Chapter 6 Quiz 6state Wide And In Most Professional Industries Ther ✓ Solved

Chapter 6 – Quiz 6 State-wide and in most professional industries, there has been a mandate that college students be more proficient in their writing. While this is not a writing class , all writing assignments will be graded for grammar, syntax and typographical correctness to help address this mandate. Pay attention to what you are being asked to do (see Grading Rubric below). For example, to describe does not mean to list , but to tell about or illustrate in more than two or three sentences, providing appropriate arguments for your responses using theories discussed in our text . Be sure to address all parts of the topic question as most have multiple parts.

A verifiable current event (less than 4 years old) relevant to at least one of the topics you respond to is a fundamental component of your quiz as well. You cannot use information from the text book or any book/article by the author of the text book as a current event. Make sure that your reference has a date of publication. For each chapter quiz and final quiz you are required to find and include at least one reference and reference citation to a current event less than 4 years old (a reference with no date (n.d.) is not acceptable) in answer to at least one question. This requires a reference citation in the text of your answer and a reference at the end of the question to which the reference applies.

You must include some information obtained from the reference in your answer. The references must be found on the internet and you must include a URL in your reference so that the reference can be verified. You should type your responses directly under the appropriate question. Be sure to include your name on your quiz. Only the first two (2) questions with answers will be graded.

Include your name in the document filename. Your completed quiz must be uploaded into the appropriate eCollege Dropbox , no later than 11:59pm on the due date. 1. Strong arguments can be given as to why encryption tools are needed to safeguard communications in cyberspace, yet these tools can be used by terrorists and criminals to protect their communications in cyberspace. (a) In the wake of September 11, can a case be made for not allowing ordinary users to employ strong encryption tools in Internet communications? (b) Can we still claim to live in a free society if plans for government interception of email communications, as provided for in the Homeland Security Act ( ), are be implemented?

Please elaborate (beyond a yes or no answer) and provide your “theoretical†rationale in support of your responses. (comprehension) 2. Is the expression “ethical hacker†an oxymoron? (a) Do you agree that some individuals should be allowed to be “certified†as hackers to work on behalf of industry or for the interest of other organizations? (b) Do the kinds of activities permitted by certified hackers in the CEH program raise any moral issues? Explain. Please elaborate (beyond a yes or no answer) and provide your “theoretical†rationale in support of your responses.

Paper for above instructions

Name: [Your Name]

Question 1

(a) In the wake of September 11, can a case be made for not allowing ordinary users to employ strong encryption tools in Internet communications?

The events of September 11, 2001, triggered a significant shift in the balance between personal privacy and national security, with encryption becoming a focal point of this debate. Strong encryption tools are vital for protecting sensitive information from cybercriminals, safeguarding personal communications, and maintaining the integrity of business transactions. However, opponents argue that allowing widespread use of strong encryption may hinder law enforcement's ability to prevent terrorism and other criminal activities.
From a national security perspective, the case for restricting ordinary users' access to strong encryption tools hinges on the argument that it hampers critical investigations. Law enforcement agencies, especially in the context of counter-terrorism efforts, could find it exceedingly difficult to monitor communications that are encrypted. A 2017 analysis by Bakewell suggests that "as encryption becomes more widespread, it becomes increasingly challenging for intelligence agencies to intercept communications that would prove vital in averting a potential threat" (Bakewell, 2017). Thus, the contention is that by limiting access to strong encryption, society might enhance its security posture.
On the other hand, this approach presents serious implications for civil liberties and personal freedoms. A blanket restriction on encryption would impact the privacy rights of millions of innocuous users whose communications are unrelated to criminal activity. Moreover, the mere act of implementing restrictions could set a dangerous precedent where the government begins to manipulate or misuse such powers, threatening the foundational principles of a free society.
In conclusion, while a case can be made against ordinary access to strong encryption tools on the grounds of national security, doing so raises substantial ethical concerns regarding personal privacy and civil liberties.

(b) Can we still claim to live in a free society if plans for government interception of email communications, as provided for in the Homeland Security Act, are implemented?

