Contractors Developing Lethal Cyber Weapons

Question: Discuss about the Contractors Developing Lethal Cyber Weapons. Answer: Introduction Most of todays headlines are dominated by the use and misuse of information and communication technology. Furthermore, considering the fact that computers, as well as other communication technologies, have made their way into all aspects of life makes ICT an integral component of todays life. ICT involvement has also led to a great dependence on it which in itself raises some questions on this over reliance (Mishra, 2015). Nevertheless, it's now common to hear of government systems losing data or even an official government member who uses police data to spy on the general population. In other cases, a private company may be charged with selling underage information via the internet (EIEx, 2016). All these issues among many others are caused by ICT or related to the field. This paper will highlight ethical concerns and analyze it using the four classical ethical theories Lethal Cyber Weapons In 2016, an upcoming, nearly half a billion dollar contract was developed by the US military, a contract that aims to develop a next generation computer code capable of killing enemy combaters or adversaries. Furthermore, the said technology is set to be deployed as soon as its complete having the necessary tools to spy, retrieve information and execute it set mandate (Nextgov, 2016). In this new system, the U.S. troops would be able to launch logical bombs, unlike the traditional bombs that target an enemys vulnerable/critical infrastructure. The new bombs would have extensive capabilities to site vulnerabilities and hit targets with the utmost accuracy. In essence, this signals the arrival of lethal cyber weapons, a highly controversial topic filled with many ethical dilemmas. Analysis using the four classical ethical theories Several schools of ethic exist including utilitarianism, deontology, virtue and contract, lets analyze this case study in terms of these theories. Utilitarianism focuses on a pragmatic approach where the said technology is seen to harm the society other than benefit it. However, even without deriving the ethical concerns with the U.S. cyberweapons, cyber-attacks are with themselves problematic as they violet all frameworks of ethic be it social, moral or even technological (Rowe, 2009). The proposed lethal weapons would have to use cyber technological to gain an advantage over combaters, however, cyber attackers including those done by governments can use the privileges held to access and destroy legitimate infrastructures owned by innocent civilians. In addition to this, consider the current negative effects of cyber-crime and terrorism e.g. botnets that enslave peoples computers to phish information thus generate illegal money (Bailey et al 2009). The same technology is now set to control weapons of mass destruction, a foreseeable negative outcome is clearly imminent. Furthermore, lethal cyber weapons are only an extension of war itself, therefore a clear negative outcome can be clearly illustrated regardless of the measures used to safeguard the technology. Another ethical concern relates to how people use the technology, the duty held by them regardless of the consequences, i.e. deontological ethics. This said, lethal cyber weapons are a danger irrespective of where or when they are used, which means, outstanding the consequences (eliminating the enemy or innocent civilians) they are morally wrong. U.S. proposed cyber weapons are in themselves a wrong action, developing them is wrong as perceived by deontologists. To them, a person can only do the right thing if its morally upright. On the other hand, consider criminal perpetrators who attack innocent civilians, now, is the government right in developing the lethal weapons to safeguard their own citizens? Yes, but with little legislation and with the thin line that exists between doing justice and infringing on peoples right, presents the true deontological ethical dilemma (Dipert, 2010). Lethal cyber technology owned by the military can only meet their original moral mandate if all the frameworks of virtue ethics are employed. This calls for professional ideals presented by the military virtues for instance courage, honor, and even compassion. Such virtues are the only way a society can distinguish between the legitimate use of military actions such as the lethal cyber weapons proposed (Vallor, 2013). Furthermore, unlike other ethical issues that may call for policies or even governance, virtues are more of a personal endeavor held by an individual. However, with automated systems that are highly characterized by cyber systems military, virtues are lost. In our case study, the deskilling of these virtues remains the highest risk of implementing cyber weapons as all virtues