Specifically, the 10-day injunction prohibited the students from
revealing vulnerabilities of the MBTA’s fare card. The students were
scheduled to present their findings in Las Vegas at the DEFCON computer
hacking conference. Were the students’ actions legal? Were their actions
ethical? Discuss your answer from the students’ perspective then from
the perspective of the MBTA.
Just do response each posted # 1 to 3 down below only.
Posted 1
From
the perspective of the students, I can confidently say that their
actions were ethical legal and justifiable. One thing the students had
identified was a lacuna with regards to argument that the students’
activities were lawful despite the fact that not ideal for the
transportation authority. In a manner it was unscrupulous on the grounds
that it is harming to the organization and would hurt their business.
From the point of view of the understudies, I would be irate that the
transportation authority accessed bar the understudies from introducing
their discoveries. It is out of line that they have the ability to do
that. From the viewpoint of the MBTA, I would accept the activities of
the understudies to be untrustworthy in light of the fact that it is
ethically wrong to hurt an organization and offer it with others to keep
harming the business. (Rainer & Prince 2018)
Legal
ethics is the base models of suitable lead inside the lawful
profession. It is the social standards and ethics which administer
judges and legal counselors. It includes obligations that the
individuals owe each other, their customers, and the courts. Regard of
customer confidences, sincerity toward the council, honesty in
explanations to other people, and expert freedom are a portion of the
characterizing highlights of legitimate morals. Lawful morals can
likewise allude to the investigation or recognition of those obligations
or the composed guidelines overseeing those obligations.
Posted 2
From
the students’ perspective, they found a loophole in a system that was
carelessly brought to the public by the MBTA. The students being at MIT
utilized this “hack” to reprogram the cards to increase the funds on the
card instantly, never to have to pay for transportation again. The
findings from these students’ were formatted as a scholastic paper, and
used to shed light on the flaws that a corporation had. In my opinion
this fits into the utilitarian ethical framework. “The Utilitarian
approach states that an ethical action is the one that provides the most
good or does the least harm” (Rainer & Prince p 66). The exposure
of the flawed system could have easily provided needed transportation to
many of those in the city who may not be able to afford it. They also
taught the MBTA and their partners that additional resources needed to
be utilized to ensure proper use of their services. The students did not
perform illegal activity when it came down to utilizing a benefit of
the card by modifying the system. The card was a self-service system and
not attached to any internal database or system with the MBTA. This
allowed the students to change the coding to the card quickly and would
have been prevented had the MBTA utilized a better system for their
transportation services.
From
the MBTA point of view, I can see them thinking this misuse of the
product would be illegal. They are stealing rides on the transportation
system and, therefore, potentially increasing the fares for innocent
members of the public. They additionally would be providing the business
as a target for other security attacks, if this system is flawed what
other systems might people attempt to enter. The business probably
reviewed this from the ethical approach of deontology. This approach
“states that the morality of an action is based on whether that action
itself is right or wrong” (Rainer & Prince p 66). It was wrong of
them to take advantage of the system and cheat the MBTA out of needed
money. As with many other public transportation systems across the
country, they are suffering financially due to new competitors. At the
end of the day the MBTA should have utilized more resources to develop a
more closed-circuit system that would prevent the misuse of its
services.
Posted 3
The
MIT students’ actions are legal because they wanted to use their
freedom of speech. The students wanted to shine light at the flaws that
the MBTA transportation card had. I do believe that the students’
actions are ethical because the information was being presented as an
academic paper. There was important information that was discussed in
the academic paper where demonstrated the company MBTA had security
flaws. Also, the students did not share important details that would
have other people take advantage of these flaws. The students were
maintaining rights approach. As stated in our textbook (Rainer &
Prince, 2018), The rights approach maintains that an ethical action is
the one that best protects and respects the moral rights of the affected
parties. I think it is important for students to address concerning
issues that can be fixed or prevented.
I
would say that MBTA also took the correct choice to pursue legal
action. They did not agree to have security flaws shared to the public.
They were trying to avoid having system attacks on their transportation
card. The transportation company pursued legal action for the purpose of
protecting their business against computer fraud. The student’s actions
would result in damages for the compan