The implementation of government interception of email communications threatens the core tenets of a free society, which typically emphasizes individual liberties, privacy rights, and limited government intrusion into personal affairs. In a free society, individuals should have the right to engage in private communications without state surveillance. The Homeland Security Act, enacted in the wake of 9/11, provided authorities with expansive powers to intercept and monitor communications in the name of national security (American Civil Liberties Union, 2022). While the intent is to prevent terrorism, the implications for civil liberties are severe.
One can argue that the erosion of privacy rights under the guise of enhancing security creates a paradox—where an ostensibly free society starts to resemble an authoritarian regime. According to philosopher Thomas Hobbes, who theorized about the social contract, individuals consent to give up certain freedoms in exchange for protection; however, when that protection comes at the cost of broader freedoms, the legitimacy of such a government comes into question (Hobbes, 1996). This creates a tension between the need for security and the citizens' right to privacy.
Furthermore, there is a growing body of scholarly work showing that increased surveillance can have a chilling effect on freedom of expression and dissent (Zuboff, 2019). If individuals believe they are being monitored, they are less likely to voice unpopular opinions or participate in political processes, undermining democratic engagement.
Therefore, while the government may present interception of emails as a necessary measure for public safety, it raises significant questions about the degree of freedom we genuinely enjoy. Advocating for such surveillance mechanisms may lead us to question whether our society's commitment to individual liberties can withstand the pressures of perceived security threats.

Question 2

(a) Is the expression “ethical hacker” an oxymoron? Do you agree that some individuals should be allowed to be “certified” as hackers to work on behalf of the industry or for the interest of other organizations?

The term "ethical hacker" indeed raises eyebrows and may initially seem paradoxical, given that hacking, by its very nature, is often associated with malicious acts. However, a deeper understanding of the role of ethical hackers reveals that they play a critical role in cybersecurity. Ethical hackers, often certified through programs like Certified Ethical Hacker (CEH), are professionals who use their skills to identify vulnerabilities within systems, thereby enabling organizations to bolster their defenses against potential breaches (EC-Council, 2021).
The ethical hacker's approach promotes a proactive stance towards security, contrasting sharply with traditional hackers who exploit vulnerabilities for personal gain. Hence, while the juxtaposition of "ethical" and "hacker" may seem contradictory at first glance, it reflects a broader evolution in the cybersecurity space whereby hacking skills are used to protect rather than exploit.
Thus, it is not only reasonable to allow individuals to be certified as ethical hackers, but it is also essential in modern-day cybersecurity. The threat landscape is constantly evolving, and having trained professionals dedicated to discovering and mitigating risks is vital for maintaining secure environments (Rogers, 2021).

(b) Do the kinds of activities permitted by certified hackers in the CEH program raise any moral issues? Explain.

The activities permitted by certified hackers in the CEH program, while aimed at enhancing security, do indeed raise several moral and ethical concerns. Primarily, there is the question of informed consent—when ethical hackers probe systems for vulnerabilities, they must ensure that they have appropriate permission to conduct such tests. Without explicit consent, their actions can breach trust and violate privacy rights, potentially placing them in the same ethical gray area as their black-hat counterparts (Stallings & Brown, 2019).
Moreover, ethical hackers often gain privileged access to sensitive data during their assessments, which raises the issue of how that data is treated post-assessment. The potential for abuse of power, misuse of collected data, or even accidental exposure can have severe repercussions, highlighting the need for robust ethical guidelines surrounding data handling and user rights.
A theoretical framework to examine this predicament is utilitarianism, which suggests that actions are justified if they serve the greater good. Ethical hackers' actions can certainly lead to a more secure digital landscape, benefiting society at large. However, if the methods employed compromise individual privacy or exploit weaknesses in regards to consent, they contradict the utilitarian principle of promoting the overall well-being of all individuals involved (Mill, 1863).
In summary, while ethical hacking is crucial for bolstering cybersecurity, it entails significant moral implications that necessitate careful consideration and strict adherence to ethical guidelines in practice.

References

American Civil Liberties Union (2022). Statement on the Homeland Security Act. Retrieved from https://www.aclu.org/news/2022/homeland-security-act/
Bakewell, G. (2017). The role of encryption in national security. Cybersecurity Review. Retrieved from https://cybersecurityreview.org/2017/03/encryption-national-security/
EC-Council (2021). What is a Certified Ethical Hacker?. Retrieved from https://www.eccouncil.org/certified-ethical-hacker-ceh/
Hobbes, T. (1996). Leviathan. Cambridge University Press.
Mill, J.S. (1863). Utilitarianism. London: Parker, Son, and Bourn.
Rogers, R. (2021). The cybersecurity skills gap: a new era of ethical hacking. Security Studies Quarterly. Retrieved from https://www.securitystudiesquarterly.org/2021/10/cybersecurity-skills-gap/
Stallings, W., & Brown, L. (2019). Computer Security: Principles and Practice. Pearson.
Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. PublicAffairs.
Please ensure that all provided references are accurate and check that they meet your institutional criteria for credible sources before submitting.