Moral Issues with Internet Privacy

It is seldom possible to draw a sharp line of distinction between what's wrong and what's right. Everybody has their own distinctive view with regard to the major moral challenges linked to internet privacy, right from social media privacy to governmental surveillance. However, all stories have two sides, and this necessitates a closer examination of a few existing moral issues associated with internet privacy. Firstly, one needs to examine the chief element of guidance provided by the law on the matter of internet privacy.

Possibly the most straightforward moral problem under the 'internet privacy breach' umbrella is malicious software (e.g., spyware) utilization for perpetrating cybercrime and stealing private data. A number of cybercrimes are made illegal by the governments of nations like the United States, European nations, etc., thus echoing unanimity with the fact that it is wrong to steal. In America, in specific, federal governmental regulations against cybercrime encompass: Dishonest practices and acts; Providing fake information and IDs; Credit card frauds; Computer-related frauds; and Frauds linked to access devices.

Interestingly, these regulations disallow invasion of others' privacy with the intent of stealing from them as well as non-malicious hacking (What Are the Moral Issues with Internet Privacy?). Subsequently, one needs to address the issue of the ethicality (or lack thereof) of internet hacking. In May of 2014, leading English daily, the Guardian, stated that a few of the top global security researchers were facing indictment on account of their attempts at exposing web infrastructural susceptibilities.

The American CFAA (Computer Fraud and Abuse Act) prohibits hacking, or the breaching of private computers and networks; however, web security specialists utilize hacking projects for exposing security shortcomings with an aim to resolve them. Critical.IO exposed a Universal Plug and Play (UPnP) protocol flaw which endangered as many as fifty million PCs, and ended up resolving it by hacking PCs.

This drove numerous technology users to suggest that federal rules regulating cybercrime ought to consider hacking intent rather than the act (What Are the Moral Issues with Internet Privacy?). For example, no less than 2 key federal-level law enforcement organizations have hired Hacking Team: DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) since the year 2012, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation since the year 2011. The latter organization signed an over-seven-hundred-thousand-dollar contract with Hacking Team for its services. Meanwhile, the former apparently employed Hacking Team's software for pursuing Colombian targets (Schwartz).

Internet privacy is also threatened by a 'creep factor' "whereby threats to privacy on the internet do not only come from criminals" (What Are the Moral Issues with Internet Privacy?) Internet users freely share their personal everyday lives on social media websites such as Google+ and Facebook. In such instances, while users' information isn't exactly stolen, numerous individuals raise concerns regarding how this freely available information is utilized by others who have access to it.

Facebook's several hundred million users expect it to utilize their personal information fairly and ensure their privacy is protected at all times.

Over the last few years, a few user complaints that have cropped up include: sensitive data uploaded on Facebook being shared with a number of third party apps and sites, usually for the purpose of data mining; Vague privacy settings which hinder several users from properly controlling their account privacy; and Bugs which enabled third-party sites and companies to breach user privacy by going as far as even sharing posts on users' Facebook walls.

While Facebook hadn't violated any privacy regulations in any of the above instances, all the above-mentioned users found Facebook or other parties utilizing their personal information in unexpected, uncomfortable ways.

Such an unanticipated and disturbing utilization of users' personal information has been labeled: the "creep factor." This creep factor establishes that for ethical use of internet user information by companies, they need to first clarify how they intend to use this information and whether their actions are legal or not (What Are the Moral Issues with Internet Privacy?).

Further, "one questions whether it is Freedom of information or the right to be forgotten" (What Are the Moral Issues with Internet Privacy?) One main component of the World Wide Web's nature which impacts users' privacy is the fact that it never forgets. Webpages with information about people usually remain online and, hence, searchable and accessible indefinitely, possibly impacting a given user's reputation negatively. In May of 2014, the EU held that its subjects possessed a right of being forgotten.

It informed Google that it has to erase pages that were inadequate or irrelevant from Google Search. This gave rise to arguments between parties who prioritized the right to information and parties who consider privacy to be a fundamental right of all human beings (What Are the Moral Issues with Internet Privacy?). Moreover, one needs to address the disadvantage of anonymity on the Internet. Although a large number of web privacy challenges revolve around identity exposures, one can also utilize several web-based services anonymously, often for malicious purposes.

"Doxxing" represents the illegal deed of hacking a web user's personal data, which includes name, contact information, bank information, address, etc. and uploading it anonymously onto Pastebin and other such services. In August of 2014, hackers posted sensitive data of game designer, Phil Fish, including his social.