MPU33213 Topic 9 Professional Ethics PDF

Topic 9 Professional Ethics MPU33213 Computer Ethics and Professional Responsibility 1 Topics covered ◼ Special aspects of professional ethics ◼ Professional code of ethics ◼ Methodology for analyzing ethical aspects 2  Morton...

Topic 9 Professional Ethics MPU33213 Computer Ethics and Professional Responsibility 1 Topics covered ◼ Special aspects of professional ethics ◼ Professional code of ethics ◼ Methodology for analyzing ethical aspects 2  Morton Thiokol / NASA ◼ Jan 28 1986, the space shuttle Challenger, destroyed by an explosion, just 73 seconds after the lift off ◼ The O-rings that were suppose to seal connections between sections of the booster rockets failed. ◼ The engineer had seen evidence that a primary O-ring seal had failed on 2 occasions in 1985. 3  Morton Thiokol / NASA ◼ The engineer reported his findings to NASA officials but the NASA officials were not giving sufficient attention to the problem. ◼ Despite his efforts to get the seals redesigned, the problem was not fixed. ◼ In the meeting on Jan 27, the engineers recommended not to launch the Challenger if the temperature was below 4 53 F degree (11.667 C degree).  Morton Thiokol / NASA ◼ NASA officials were displeased with the recommendation. ◼ During the recess in the meeting, the top managers decided to support the launch (point of view from management) ◼ >50% profit came from work for NASA ◼ Theengineer shared his hypothesis about how cold temperature had caused the failure of O-ring. 5  Morton Thiokol / NASA ◼ The engineer was isolated by the company from the NASA personnel and O-ring redesign effort. ◼ The engineer stopped work in July 1986. ◼ He found work as forensic engineer after two years. 6  Hughes Aircraft (1980s) ◼ Hughes Aircraft manufactured military- grade hybrid computer chips for a variety of sophisticated weapons systems, price range between $300 - $5000 ◼ The chips must passed 2 kinds of tests ◼ Functioncorrectly ◼ Resistance to shocks, high temperature 7 and moisture  Hughes Aircraft ◼ 10% of the chips failed at least one of the tests. ◼ Common problem were “leakers”, caused by defective seal which let moisture in. ◼ Margaret Goodearl & Donald LaRue supervised the testing area, Ruth Ibarra was an independent quality control agent. ◼ August 1986, a worker found a leaker, Goodearl reported to the upper management. 8  Hughes Aircraft ◼ Goodearl was threatened to be fired if she didn’t reveal the identity of the worker who found the leaker and complained. ◼ 2 months later, Donald LaRue ordered another worker to reseal the lids on some leakers, which violated the process of handling the leakers. ◼ The worker reported the incident to 9 Goodearl.  Hughes Aircraft ◼ Goodearl reported to upper management, again she was threatened. ◼ Goodearl and Ibarra found a box of chips with blank paperwork – necessary tests had not been performed. ◼ When she reported to her superiors, she was told that she was no longer part of the team. 10  Hughes Aircraft ◼ Goodearl filed a formal harassment complaint. Again, she was threatened. ◼ In the late 1986, Goodearl and Ibarra contacted the Office of the Inspector General, part of the US Department of Justice. ◼ One day, Donald LaRue planned to approve 2 leakers after Goodearl had gone home. 11  Hughes Aircraft ◼ Goodearl and Ibarra made photocopies of the documentation showing the chips had failed the leak test. ◼ After the chips were shipped, the Department of Defense tested them and found them to be leakers. ◼ The Office of the Inspector General began a formal investigation. ◼ Goodearl was fired in 1989. Ibarra left in 1988. 12  Hughes Aircraft ◼ In 1990, Goodearl and Ibarra filed a civil suit against Hughes Aircraft, claiming that company had violated the False Claim Act by falsifying records in order to defraud the government. ◼ In 1994, the company was ordered to pay $4.05 million in damages. Goodearl and Ibarra received 22% of the settlement. 13  Overview of Whistleblowing ◼ Whistleblower Triesto report harmful situation through authorized channels Rebuffed by organization Makes disclosure through unauthorized channels 14  Overview of Whistleblowing  Whistleblowers punished for their actions Lose job or all chances of advancement Financial and emotional hardship  Goodearl and Ibarra were unemployed for an extended period of time.  Ibarra and husband went on welfare until they could find work.  Goodearl and husband filed for bankruptcy. 15  Overview of Whistleblowing  Whistle-blowers are serve for public good:  False Claims Act  Allows a whistle-blower to sue on behalf government, a person or company that was submitting falsified claims to the government.  Whistle-blower receives 15 – 30% of settlements.  Provide protections against retaliation by employers.  Whistle-blower Protection Act ◼ Not protected under OSA ◼ Provide protections against retaliation by 16 employers.  