Critical Thinking Activity: Module 08

Question 1

1. Who is responsible for this catastrophe? Osbert? His professor? The student who changed the network configuration? The university? On what do you base your position?

Answer 1

Based on the scenario, it appears that Osbert is responsible for the catastrophe. He created the worm that compromised the computer on the HAL company network. The university or the professor who supervised Osbert may bear some responsibility for not properly supervising or training him. Additionally, the student who changed the network configuration may have also contributed to the vulnerability of the network. Ultimately, it is a complex situation with multiple factors at play, and a thorough investigation would be necessary to determine the full extent of each party’s responsibility.

Question 2

2. Osbert had read, understood, and signed the white hat agreement his university required. He had followed all of the rules and never had an intent to do harm. Do you think his position in this matter is defensible if he were to face criminal charges? What if he is sued by the many organizations that might have been affected by his worm?

Answer 2

He may not of ment to intended do harm but his actions resulted in significant harm to the HAL company network and potentially to other organizations that were affected by his worm. The fact that he followed all of the rules and had no malicious intent may be taken into consideration in a legal proceeding, but it may not necessarily absolve him of all responsibility.

If Osbert were to face criminal charges, his position may be defensible to some extent, but it would ultimately depend on the specific laws and regulations.

If Osbert is sued by the many organizations that might have been affected by his worm, he may be liable for damages.

Question 3

Ethical Decision Making
1. Was Osbert acting ethically when he wrote his worm program? On what do you base your position?

Answer 3

Osbert was not acting ethically when he wrote his worm program.

Writing a worm programs with the intent to cause damage to computer systems and networks is generally considered unethical and illegal behavior.

Question 4

Ethical Decision Making
2. Was Osbert’s professor acting ethically by assigning him the worm program? On what do you base your position?

Answer 4

If the assignment was part of a legitimate educational exercise intended to teach students about the risks and consequences on computer viruses and malware, then the professor may have acted ethically. With properly supervised and instructed on how to use worm programs responsibly, I feel it could be some usfull teachings.

However, if the professor assigned the program without proper guidance or oversight, or if the program was intended to be used for malicious purposes, then the professor may have acted unethically.