1

Nina Khuu
CST 300 Writing Lab
8 February 2022
Hacktivism

The continuous growth of technology has changed almost every aspect of how society

functions. The world is immersed in a digitally rooted ecosystem, and it has affected many facets

of human activities. Activism is one of the activities that has evolved with the introduction of

technology. A new method to achieve social or political change was conceived, known as

hacktivism. Many of the practices used by hacktivists are illegal under the Computer Fraud and

Abuse Act (Thompson, 2013). The opinions of the legality of hacktivism are divided. This paper

will examine the stance of both stakeholders, then formulate the recommended outcome to the

question of whether hacktivism should be decriminalized.

Background

Hacking refers to gaining unauthorized access into computer systems, networks, or

devices by exploiting security weaknesses. There are three categories of hackers known as white

hat, grey hat, and black hat. The spectrum of these hackers begins with the white hats, which are

also known as the ethical hackers. This group of individuals is given permission to penetrate

enterprise systems with the goal of improving security by discovering system vulnerabilities. At

the other end of the scale are the black hats, which refers to hackers with malicious intent. This

group seeks exploitation for personal advantage such as thrill or monetary gain. Somewhere

between the white and black hats, resides the groups of hackers known as the grey hats. The grey

hats exhibit benevolent intentions different from that of black hats but are hacking into systems

without authorization, unlike the white hats. Based on these traits, hacktivism falls within this

grey area.
 2

The first act of hacktivism was the attack on NASA in October 1989, called the WANK

worm. The hackers infiltrated the network and infected the computers with a worm, which is a

malware that spreads itself from one computer to the next. This program produced a message on

the screen stating that files were being deleted in addition to the message, “Your system has

officially been WANKed. You talk of times of peace for all, and then prepare for war.” WANK

is an acronym for Worms Against Nuclear Killers, and their agenda was to prevent the

possibility of nuclear war which was a big concern at the time (Mel, 2019). However, the worm

was not destructive and did not delete any of the files. Instead, it was the fear of the malware that

caused a panic at NASA, tricking the agency into wiping their own computers.

Throughout the years, thousands of hacktivist groups have been established worldwide. A

few of the most notable of these groups are Anonymous, Legion of Doom, Masters of Deception,

and Chaos Computer Club (Frankenfield, 2021). The groups that hacktivists target are

government agencies, corporations, and powerful groups or individuals. Hacktivism is motivated

by the need to correct any injustices from a political, social, or religious standpoint to achieve

what is viewed as the preceived greater good of society.

The techniques commonly used by hacktivists are doxing, distributed denial of service

(DDOS), and defacement. Doxing is the act of publicly revealing personal information in an

attempt to discredit, incriminate or embarrass the intended target. The leaked data can be

confidential emails, documents, and personal identifying information. DDOS is a method used to

disrupt normal traffic to a site by bombarding the server of the targeted site with requests for

service, leading to a slow down or crashing of a server. Overloading the bandwidth is done by

using malware to infect devices and creating a botnet, which is used to carry out the DDOS
 3

attack. Defacement is the technique used to visually alter the appearance of a site, usually with

the goal of pushing a particular message.

Stakeholder Analysis

Stakeholder 1: Hacktivism is justified

Values. This group holds the value of humanity, equality, freedom, and transparency in

high regard. They believe that humans are entitled to the basic rights of fair treatment, free

speech, and the right to life. A notable example of a campaign that pushed for justice and social

changes related to the values of equality and life is the Black Lives Matter hack. Black Lives

Matter was an activist movement with the mission to “eradicate white supremacy and build local

power to intervene in violence inflicted on Black communities by the state and vigilantes” (Black

Lives Matter). During the series of protests that occurred in 2020, Anonymous launched a DDOS

attack in support of the BLM movement. This attack disabled the Minneapolis PD website in

response to the police killing of George Floyd (Molloy & Tidy, 2020). The goal was to shed light

on the crimes committed by the police department in hopes of social justice.