Motives of Whistle-blowers: Hero or traitor?  People become whistle-blowers for different reasons  Morality depend on the whistle-blowing is motivated by a desire to help others-vocation or harm others-recrimination A person has known about a dangerous product for years but only becomes a whistle-blower after he has been turned down for a raise or promotion.  An employee who has been involved in a cover- up for sometime, realise that they are about to be caught, cooperate with the authorities to identify other guilty parties in order to avoid punishment. 17  Whistle-blowers Causes Harm Typical corporation response:  Whistle-blowers are disloyal to the company.  Generate bad publicity.  Disruption of organization’s social fabric.  Makes it hard for people to work as team.  Engineers are responsible to point out the technical problems, but the management is responsible for the decision being made. 18  Whistle-blowing as Organizational Failure  Company  Sufferfrom bad publicity  Ruined careers of accused managers  Erodes team spirit (people suspicious of one another)  Whistle-blower  Retaliation  Estrangement 19  Whistle-blowing as Organizational Failure  Company should provide communication channel that allows concerns to be raised, discussed and resolved.  Company should return to using principle- based ethics in decision making 20  Whistle-blowing as Moral Duty  By referring to the SE Code of Ethics 1.02, 1.03, 1.05, 2.05, 2.09, 3.01, 6.06 and 6.13, a person has moral duty to blow the whistle.  Richard DeGeorge’s questions for whistle- blowing  Isthe problem results serious harm to the public?  Have you told your manager about the potential harm?  Have you tried every possible internal channel?  Do you have persuasive documented evidence?  Are you sure whistle-blowing will work? 21  Whistle-blowing as Moral Duty  “Yes” to the first 3 questions, you have the right to whistle-blow.  “Yes” to all questions, you have the duty to whistle-blow.  Moral responsibility is not exclusive (we can’t assign it to the others) and must be borne by people. 22  Whistle-blowing as Moral Duty  Company X wants to develop a dating service Web site. It hires company Y to develop it. Company Y hires you as a private contractor to provide an instant messaging software. Your contract stated you are not responsible for the security of the site. Company Y is supposed to responsible for it. The development is behind schedule and Company Y implements a simplistic security scheme that allows all messages to be sent in plain text. 23  Whistle-blowing as Moral Duty  You bring your concerns to the management of Company Y, but Company Y still plans to deliver the software without telling Company X. You are reminded that you’ve signed a confidentiality agreement that forbids you from talking about the software to anyone.  What should you do? 24  Introduction ◼ Jacobus Lentz, Netherlands’ inspector of population registries before World War II, devised a forgery-proof identification card and advocated that every citizen be required to carry it at all times. A central registry of Identity case is setup for verification: Specialized: password photo and fingerprints- difficult to forge/falsify ◼ Rejected by Dutch government: it offended democratic sensibilities - treated every Dutch person was a potential criminal. 25 Source: Michael J. Quinn (2015). Ethics for the Information Age. (6th ed.)  Introduction ◼ 1940, Netherlands came under German occupation. ◼ Lents promoted his invention and the Nazis were impressed. ◼ Theidentification card was issued to everyone in the Netherlands. 26 Source: Michael J. Quinn (2015). Ethics for the Information Age. (6th ed.)  Introduction ◼ 1941, the Germans began a special census of the Jews, they were required to register at their local census office. ◼ Failing to register: 5 years in prison and lost of property. ◼ Can the government track down those who failed to registered? 27 Source: Michael J. Quinn (2015). Ethics for the Information Age. (6th ed.)  Introduction Persecution of Jews in the Netherlands: ◼ Lentz anticipated the needs of the Germans, he started the process of producing an alphabetic register of Jewish population. ID card stamped with a “J” ◼ July 1942, the Germans began deporting the Jews to concentration camp in Eastern Europe by twice-weekly train. ◼ The list provided by Lentz allowed this operation to be conducted efficiently. ◼ 107,000 of 140,000 Jews were deported. 102,000 died. 28 Source: Michael J. Quinn (2015). Ethics for the Information Age. (6th ed.)  Introduction ◼ After the war, Lentz received a prison sentence of 3 years. Prime example of doing his job without looking at the bigger picture ◼ If you were Lentz… ◼ Will you promote your invention to the Germans? ◼ Sooner or later, the Germans will get to you and ask for your invention, what will be your decision? 29 Source: Michael J. Quinn (2015). Ethics for the Information Age. (6th ed.)  