Permission is what your textbook argues draws the line between ethical hacking and naughty hacking. Another word for it might be "consent".
What constitutes permission?
What constitutes consent?
Exactly how specific do we have to get about permission/consent?
This week, you have sexual consent, "implied consent" in the Girls Gone Wild case (which unfortunately, the woman lost!), and consensual cannibalism to think with as you consider the above questions. I think the Antioch College and Girls Gone Wild cases are the most rewarding to think with, but Armin Meiwes, the German cannibal, has some interesting things to offer us too.
Missouri Woman Loses Lawsuit in Girls Gone Wild case
All Your Boobs Belong To Us: Some Thoughts on Consent While Female
Alan Soble, Antioch's 'Sexual Offense Policy': A Philosophical Exploration
Eva Feder Kittay, Ah! My Foolish Heart: A reply to Alan Soble
German Cannibal Tells of Fantasy
Murder, Cannibalism, and Indirect Suicide: A Philosophical Explanation of a Recent Case
I hate to be the first poster on a question like this, but it is Sunday and no one else has posted.
ReplyDeletePermission, does permission really give permission. If I am given permission to find weak points in a company’s network but not getting into the company’s network and I get in to it through a weak point in the network; one could argue that I should have asked permission to go into the company’s network. But more importantly someone else could argue that I was given permission to find weak points and the best way to confirm that there is a weak point is to test it meaning that the original permission covered what I did. In other words if I am given permission at the start of something and I continue without any further permission being given and more importantly no permission being recanted; was I given permission for the entire event or did the permission just apply to the beginning of the event.
Consent is the hardest word to define in the sense of law, even harder in the ethical sense. Hypothetically let’s say I stumble upon a car crash, a person has wrapped their car around a tree. This person is unconscious and has their right leg pinning them within the car. The car is beginning to catch fire so I break the person’s leg with a crowbar to get them out of the vehicle. Consent was not given for me to break their leg and remove them from the vehicle. It turns out it was a depressed sports player trying to commit suicide after a horrible loss, and not only did I deny the person the death that they wanted but I also ruined any chance the player had at a comeback by breaking their leg. If we ignored all current laws and precedents in court, the person is able to sue me for breaking their leg and ruining their sports career. To me the consent was implied that the person wanted to be saved, to the person the consent was implied that the person wanted to die.
There is a point where permission and consent become too specific and it throws a spanner into the works, but there is also point where permission and consent become too implied and the system fails to be functional. Specific consent and permission is a balancing act where both ends have their benefits and downfalls.
Consent can be a pretty powerful word, but also a comforting one as well. For example, I use a remote login service to help clients, friends and family with computer related issues. As awkward as it might sound, I'll ask family or friends for an email giving me permission to log into their system in order to troubleshoot. Clients are always asked for some kind of written consent to protect my a$$.
ReplyDeleteThe specifics surrounding consent or permission all depends on the situation or environment.
In my opinion, it's all about granting ones request via verbal or written. When it comes to business relations, it is always best to have everything in writing. This protects clients and businesses against any misfortunes. As for verbal consent, I see this falling somewhere between a teenager asking their parents to borrow the car or to stay out late on a Friday night.
So based on my thoughts above, I believe that is what best describes on what constitutes permission or consent. It's all about granting ones wish via verbal or written in order to maintain trust and protection.
Ooh, good opener, Toothpick Guy! :) Consent to medical procedures is a terrific one. It's an interesting quandary--if I'm dying and am wheeled into an emergency room, the "default" assumption is that I want to be resuscitated (which is why if you don't, you need to have a DNR--do not resuscitate order), but on the other hand, you have to sign consent forms for everything from surgeries to blood tests, so somewhere there is a line where consent to a medical procedure goes from being the "default" assumption and becomes something that must be explicitly granted. Karl has provided us another thing to think with as we probe the nature of consent--what differentiates the set of moments where consent to medical procedures is the default from the set of moments where consent to medical procedures must be explicitly given?
ReplyDeleteHow specific does it have to be, Orlando? If I send you an email and let you virtually log in to my computer, am I giving you access to EVERYTHING on my computer?
ReplyDeleteOr, do you have a responsibility for it to lie within certain boundaries?
And if so, what defines those boundaries?
One option: I set them explicitly in the email, "Dear Orlando, you have permission to remotely access my computer. I consent to your doing this and this and this, and please don't do this and this and this."