Position. They believe that injustices should be rectified by any means regardless of who

is committing these injustices. Any infringement on human rights or constitutional rights morally

justifies the acts of cyber activism and should not be criminalized.

Claims. The claim of value can be used to support the position that hacktivism is

justified. Comparing the actions of hacktivists to moral principles, this group can state that

hacktivism is morally right. With the use of comparison between the wrongdoings of the targeted

hack versus the hacktivists, a judgement can be made that the result of a hack is better for the

greater good.
 4

Stakeholder 2: Hacktivism is a crime

Values. These stakeholders value adherence to the law and maintaining order and

structure in a society. An individual’s right to privacy is also another important value to this

group.

Position. Hacktivism is a form of cyber vigilantism and is illegal under the Computer

Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). Some of the methods utilized by hackers violate CFAA by

accessing computers without authorization, and in some cases, causing damages or loss

(Freeman). Such as the case of the Sony DoS and data breach hack that resulted in a total loss of

$173 million (Vamosi, 2011).

Claim. The claim of policy can be used to support the position that hacktivism is a crime.

It can be argued that to maintain order within society, individuals must abide by the law set forth

by the government. Another claim that can support this position is the claim of fact. It is a stated

fact that the acts committed directly violate the law.

Argument Question

Given the circumstance that some of the intended targets of these hackings are breaking

the law themselves, should hacktivism be decriminalized?

Stakeholder Argument

Stakeholder 1: Hacktivism is justified

The appropriate ethical framework to apply to this position is virtue ethics. Virtue ethics

places importance on acting with moral character traits such as courage, compassion, fairness,

and honesty, etc. (Velasquez et al., 1988). Hacktivists do not have mal intent, but rather they

campaign and respond to acts of misconduct that violate moral principles. An example of the act

of compassion and righteousness can be observed in Anonymous’ Operation Darknet. This was a
 5

DDoS attack that occurred in 2011 and 2017 against child pornography sites and servers

(Stouffer, 2021). This attack served as an end to immoral behavior and sought for the betterment

of humanity with disregard to consequences.

Seeking justice is another guiding factor for these stakeholders to defend the belief that

hacktivism is warranted. It could be said that the victims of hacktivists are not victims but rather

offenders instead. Offenders that are perceived to inflict oppression, censorship, and

mistreatment to society. The conviction to rectify these injustices is shaped by the virtue ethical

approach.

The correct course of action for this group would be to decriminalize hacking if it is for a

just cause. Legalizing acts of hacktivism would benefit in this stakeholder by reducing or

eliminating the consequences associated with cyber activism. The ability to seek justice without

facing legal implications can help this stakeholder reach the goal of the betterment of society.

Stakeholder 2: Hacktivism is a crime

The ethical approach to support this stakeholder’s position is Kant’s ethics. The concept

behind Kant’s ethics is known as a categorical imperative. This is a belief that an individual acts

in a way that is universal in how all beings will act given that certain situation. The act is not

dependent on conditions or circumstances but rather an absolute action that applies to all. Given

this ethical approach, this group can conclude that the actions of hacktivists are not justified.

These techniques used to exploit or attack different targets are not something that can be an

absolute action that every individual will engage in. The circumstance that the intended target

may be committing a crime as well has no pertinence to this decision.

The correct course of action for this group would be to keep all forms of hacking illegal.

If hacktivism was decriminalized, this group would be affected by the possibility of vigilantism
 6

causing disorder amongst society. Additionally, the rate of hacks could increase due to the

inability to regulate what is considered right or wrong when it comes to hacking.

Student Position

Albert Einstein once stated, “Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear, and

greed.”. These three characteristics are prevalent in society, and their existence is what drives

many injustices. Ignorance is the reason for mistreatment based on gender, religion, race, or

sexual orientation. Fear of repercussions can lead to government agency cover-ups and

censorship. Greed is the force behind corruption in politicians and corporations. As these

emotions exist in the world, we will not see the end to immoral behaviors. There is a need to

amend these wrongs and I believe hacktivism is a justified way in doing so.