The Paradigm of Professions ◼ What is a profession? ◼ Informally, is a vocation that requires a high level of education and practical experience in the field. ◼ Professionals have a special obligation to ensure their action are for the good of those who depend on them. ◼ Their decisions can have more serious consequences than the choices made by those holding less responsible positions in society. ◼ Is Jacobus Lentz a professional? 30 Source: Michael J. Quinn (2015). Ethics for the Information Age. (6th ed.)  The Paradigm of Professions ◼ Fully developed profession has well-organised infrastructure for certifying new members and supporting those who already belong to the profession. ◼ 8 components of a mature professional infrastructure: ◼ Initial professional education ◼ Formal course work completed by candidates before they begin practicing the profession. ◼ Accreditation ◼ Assures that the formal course work meets the standards of the profession. 31 Source: Michael J. Quinn (2015). Ethics for the Information Age. (6th ed.)  The Paradigm of Professions ◼ 8 components of a mature professional infrastructure: ◼ Skills development ◼ Activities that provide candidates with the opportunity to gain practical skills needed to practice the profession ◼ Certification ◼ Candidates are evaluated to determine their readiness to enter profession ◼ Licensing ◼ Candidates are given legal right to practice the profession 32 Source: Michael J. Quinn (2015). Ethics for the Information Age. (6th ed.)  The Paradigm of Professions ◼ 8 components of a mature professional infrastructure: ◼ Professional development ◼ Formal coursework completed by professionals in order to maintain and develop their knowledge and skills ◼ Code of ethics ◼ Mechanism by which a profession ensures that its members use their knowledge and skills for the benefit of society ◼ Professional society ◼ Organisation promoting the welfare of the profession 33 Source: Michael J. Quinn (2015). Ethics for the Information Age. (6th ed.)  What is Professional Ethics? ◼ Professional ethics includes relationships with and responsibilities toward customers, clients, coworkers, employees, employers, others who use one’s products and services, and others whom they affect ◼ A professional has a responsibility to act ethically. Many professions have a code of ethics that professionals are expected to abide by ◼ Doctors, lawyers & judges, accountants 34  What is Professional Ethics? ◼ The Therac-25 In 1986, Ray Cox went into the clinic for his usual radiation treatment in his shoulder. The technician mistakenly typed "x" into the computer, which signified x-ray beam, then immediately realizing the error, changed the "x" into an "e" for electron beam, and hit "enter", showing the machine that they were ready to start treatment. This sequence occurred in less than 8 seconds. (This particular sequence, in this time frame, was never tried in the original testing of the machine.) The computer gave the signal of "beam ready", and the technician pressed "b" to deliver the beam to the patient. But then the computer responded with an error message. Usually this message meant that the treatment had not been delivered. So the technician repeated the process and delivered another beam to the patient. And yet again, an error message occurred. Meanwhile, Ray felt sharp stabbing pains in his back, which was much different than his usual treatments, and removed himself after three shocking attempts. Because the commands were changed in such a short period of time, the computer did not respond properly. The metal plate moved away showing the technician that it was in low energy electron beam mode. But the beam that actually came from the machine was a blast of 25 000 rads with 25 million electron volts, the maximum setting, which is more than 125 times the regular dose. Ray’s health quickly became worse, and he died 4 months later from complications of major radiation burns. 35  Main ethical issues Ethical ~ Technical issues: ◼ How much risk to privacy and security of data is acceptable in a system? ◼ How much risk to safety and reliability of computer systems is acceptable? ◼ What use of another company’s intellectual property are acceptable? 36  Professional code of ethics ◼ Provide guidance for new or young members of the profession who do not know what is expected of them ◼ Software Engineering Code of Ethics and Professional Practice, by ACM/IEEE-CS https://ethics.acm.org/code-of-ethics/software- engineering-code/ ◼ Code of Professional Conduct and Practice, by Malaysian National Computer Confederation, http://www.mncc.com.my/code.htm 37  Professional code of ethics ◼ General guidelines for producing good systems: ◼ Understand what success means. (View the system’s role and responsibility in a wide context) ◼ Include users in the design and testing stages to provide safe and useful systems. ◼ Do a thorough, careful job when planning and scheduling a project and when writings bids / contracts. ◼ Design for real users. (Users might be careless) ◼ Don’t assume existing software is safe or correct. ◼ Be open and honest about the capabilities, safety and limitations of software. 