Search results

Political hackers, like the infamous Anonymous collective, have demonstrated their willingness to use political violence to further their agendas. However, many of their causes - targeting terrorist groups, fighting for LGBTQ+ rights, and protecting people's freedom of expression, autonomy and privacy - are intuitively good things to fight for.This book will create a new framework that argues that when the state fails to protect people, hackers can intervene and evaluates the hacking based on the political or social circumstances. It highlights the space for hackers to operate as legitimate actors; guides hacker activity by detailing what actions are justified toward what end; outlines mechanisms to aid hackers in reaching ethically justified decisions; and directs the political community on how to react to these political hackers.Applying this framework to the most pivotal hacking operations within the last two decades, including the Arab Spring, police brutality in the USA and the Nigerian and Ugandan governments' announcements of homophobic legislation, it offers a unique contribution to conceptualising hacking as a contemporary political activity.

"This book starts from the proposition that the field of intelligence lacks any coherent or systematic ethical review, and then develops an ethical framework for intelligence based on the notion of harm and the establishment of the Just Intelligence Principles. This book argues that the most appropriate ethical framework for intelligence collection is one which is able to recognise that intelligence collection does indeed cause harm, but that sometimes this harm is necessary in order to protect the political community. It tackles this tension by creating an ethical framework specifically designed for intelligence that is able to balance the need to limit the damage caused while securing the political community. This is achieved by developing an ethical framework of two parts. The first part is designed to recognise those features of intelligence that might be considered ethically unacceptable by highlighting the 'harm' it can cause. Once the harm is understood, the second part of the ethical framework establishes a set of Just Intelligence Principles that outline if and when the harm caused is justified. These Just Intelligence Principles are developed by drawing upon the just war tradition and its criteria of just cause, legitimate authority, right intention, last resort, proportionality and discrimination. By placing the harm that intelligence can cause into context of the Just Intelligence Principles it is possible to ensure that intelligence collection is only carried out when the circumstances demonstrate a suitable level of threat, authorised by a sufficient level of authority, carrying a right intention, that the damage is proportional to the expected information gains, and discriminates between legitimate and illegitimate targets. The main feature of the ethical framework created, however, is that it recognises that different intelligence collection activities can cause different levels of harm and that as a result the circumstances needed to justify them must also change. The book examines three of the main collection disciplines in the field of intelligence studies: imagery intelligence, signals intelligence and human intelligence. By applying the ethical framework established at the beginning of the book to these three important intelligence collection disciplines, it is possible to better understand the ethical framework while also demonstrating its real-life applicability. This book will be of much interest to students of intelligence studies, ethics, war and conflict studies, security studies and IR"--

AbstractThe ethical value of intelligence lies in its crucial role in safeguarding individuals from harm by detecting, locating, and preventing threats. As part of this undertaking, intelligence can include protecting the economic well-being of the political community and its people. Intelligence, however, also entails causing people harm when it violates their vital interests through its operations. The challenge, therefore, is how to reconcile this tension, which Cécile Fabre's recent book Spying through a Glass Darkly does by arguing for the "ongoing and preemptive imposition of defensive harm." Fabre applies this underlying argument to the specifics of economic espionage to argue that while states, businesses, and individuals do have a general right over their information that prevents others from accessing it, such protections can be forfeited or overridden when there is a potential threat to the fundamental rights of third parties. This essay argues, however, that Fabre's discussion on economic espionage overlooks important additional proportionality and discrimination concerns that need to be accounted for. In addition to the privacy violations it causes, economic espionage can cause harms to people's other vital interests, including their physical and mental well-being and autonomy. Given the complex way in which the economy interlinks with people's lives and society, harms to one economic actor will have repercussions on those secondary economic entities dependent on them, such as workers, buyers, and investors. This, in turn, can produce further harms on other economic actors, causing damages to ripple outward across society.

One of the biggest challenges facing modern societies is how to monitor one's intelligence community while maintaining the necessary level of secrecy. Indeed, while some secrecy is needed for mission success, too much has allowed significant abuse. Moreover, extending this secrecy to democratic oversight actors only creates another layer of unobserved actors and removes the public scrutiny that keeps their power and decision-making in check. This article will therefore argue for a new type of oversight through a specialised ethical whistleblowing framework. This includes, first, outlining what intelligence wrongdoings justify whistleblowing; second, whether whistleblowing is the correct remedy – something not necessarily clear with intelligence; and finally, what form the whistleblowing should take. This framework will examine the Snowden case to determine whether he was correct leaking intelligence data and whether the means were appropriate, and second, whether those involved in the Central Intelligence Agency use of torture should have blown the whistle and if they now face blame for failing to act.