Policing The Internet: Is Hacking Ever OK?

On a largely lawless internet, is it ever ethically acceptable to take the law into your own hands?
By way of the internet we have become one vast global community, sharing our information across all seven continents in the blink of an eye. This of course has many benefits, as global business capabilities have expanded no end and our lives have been forever altered by the wonders of the internet. However, the global community of the web brings with it the blurred lines of the law: in an environment with no borders, who makes the rules? And who is around to enforce them?
The term “hacking” has evolved to mean something criminal. Originally, the term “hacker” denoted an individual using a program or device for something outside of its original purpose, but its mainstream adoption as a symbol of cyber-crime has bent its meaning out of shape. Regardless of its meaning, though, hacking is rife on the web and a series of well-publicised hacks and scams have been at the forefront of world news in recent months.
But is hacking ever OK?
Looking beyond the criminality of the act of hacking, it’s hard to deny that it can have a positive effect on the online community. In a world where explicit, harmful and criminal material is readily accessible and the policing of all online content is nigh on impossible, groups of “hacktivists” have emerged to restore order. Of course, this coming from a western perspective can be problematic as the decision on just what content needs policing and indeed removing from the web is subjective and dependent on social and cultural norms.
Indeed, what is deemed offensive in the western world may be commonplace in another area of the world and this blurs the lines surrounding the concept of hacktivism. From one perspective hacktivist groups are an internet necessity, protecting global webizens from a whole world of unsavoury content. From another, however, the hackers take on the more common guise as a mere nuisance.
The laws of the internet are hardly stringent, and as such it is hard to truly justify the defamation or celebration of hacktivist groups. Without rigid structural guidelines on usage of the internet and its mine of information, the world is left to the mercy of aforementioned harmful data. Yet these vigilante groups who attempt to enforce the law online can’t be justified in an environment which unites communities from Sao Paolo to Amsterdam.
Looking closely at an example of opinions divided, the Ashley Madison hack which has been slowly unravelling in the eyes of the media could be construed in two entirely different ways. Those among us who deem the website’s purpose to be unsavoury may commend the hackers for exposing the members’ information: a case of karma at work. But on the other hand, who has the right to make assumptions about the nature of citizens of the web? Considering that by and large we know nothing of the nature of the website and its members, is anyone right in celebrating a gross invasion of privacy and misuse of personal data?
In an environment where laws aren’t contained by geographical borders and policing is at best lacklustre, hacktivist groups certainly have their motives. What is unclear is that on a case-to-case basis, who decides what is right and what is wrong? And is it OK for everyday citizens to take the ‘law’ into their own virtual hands? The debate continues…
Is hacktivism an ethically sound practice? Have your say, Tweet us @VPSNET.