38  Professional code of ethics ◼ General guidelines for producing good systems: ◼ Require a convincing case for safety. (Delay rather than proceed if necessary.) ◼ Pay attention to defaults. (Are default settings appropriate for most users?) ◼ Develop communication skills. 39  SE Code of Ethics SE shall commit themselves to making the analysis, specification, design, development, testing and maintenance of software a beneficial and respected profession. ◼ Principle 1: Public ◼ Software engineers shall act consistently with the public interest ◼ Principle 2: Client and Employer ◼ Software engineers shall act in a manner that is in the best interests of their client and employer consistent with the public interest ◼ Principle 3: Product ◼ Software engineers shall ensure that their products and related modifications meet the highest professional standards possible 40  SE Code of Ethics ◼ Principle 4: Judgement ◼ Software engineers shall maintain integrity and independence in their professional judgment ◼ Principle 5: Management ◼ Software engineering managers and leaders shall subscribe to and promote an ethical approach to the management of software development and maintenance ◼ Principle 6: Profession ◼ Software engineers shall advance the integrity and reputation of the profession consistent with the public interest 41  SE Code of Ethics ◼ Principle 7: Colleagues ◼ Software engineers shall be fair to and supportive of their colleagues ◼ Principle 8: Self ◼ Software engineers shall participate in lifelong learning regarding the practice of their profession and shall promote an ethical approach to the practice of the profession https://ethics.acm.org/code-of-ethics/software-engineering-code/ 42  Analysis of the Code ◼ No mechanical process for determining the correct actions to take when faced with a moral problem. ◼ An action that is not expressly forbidden by the code does not mean it is morally acceptable. ◼ Code is a collection of rules, when we encounter a situation where two rules conflict, ask questions that will help us consider the principles 43  Analysis of the Code ◼ Questions to ask: ◼ Who is affected? ◼ Am I treating other human beings with respect? ◼ Would my decision hold up to public scrutiny? ◼ How will those who are least empowered be affected? ◼ Are my acts worthy of the ideal professional? 44  Alternative List of Fundamental Principles ◼ 1) Be impartial ◼ The good of the general public is equally important to the good of your company ◼ The good of your profession and your company are equally important to your personal good ◼ It is wrong to promote your agenda at the expense of your firm, and it is wrong to promote the interests of your firm at the expense of the society ◼ Supports Clauses 1.02, 1.03, 1.05, 1.07, 3.03, 3.12., 4.01 and 6.05 45  Alternative List of Fundamental Principles ◼ 2) Disclose information that others ought to know ◼ Do not let others come to harm by concealing information from them ◼ Do not make misleading or deceptive information ◼ Disclose potential conflicts of interest ◼ Supports Clauses 1.04, 1.06, 2.06, 2.07, 3.01, 4.05, 4.06, 5.05, 5.06, 6.07-6.09, 6.12 and 6.13 46  Alternative List of Fundamental Principles ◼ 3) Respect the rights of others ◼ Do not infringe on the privacy rights, property rights, or intellectual property rights of others ◼ Supports Clauses 2.02, 2.03, 2.05, and 3.13 47  Alternative List of Fundamental Principles ◼ 4) Treat others justly ◼ Everyone deserves fair wages and appropriate credit for work performed ◼ Do not discriminate against others for attributes unrelated to the job they must do ◼ Do not penalise others for following the Code ◼ Supports Clauses 5.06 – 5.12, 7.03 – 7.05, 7.07 and 8.07 48  Alternative List of Fundamental Principles ◼ 5) Take responsibility for your actions and inaction ◼ You are responsible for the things you do, both good and bad ◼ You may also be responsible for bad things that you allow to happen through your inaction ◼ Supports Clauses 1.01, 3.04 – 3.08, 3.10, 3.11, 3.14, 3.15, 4.02, and 7.08 49  Alternative List of Fundamental Principles ◼ 6) Take responsibility for the actions of those you supervise ◼ Managers are responsible for setting up work assignments and training opportunities to promote quality and reduce risk ◼ They should create effective communication channels with subordinates so that they can monitor the work being done and be aware of any quality or risk issues that arise ◼ Supports Clauses 5.01 – 5.04 50  Alternative List of Fundamental Principles ◼ 7) Maintain your integrity ◼ Deliver on your commitments and be loyal to your