The summer news provided the Privacy Research Group with quite a bit of discussion. The one topic that provoked the liveliest debate was the recent hack and public release of data from Ashley Madison. The site is designed to be a dating app for extra marital affairs and was recently hacked by the “Impact Team.” They claimed that the site is a “prostitution/human trafficking website for rich men to pay for sex.”[1] The Impact Team sought to frame its hack as one that held the moral high ground by seeking to shut down Ashley Madison.
Because of the nature of the site and its professed purpose, Americans have spent the last few weeks debating the role of morality in deciding who is entitled to privacy protections. While most are likely sympathetic to the argument that everyone is entitled to privacy, there must be a line on which information is worth protecting. For instance, child pornographers should and likely do not have an expectation of privacy because of their illegal and immoral activities.
In an excellent piece on Daily Nous, several philosophers attempted to answer some outstanding questions regarding moral judgment and vigilantism that have been raised in the aftermath of the release of data.[2] Jonathan Ichikawa argues that the Ashley Madison customers are victims of an illegal attack, regardless of their indiscretion. Just as society should not victim blame for other crimes, users of Ashley Madison are victims in this unfortunate scenario. He also reminds readers that there are understandable reasons to use a site such as Ashley Madison. For instance, some are in open relationships or “are closeted LGBTQ people who need discretion.”[3]
In another post, Hallie Liberto compares hackers who expose corporate wrongdoing to the hackers of Ashley Madison.[4] She ponders why the reaction to hackers exposing corporate illegality should differ from the reaction to the Impact Team. While there may be some legitimate open relationships, people who wish to cheat on their partners are likely breaking significant promises, deceiving partners to stay in a relationship longer, and potentially undermining sexual consent. She argues that the reason society tends to treat these two similar hacks differently is because of the nature of how society treats sex and sexual assault. According to Liberto, society treats these topics as private to the detriment of open discussion.[5] Without the open discussion, the Impact Team has been cast negatively.
Society will continue to grapple with these ethical questions. There will be many more hacks of morally questionable websites, and it is important to have a vigorous debate about the moral and ethical boundaries of privacy.
[1] Rhiannon Williams, Ashley Madison Hack: The Depressig Rise of the ‘Moral’ Hacker, The Telegraph, (Aug. 20, 2015), http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11814054/Ashley-Madison-hack-The-depressing-rise-of-the-moral-hacker.html.
[2] Philosophers on the Ashley Madison Hack, Daily Nous, (Aug. 24, 2015), http://dailynous.com/2015/08/24/philosophers-on-the-ashley-madison-hack/.
[3] Id.
[4] Id.
[5] Id.