and ethical responsibilities are completely lost or lowly maintained. As a solution, all lethal cyber weapons should remain within the military jurisdiction maintained by proper military virtues, b ut this is dependent on training and personal moral responsibility. Finally, as seen in the post, new technologies and developments bring with them a new set of rules, these rules or policies govern their capabilities and the extent of their use. Contractarianism (contract theory) holds both political and moral theory in authorizing certain actions. In simple terms, cyber technology ethical concerns are met through legal policies (Stanford, 2012). Technically, little has been done to develop the appropriate policies and rules that govern the technology. Moreover, the current policies refer to cyber-attacks as attacks on digital media or information, therefore a policy vacuum is in existence (Bok, 1986). To date, long discussion is in existence of incorporating chips to identify computers used to carry out cyber-attacks, however, this also infringes on privacy and secrecy requirements. Finally, considering the developers of cyber technologies are the same people who advise on the use and on the technical countermeasures presents a contractual ambiguit y because the set policies will be inclined to fit their bill (Pence Latiff, 2014). Therefore, independent bodies and not the developers and the users should set the necessary laws and policies that govern cyber technologies especially lethal cyber weapons. Recommendations In an ideal world, lethal cyber weapons would be abolished because they present considerable mass destructions opportunities. Moreover, cyber weapons have many negative effects on a society apart from mass destruction including infringing of peoples rights (privacy, identity, secrecy etc.). However, considering the attacks carried out by villains and terrorists, a counter action is needed. Furthermore, technology is ever changing and abolishing its component can never be a solution. In its place, the international community should develop laws and policies that safeguard on all components of cyber systems. In addition to this, these policies should be reviewed regularly and independently from those who use the extreme cyber technologies. These actions would fulfill the contractual ethical dilemma needed to govern the technology. Laws and policies are an integral part of a properly functioning society, however, without moral and virtues they stand to lose. Therefore, good moral and virtues are needed to properly use the cyber systems and the capabilities they pose. However, to guarantee success lethal cyber weapons like nuclear weapons should be held by a few, who again should meet the set contractual policies as set by independent bodies that have the will of the people at heart. References Bok, S. (1986). Secrets. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Charles Pence Robert Latiff. (2014). Ethics of Emerging Weapons Technologies. University of Notre Dame. Retrieved 08 January, 2017, from: https://charlespence.net/courses/phil20628-s2014/slides/lecture1.pdf Christopher Folk. (2015). U.S. Cyber Command Moves Towards Lethal Cyber Weapons. Cyber Security law and policy. Retrieved 08 January, 2017, from: https://blog.cybersecuritylaw.us/2015/11/05/u-s-cyber-command-moves-towards-lethal-cyber-weapons/ Denning, D. (1999). Information warfare and security. Boston: Addison-Wesley. EIEx. (2016). Ethical issues of emerging ICT applications. The magazine of the European innovation exchange. Retrieved 08 January, 2017, from: https://www.eurosfaire.prd.fr/7pc/doc/1304928786_eiex06etica2.pdf Minati Mishra. (2016). Ethical, Legal and Social aspects of Information and Communication Technology. Retrieved 08 January, 2017, from: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1507/1507.08447.pdf Neil Rowe. (2007). Ethics of cyber war attacks. Cyber War and Cyber Terrorism. U.S. Naval Postgraduate School. Retrieved 08 January, 2017, from: https://faculty.nps.edu/ncrowe/attackethics.htm Nextgov. 2016. Pentagon contractors developing lethal cyber weapons. Retrieved 08 January, 2017, from: https://www.nextgov.com/cybersecurity/2015/11/lethal-virtual-weapons-real/123417/ Randall Dipert. (2010). The Ethics of Cyber warfare. Journal of Military Ethics, 9(4), pp. 384-410. Retrieved 08 January, 2017, from: https://www3.nd.edu/~cpence/eewt/Dipert2010.pdf Stanford. (2012). Contractarianism. Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 08 January, 2017, from: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/contractarianism/ Vallor Shannon. (2013). The future military virtue: Autonomous systems and the moral deskilling of the military. Santa Clara University. Retrieved 08 January, 2017, from: https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001context=phi