employer, while obeying the law ◼ Do not ask someone else to do something you would not be willing to do yourself ◼ Supports Clauses 2.01, 2.04, 2.08, 2.09, 3.01, 3.02, 3.09, 4.03, 4.04, 6.06, 6.10, 6.11, 8.08, and 8.09 51  Alternative List of Fundamental Principles ◼ 8) Continually improve your abilities ◼ Take advantage of opportunities to improve your software engineering skills & your ability to put the Code to use ◼ Supports Clauses 2.01, 2.04, 2.08, 2.09, 3.01, 3.02, 3.09, 4.03, 4.04, 6.06, 6.10, 6.11, 8.08, and 8.09 52  Alternative List of Fundamental Principles ◼ 9) Share your knowledge, expertise, and values ◼ Volunteer your time and skills to worthy causes ◼ Help bring others to your level of knowledge about software engineering and professional ethics ◼ Supports Clauses 1.08, 6.02 – 6.04, 7.01, 7.02, and 7.06 53 Alternative List of Fundamental Principles Fundamental principles (virtues) Supporting Clauses 1) Be impartial 1.02, 1.03, 1.05, 1.07, 3.03, 3.12., 4.01 and 6.05 2) Disclose information that others 1.04, 1.06, 2.06, 2.07, 3.01, 4.05, 4.06, 5.05, ought to know 5.06, 6.07-6.09, 6.12 and 6.13 3) Respect the rights of others 2.02, 2.03, 2.05, and 3.13 4) Treat others justly 5.06 – 5.12, 7.03 – 7.05, 7.07 and 8.07 5) Take responsibility for your 1.01, 3.04 – 3.08, 3.10, 3.11, 3.14, 3.15, 4.02, actions and inaction and 7.08 6) Take responsibility for the actions 5.01 – 5.04 of those you supervise 7) Maintain your integrity 2.01, 2.04, 2.08, 2.09, 3.01, 3.02, 3.09, 4.03, 4.04, 6.06, 6.10, 6.11, 8.08, and 8.09 8) Continually improve your abilities 2.01, 2.04, 2.08, 2.09, 3.01, 3.02, 3.09, 4.03, 4.04, 6.06, 6.10, 6.11, 8.08, and 8.09 9) Share your knowledge, 1.08, 6.02 – 6.04, 7.01, 7.02, and 7.06 expertise, and values 54  Evaluate IT-related Moral Problems ◼ 3-steps process: 1. Consult the list of fundamental principles and identify those that are relevant to the moral problem. 2. Search the list of clauses accompanying each of the relevant fundamental principles to see which speak most directly to the issue. 55  Evaluate IT-related Moral Problems ◼ 3-steps process: 3. Determine whether the contemplated action aligns with or contradicts the statements in the clauses. If the action is in agreement with all the clauses, that provides strong evidence the action is moral. If the action is in disagreement with all the clauses, it is safe to say the action is immoral. 56  Evaluate IT-related Moral Problems ◼ 3-steps process: Usually, the contemplated action is supported by some clauses and opposed by others. ◼ Must use our judgement to determine which of the clauses are most important before we can reach a conclusion about the morality of the contemplated action 57  Scenario 1 ◼ Sam Shaw calls the Dept of CS at East Dakota State University seeking advice on how to improve the security of his business’s LAN. A secretary in the department routes his call to Professor Jane Smith, an internationally recognised expert in the field. Prof Smith answers several questions posed by Mr. Shaw regarding network security. When Mr. Shaw asks Prof Smith to recommend a software package to identify security problems, Prof Smith tells him that NetCheks got the personal computer magazine’s top rating. 58  Scenario 1 ◼ She does not mention that the same magazine gave a “best buy” rating to another product with fewer features but a much lower price. She also fails to mention that NetCheks is a product of a spin-off company started by one of her former students and that she owns 10% of the company. 59  Scenario 1 ◼ Step 1: Consult the list of fundamental principles and identify those that are relevant to the moral problem. ◼ From the list of fundamental principles, 3 most relevant fundamental principles: ◼ Be impartial (1.02, 1.03, 1.05, 1.07, 3.03, 3.12., 4.01 and 6.05) ◼ Disclose information that others ought to know (1.04, 1.06, 2.06, 2.07, 3.01, 4.05, 4.06, 5.05, 5.06, 6.07-6.09, 6.12 and 6.13) ◼ Share your knowledge, expertise and values (1.08, 6.02 – 6.04, 7.01, 7.02, and 7.06) 60  Scenario 1 ◼ Step 2: Search the list of clauses accompanying each of the relevant fundamental principles to see which speak most directly to the issue. ◼ From the list of clauses identified with the fundamental principles, those fit the case study most closely are: ◼ 1.06. Be fair and avoid deception in all statements, particularly public ones, concerning software or related documents, methods and tools. ◼ Prof Smith was deceptive when she mentioned the most highly rated software package but not the one rated to be a “best buy” ◼ 1.08. Be encouraged to volunteer professional skills to good causes and contribute to public education concerning the discipline 61  Scenario 1 ◼ From the list of clauses identified with the fundamental principles, those fit the case study most closely are: ◼ 4.05. Disclose to all concerned parties those conflicts of interest that cannot reasonably be avoided or escaped ◼ 6.02. Promote public knowledge of software engineering ◼ Professor Smith freely provided Sam Shaw with valuable information about network security 62  Scenario 1 ◼ From the list of clauses identified with the fundamental principles, those fit the case study most closely are: ◼ 6.05. Not promote their own interest at the expense of the profession, client or employer ◼ Prof Smith did not tell Sam Shaw that she had a personal stake in the success of the NetCheks software. She did not tell him about the “best buy” package that may have provided him every feature he needed at a much lower price. 