Another option: there is an understanding based on the purpose of your "visit" to my computer, much like someone who is performing a service in your home. If I'm your friend and I'm visiting your house to feed your cat while you're away, often that means that I have access in limited terms--I should do what I need to do to feed the cat, but I shouldn't, say, go through your dresser drawers or open your mail. Thus, you might log in to fix the problem, but if you decided you wanted to go through all my emails or photos, that might be outside the boundaries of the permission you were given.
Or, maybe it's something else?
More things to think with!
I believe permission and consent are the same thing for the most part. Permission is asked to grant full consent. I think it should be if you have permission to do something to someone you have their consent. However I guess you can turn it into I can kiss someone because it is legal so I have permission to do so, but you need the person's consent to kiss them. It's a tricky subject, however in my opinion you should always get someone's consent before doing anything.
ReplyDeleteI think based upon the girls gone wild stories,you have to be very specific when it comes to consent, because if you aren't you can be fully taken advantage of like the woman who lost the case because even though she never verbally agreed to doing what happend she never disagreed. In that scenario girls gone wild had neither her permission or consent but got away with it.
Not required but interesting: a PG-13 article at the online heir to Jane magazine about "enthusiastic consent" that I read today: http://www.xojane.com/sex/ill-try-anything-once-enthusiastic-consent
ReplyDeleteconsent can be expressed as follows (taken from wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent )
ReplyDelete"Implied consent is a controversial form of consent which is not expressly granted by a person, but rather inferred from a person's actions and the facts and circumstances of a particular situation (or in some cases, by a person's silence or inaction).
Expressed consent may be in verbal, nonverbal or written form and is clearly and unmistakably stated.
Verbal consent is given by using verbal communication.
Nonverbal consent is given by using nonverbal communication."
Clearly certain forms are much clearer than others. Words are more easily defended than, say, a nod of the head, although they are both consent. Sometimes consent is better recognized at the moment a person removes it...say, in the kink scene, with a "safe word" or "safe gesture". I would add that in a kinky type of "scene, ACTUAL consent in the moment may or may not be given, depending on the people involved and the desired fantasy action. A "collared" slave indicates permission to her Dom/me by wearing the collar to indicate s/he is "owned", but to new people or those unschooled in such points, that may be mistaken as consent for EVERYONE to be able to do as they please to this person..."implied consent"...and they would be entirely wrong.
My own feelings is "implied consent" is pretty bullshit. Yet that does not stop me from thinking "DUH! What did you EXPECT??" when people put themselves in situations such as flashing naked bits at Mardi Gras and then finding the pictures to prove it online, later. At the same time I recognize there is serious fault in that reaction - it has been used in rape cases, as we have spoken about in class - the "she was asking for it" defense. I'm always seriously angry that even works as a defense sometimes, because as people together in a community, perhaps we should strive to evolve beyond such short thinking.
What level you should bring consenting to something would depend on the situation. If my friend who treats me to movies all the time needs $5, I would give it with no expectation of returning it, even if she promises such. I agree to that to make her happy, but it doesn't even matter. If I'm at a kink party, and I'm participating in play with people I have a well established relationship with, I would not interrupt the flow of it all by asking constant permissions (although permission can be instantly removed as indicated above). If someone was new to this game, I would be very, very specific with each new experience. And I would keep a watchful eye on others to be sure they also respected such boundaries. If I were to be engaging in work for a company, I want it in writing, to be reviewed and discussed in some detail if not extreme detail, to be clear where boundaries lie. I may notify them at each advance of the process, if needed.
Consent is tricky and mutable.
Agreed. It does depend on the situation. I know that in rape cases lack of consent is generally NOT considered consent, but what about saving a life where the person is unable to consent in any way? (I believe here in MA there's a 'good samaritan' law that can protect individuals acting in good faith, although I'm not sure of the details)
ReplyDeleteI always try to get written consent in some form for computer work (doesn't apply to immediate family; they know I know what I'm doing). It might seem that some freelance computer work gets into 'informed consent' and all the pitfalls that entails; I've done work for a few people who later tried to argue with me about payment because 'I didn't know I was agreeing to all this technical stuff' (I had to do some work in the command line; they thought I was 'hacking' them so refused to pay).
I'd think that in the remote-access example, consent would apply to specific tasks and files only. The responsibility is then on the investigator to make sure they adhere to those rules.
In terms of how specific it has to be, I would want something within an email clarifying what the request is and what is the purpose.
ReplyDeleteExample; Dear Orlando, I am having trouble launching my Internet Explorer application. Please log into my PC to troubleshoot. I give you permission to do so by writing this email.
Something along those lines would suffice.