To consent or not to consent

1.     What is implied consent?  When, if ever, is implied consent morally acceptable?  When is it necessary to obtain explicit consent?  Give some examples--they don't have to deal with the body and sex, as these examples do, but they should *not* be associated with computers.

Implied consent is defined as consent which is not expressly granted by a person, but rather inferred from a person’s actions or in some instances inactions. There are times that implied consent is absolutely acceptable. Unfortunately we live in a day and age where we have adversaries that are trying to kill us. There is a network of terrorist operatives that are radicalizing people every day to engage or facilitate potential terrorist plots against us. The reason I am talking about this is that it factors into explicit and implied consent. For example when you go to the airport or try and visit a high threat level monument such as the statue of liberty you are giving implied consent to being searched. The security procedures that may or may not be done to you are not described in front of security checkpoints but when you encounter them, the reason they are legal is because by entering the checkpoint to go into the secure area you are giving implied consent. You are giving the TSA the right to search you. It is implied because you could have turned away but you didn’t so now that you are choosing to enter, all of your items may be searched and/or confiscated if deemed a threat. This is a case where I believe to an extent it is morally acceptable because it is for the greater good of society. It protects us.

It is necessary to obtain explicit consent anytime someone does something that would make you very uncomfortable if you weren’t aware it as going to take place. Examples, sex, being videotaped during sex, a doctor examining any portion of your naked body, if any portion of your naked body is going to be revealed(pantsing or sharking), if you are going to be recorded, if you are offered legal drugs, (you can’t just drug people), if any personal info is being given out,(I always ask if someone asks me for their number if its ok) I am being general because I feel all these things are equally important as I am also sure I am leaving things out that could absolutely be added to this list.

2. How does the problem of implied vs. explicit consent apply to computers, and specifically, to ethical hacking?  When would an ethical hacker need to make use of this concept?

It applies because there are many boundaries on the internet. In ethical hacking you are going to be conducting certain tests on security and there is certain things that have to be ironed out before the testing can commence. You have implied consent that you can use certain methods to try and exploit the company. You have to get explicit consent if you are going to in areas that might expose you to personal information. I feel the explicit consent as far as computers goes is determined by the content that is being accessed. In hacking and on computers in general. You need explicit consent to view material that would be considered too vulgar for minors or at least a birthdate that matches the criteria. You need explicit consent if you are required to give any personal information at all. You can choose to disagree and not give it. There is also explicit consent to agree with the terms of the website. The implied consent on the internet is that you will not attempt to hack, pirate, steal, post illegal materials, use it as a platform to overthrow the government, incite anarchy and mayhem, etc. By using it, even if you don’t sign anything give consent to not break the law.