63  Scenario 1 ◼ Step 3: Determine whether the contemplated action aligns with or contradicts the statements in the clauses. If the action is in agreement with all the clauses, that provides strong evidence the action is moral. If the action is in disagreement with all the clauses, it is safe to say the action is immoral. ◼ Mr. Shaw was asking Prof Smith for free advice and she provided it. She did a good thing. (Clauses 1.08 and 6.02) ◼ However, she violated the other 3 clauses (1.06, 4.05 & 6.05). ◼ Most important, she did not reveal her personal interest in NetCheks, which could lead her to be biased 64 ◼ Evidence: she did not mention the “best buy” package  Scenario 2 ◼ Joe Green, a system administrator, is installing a new software package on the PC used by employee Chuck Dennis. The company has not authorised Joe to read other people’s emails, Web logs or personal files. However, in the course of installing the software he accidentally come across directories containing files with suspicious-looking names. He opens a few of the files and discovers they contain child pornography. Joe believes possessing such images is against federal law. What should he do? 65  Scenario 2 ◼ Step 1: Consult the list of fundamental principles and identify those that are relevant to the moral problem. ◼ From the list of fundamental principles, the most relevant principles to the scenario are: ◼ Be impartial ◼ Respect the right of others ◼ Treat other justly ◼ Maintain your integrity 66  Scenario 2 ◼ Step 2: Search the list of clauses accompanying each of the relevant fundamental principles to see which speak most directly to the issue. ◼ Examine the list of clauses associated with the fundamental principles, the most relevant are: ◼ 2.03. Use the property of a client or employer only in ways properly authorised and with the client’s or employer’s knowledge and consent. ◼ Somebody has misused the company’s PC by using it to stored image of child pornography. By this principle Joe has an obligation to report what he discovered. ◼ 2.09. Promote no interest adverse to their employer or client, unless a higher ethical concern is being compromised; in that case, inform the employer or another appropriate authority of the ethical concern. ◼ Applying this principle would lead Joe to disclose what he discovered. 67  Scenario 2 ◼ Analysis ◼ Examine the list of clauses associated with the fundamental principles, the most relevant are: ◼ 3.13. Be careful to use only accurate data derived by ethical and lawful means and use it only in ways properly authorised. ◼ Joe discovered the child pornography by violating the company’s policy against examining files on personal computers used by employees. ◼ 5.10. Provide for due process in hearing charges of violation of an employer’s policy or of this Code ◼ Simply because Chuck had these files on his computer does not necessarily mean he is guilty. Perhaps someone else broke into Chuck’s computer and stored the images there. 68  Scenario 2 ◼ Step 3: Determine whether the contemplated action aligns with or contradicts the statements in the clauses. If the action is in agreement with all the clauses, that provides strong evidence the action is moral. If the action is in disagreement with all the clauses, it is safe to say the action is immoral. ◼ This is more complicated because Joe violated the company’s policy to uncover the child pornography on Chuck’s PC. ◼ The principles guide Joe to reveal his discovery to the relevant authorities within the corporation, even though management may punish Joe for breaking the policy. ◼ There is possibility Chuck is a victim. Someone else may try to frame Chuck or use his computer as a safe stash. ◼ Joe should be discreet until a complete investigation is completed and Chuck has had the opportunity to defend himself. 