As a supporter of basic human rights and a believer of living with high moral standards, I

side more with the views of stakeholder 1. However, I would use the utilitarianism ethical

framework to support my argument. Utilitarianism is a balance between good and harm. This

ethical approach seeks to find the best action by weighing which decision provides the greatest

amount of good and allowing the least amount of harm. This can be quantified by seeing which

action helps a greater amount of people. The agendas pushed by hacktivists are perceived as

helping the greater good of the population while harming the least amount of people. The Black

Lives Matter movement sought to shed light on the acts of police brutality to help advance the

fight on racial injustice for the entire black population while the only harm was temporarily

disabling the Minneapolis PD network. The results of helping an entire black population

outweigh the acts that it took to arrive at that outcome.

Though hacktivism tries to push an agenda of righting wrongs, there may still be acts

committed that seem extreme or teetering on the border of morally acceptable. The
 7

recommendation to solve the issue regarding the legality of hacktivism is to re-evaluate the

legislature pertaining to these acts and developing detailed revisions. Currently, the only

legislature that exist is the CFAA, which are laws that leave space for grey areas and can lead to

indictments based on loose definitions. For example, a DoS attacks resemble that of a protest

where people assemble and possibly disrupt the activities of a corporation or agency. Protests are

protected under the 1st Constitutional amendment; however, DoS have seen prosecution due to

“damages” as defined by the CFAA. The definition of damage, as stated in the CFAA, is

“impairment to the integrity of availability of data, a program, a system, or information.” This

definition is not detailed to explain the extent of the damage or the time frame. DoS attacks are

merely temporary disablements that can be miscategorized as damage.

Conclusion

Hacktivism can be a difficult topic to debate and decide a stance on whether it is right or

wrong. As with most laws, it’s not just black and white, but can be areas of grey. In these areas

of grey, we must use our judgement by applying our ethical frameworks to decide on the best

course of action. Providing greater good to a bigger population is the best action because it yields

the greatest result. Certain acts of hacktivism should be decriminalized to support this action, and

it starts with re-evaluating the legislature to reduce the legal implications to the least damaging

acts.
 8

Resources

Black Lives Matter (n.d.). About. Retrieved on February 12, 2022, from

https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/

Frankenfield, J. (2021, August 26). Hacktivism Investopedia. Retrieved February 12, 2022, from

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hacktivism.asp

Freeman, J. (n.d.). What is CFAA? Freeman Law. Retrieved on February 13, 2022, from

https://freemanlaw.com/computer-fraud-abuse-act-cfaa/

Mel, M. (2019, August 15). The Wank Worm (or how hacktivism came to be). Medium.

Retrieved February 2, 2022, from https://medium.com/@mmelikidou/the-wank-worm-or-

how-hacktivism-came-to-be-ba89e981822d

Molloy, D. & Tidy, J. (2020, June 1). George Floyd: Anonymous hackers re-emerge amid US

unrest. BBC. Retrieved on February 10, 2022 from

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52879000

Souffer, C. (2021, September 8). Hacktivism: An overview plus high-profile groups and

examples. Norton. Retrieved on February 13, 2022, from

https://us.norton.com/internetsecurity-emerging-threats-hacktivism.html

Thompson, C. (2013 January 18). Hacktivism: Civil Disobedience or Cyber Crime? ProPublica.

Retrieved February 12, 2022, from https://www.propublica.org/article/hacktivism-civil-

disobedience-or-cyber-crime

Vamosi, R. (2011, September 6). How Hacktivism Affects Us All. PCWorld. Retrieved on

February 13, 2022, from

https://www.pcworld.com/article/482565/how_hacktivism_affects_us_all.html
 9

Velasquez, M., Andre, C., Shanks, T., J, S., & Meyer, M.J. (1988 January 1). Ethics and Virtue.

SCU. Retrieved on February 13, 2022, from https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-

resources/ethical-decision-making/ethics-and-virtue/