Ethics Assignment #3（Select one of the laws you examined last week）

Computer Security Act, also known as the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) is a US legislation that protects government information and plans against threats whether they may be man-made or natural.  FISMA divides up the security responsibilities to different agencies to make sure that the security of data in the federal government is protected. The Computer Security Act puts program officials and the head of each agency in charge of analyzing the information security programs in order to keep the risks at an all time low. The National Institute of Standards and Technology works with FISMA to categorizes the information to be protected, chooses minimum baseline controls, simplifies controls with the risk assessment procedure, record the controls in the system security plan, carry out security controls in the correct information systems, analyze the validity of the security controls once they have been set, find the agency-level risk in the mission or business case, approve information system for processing, and monitor the security controls.

            In some situations, I believe that it would be morally acceptable to break this law, such as if the United States government and FBI were going to do something that is against the United States Constitution Amendments. Unfortunately there is a current situation that the FBI has decided a new version of the iPhone operating system shall be created that would be able to give the FBI access to unlock any phone. Apple would be putting user data at risk. This goes against the 4^th Amendment that states that each individual is protected under this Amendment from unreasonable searches and seizures of property by the government. It protects against arbitrary arrests, stop-and-frisks, safety inspections, wiretaps, and various forms of surveillance. The fact that the FBI could be suspicious of a completely innocent person, get access to their phone and easily break the code is outrageous. The case here is that the FBI wants to get access to the San Bernardino shooters’ iPhones, which Apple is denying. If I thought that it would be morally acceptable to break a law, and if I were a member of Anonymous, I would not allow this to happen. Just as the government thinks that they have the right to access anyone’s information, we should let them know that their information can be threatened to be disclosed too. The San Bernardino shooters’ are dead, so privacy is not a big deal to them. But what about those innocent people whose data could be exposed? What about their privacy? This is related to Plato’s Crito. The so-called “unjust laws” were wrongful accusations that put him in prison. The just laws were those that were keeping him in prison as a convicted criminal. Those that accused Plato used the laws as a basis of putting him in jail. This unjust and just rules situation plays into that of hackers such as Anonymous. Just laws are those that the majority believes are right, that they follow and make the minority follow as well. Unjust laws are those laws that a majority group makes minority group follow, but they in turn do not follow them because they are only there to oppress minority groups. The majority group of the government is making the minority group of American citizens follow their unjust laws of “no hacking” that they themselves don’t follow because they are using the FBI to tap into our privacy.  But they themselves “operate in the shadows behind an iron curtain of secrecy.” Handing the golden keys of the kingdom to the FBI is the worst decision, and I am glad that Apple is fighting back on that case.