69  Scenario 3 ◼ The internet is plagued by a new worm that infects PCs by exploiting a security hole in a popular operating system. Tim Smart creates an antiworm that exploits the same security hole to spread from PC to PC. When Tim’s antiworm gets into a PC, it automatically downloads a software patch that plugs the security hole. Tim releases the antiworm, taking precautions to ensure that it cannot be tracked back to him. 70  Scenario 3 ◼ The antiworm quickly spreads throughout the Internet, consuming large amounts of network bandwidth and entering millions of computers. To system administrators, it looks like another worm and they battle its spread the same way they fight all other worm. 71  Scenario 3 ◼ Step 1: Consult the list of fundamental principles and identify those that are relevant to the moral problem. ◼ The most relevant fundamental principles are: ◼ Continually improve your abilities ◼ Share your knowledge, expertise and values ◼ Respect the right of others ◼ Take responsibility for your actions and inactions 72  Scenario 3 ◼ Step 2: Search the list of clauses accompanying each of the relevant fundamental principles to see which speak most directly to the issue. ◼ The most relevant clauses are: ◼ 1.01. Accept full responsibility for their own work ◼ Tim tried to prevent others from discovering that he was the author of the antiworm. He did not accoet responsibility for what he had done. ◼ 1.08. Be encouraged to volunteer professional skills to good causes and contribute to public education concerning the discipline ◼ The antiworm did something good by patching security holes. Tim provided the antiworm to the Internet community without charge. However, system administrator spent a lot of time trying to halt the spread of the antiworm, a harmful effect. 73  Scenario 3 ◼ The most relevant clauses are: ◼ 2.03. Use the property of a client or employer only in ways properly authorised and with the client’s or employer’s knowledge and consent ◼ Tim’s “client” is the community of Internet PC owners who happen to use the operating system with security hole. While his antiworm was designed to benefit them, it entered their systems without their knowledge or consent. The antiworm also consumed a great deal of network bandwidth without the consent of the relevant telecommunication companies. 74  Scenario 3 ◼ The most relevant clauses are: ◼ 8.01. Further their knowledge of developments in the analysis, specification, design, development, maintenance and testing of software and related documents, together with the management of the development process. ◼ 8.02. Improve their ability to create safe, reliable and useful quality software at reasonable cost and within a reasonable time ◼ Tim followed these 2 clauses when he acquired a copy of the worm, figured out how it worked and created a reliable antiworm in a short period of time. The experience improved his knowledge and skills. ◼ 8.06. Improve their knowledge of this Code, its interpretation and its application to their work 75  Scenario 3 ◼ Step 3: Determine whether the contemplated action aligns with or contradicts the statements in the clauses. If the action is in agreement with all the clauses, that provides strong evidence the action is moral. If the action is in disagreement with all the clauses, it is safe to say the action is immoral. ◼ According to some of the principles, Tim did the right thing but according to the others, Tim was wrong to release the antiworm. How to resolve this dilemma? 76  Scenario 3 ◼ Analysis ◼ Tim’s welfare is less important than the public good. ◼ View from 3 remaining clauses: 1.01, 1.08 & 2.03 ◼ 1.01: what Tim did was wrong. He refused to accept the responsibility for launching the antiworm by attempting to hide his identity. ◼ From point of view of clause 1.08, must determine whether his efforts were directed to a “good cause” ◼ Tim’s antiworm benefited the PCs. However, it harmed the Internet by consuming a large amounts of bandwidth and it harmed the administrators who spent time battling it. There were harmful as well as beneficial consequences, we cannot say that his effort were directed to a completely good cause. 77  Scenario 3 ◼ Analysis ◼ From point of view of clause 2.03, Tim violated the property rights of the PC owners because the antiworm infected their PCs without authorization. His release of the antiworm was wrong. ◼ Tim’s release of antiworm is clearly wrong based on 1.01 & 2.03. It is also hard to argue that he satisfied the spirit of clause 1.08. ◼ Conclusion: Tim’s action violated the SE Code of Ethics and Professional Practice 78  Scenario 4 ◼ Acme Corporation licenses a software package to many state, country and city governments. Government agencies have the choice of three levels of service: ◼ The bronze level provides online support only ◼ The silver level adds phone support ◼ The gold level includes training classes taught on the customer’s site. ◼ The gold level cost $20,000 a year more than the silver level 79  Scenario 4 ◼ Jean is one of the Acme employees who works in the supper organisation. Mostly, Jean provides phone support, but from time to time he teaches an on-site class. In fact, Jean created many of the instructional materials used in these classes. Because of the recession, quite a few government agencies have dropped from the gold level of support to the silver level, and some members of Jean’s training group have lost their jobs. Jean has a family to support and he is wondering if his position will soon be eliminated as well. 80  Scenario 4 ◼ The state government of East Dakota is one of the many customers that no longer pays Acme Corporation for on-site training. One day Jean gets a call from Maria, who works for the East Dakota state agency using the software package. Maria offers to pay Jean $5,000 plus expenses to run a five-day training class that covers the same material as the official course taught by Acme. Jean accepts the offer, but he does not inform anyone at Acme Corporation of his decision. 81  Scenario 4 ◼ Working at home on evenings and weekends, he develops his own set of instructional materials. He takes a week of paid vacation from work, travels to East Dakota and teaches the class. 82  Scenario 4 ◼ Step 1: Consult the list of fundamental principles and identify those that are relevant to the moral problem. ◼ Most relevant fundamental principles: ◼ Be impartial ◼ Take responsibility for your actions and inaction ◼ Disclose information that others ought to know ◼ Maintain your integrity ◼ Continually improve your abilities 83  Scenario 4 ◼ Step 2: Search the list of clauses accompanying each of the relevant fundamental principles to see which speak most directly to the issue. ◼ Most relevant clauses: ◼ 2.08 Accept no outside work detrimental to the work they perform for their primary employer. ◼ Employers provide employees with weekends off and paid vacations so that they can rest from their labours and return to work refreshed and able to perform at a high level. You could argue that Jean’s consulting work was detrimental to his “day job” at Acme Corporation because it filled his evenings and weekends and kept him from getting a proper vacation 84  Scenario 4 ◼ Most relevant clauses: ◼ 3.04 Ensure that they are qualified for any project on which they work or propose to work by an appropriate combination of education and training, and experience. ◼ Based on his prior experience at Acme, Jean was certainly well qualified to develop the instructional materials and teach the class in East Dakota. He has fulfilled this obligation of the Code. 85  Scenario 4 ◼ Most relevant clauses: ◼ 4.05 Disclose to all concerned parties those conflicts of interest that cannot reasonably be avoided or escaped. ◼ By accepting the consulting job with the East Dakota state government, Jean created a conflict of interest between himself and Acme Corporation. It is in Jean’s interest if East Dakota does not purchase the gold level of support, but it is Acme Corporation’s interest if East Dakota does buy the gold level of support. Jean violated this clause by not disclosing his consulting job to Acme Corporation. 86  Scenario 4 ◼ Most relevant clauses: ◼ 6.05 Not promote their own interest at the expense of the profession, client or employer. ◼ By agreeing to teach the class, Jean put his own interest above that of his employer. Clearly, the East Dakota state government recognized a need to have some on-site training. If Jean did not accept the consulting job, the East Dakota government may have gone back to the gold level of support from Acme. 87  Scenario 4 ◼ Most relevant clauses: ◼ 8.04 Improve their understanding of the software and related documents on which they work and of the environment in which they will be used. ◼ By creating his own set of instructional materials, Jean probably developed an even better understanding of the software package and its capabilities. There is a good chance he came up with come insights about better ways to teach others how to use the software. This additional knowledge will make Jean a more valuable employee of Acme Corporation. 88  Scenario 4 ◼ Step 3: Determine whether the contemplated action aligns with or contradicts the statements in the clauses. If the action is in agreement with all the clauses, that provides strong evidence the action is moral. If the action is in disagreement with all the clauses, it is safe to say the action is immoral. ◼ You could argue that Jean is actually helping Acme Corporation. If East Dakota cannot find another source of on-site training, they may stop using the software. ◼ You could also argue that Jean’s work for East Dakota improved his knowledge and ability to teach others how to use it, making him a more effective phone support person. ◼ However, it’s unlikely the upper management will be convinced by these arguments, particularly since Jean did not disclose the offer from East Dakota before accepting it. The management is much more likely to question his loyalty. He may well be the next person laid off if the company learn about his consulting work. 89  Scenario 4 ◼ Analysis ◼ Jean violated clauses 2.08, 4.05 and 6.05. ◼ Jean’s action were wrong and unwise, and may have put his full-time job in jeopardy. 90