The past few weeks have shown us how digital landscapes shape our social, political and economic lives. This has been using misinformation and disinformation to agitate and generate a real-world response.
As a result of the impact of the digital world, the rise of hacktivism has become an influential force in advocating for change and drawing attention to perceived injustices. Hacktivism, the use of computer hacking to further political ends, is often presented as a modern form of civil disobedience, challenging power structures and exposing wrongdoing.
Examples of hacktivism can be seen around the world, including Belarusian cyber groups attempting to slow down Russian troops in opposition to the ongoing war against Ukraine, as well as during the Arab Spring, where cyber groups granted access to information to the citizens.
However, despite its appeal and occasional successes, hacktivism cannot serve as a substitute for due process in a democratic society. Due process, grounded in legal standards and fair procedures, ensures that justice is administered impartially and equitably.
Cyber Security Consultant, CyberSmart.
Legal and ethical limits
Although their targets may be well-intentioned, hacktivists often circumvent or openly violate laws designed to protect privacy, property, and security. These illegal activities often involve methods such as unauthorized access to systems and data breaches that violate laws and ethical standards.
Due process, on the other hand, is governed by legal frameworks that ensure that actions are legal and rights are protected. When hacktivists circumvent legal procedures, they undermine the rule of law, which is fundamental to democratic governance.
The actions of hacktivists can be ethically ambiguous. While some may see themselves as digital Robin Hoods, their methods can cause significant harm. For example, the exposure of personal data during a hack can lead to identity theft, financial loss, and serious privacy violations of innocent people. These actions raise critical ethical questions about the means used to achieve perceived noble ends. By bypassing legal channels, hacktivists deny people the protections afforded them by law, such as the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial.
While most people won’t lose sleep over this in cases of hacktivism targeting the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the law is still in place to protect everyone; Failure to do so sets a dangerous precedent that may not be used with such noble intentions in the future.
Responsibility and transparency
Due process ensures accountability and transparency through a transparent legal process where actions and decisions are subject to scrutiny and oversight. Judges, lawyers, and law enforcement officials are held to consistent standards and their actions are under constant review. Hacktivism lacks these processes, and often operates in secret and without accountability, raising questions about their motives, as well as the accuracy and truth behind the information they disclose.
Potential for unintended consequences
Hacktivism attacks, no matter how well-intentioned, are often indiscriminate and can cause collateral damage, such as disruption of services, harm to innocent parties, and escalation of conflicts. A hack aimed at exposing bad corporate practices could also compromise the personal data of employees and customers, causing widespread damage.
The acts of hacktivists can also lead to harsh responses from governments and corporations seeking to increase security after a cyberattack. Stricter regulations and cybersecurity measures can potentially reduce freedoms in the digital space.
Additionally, hacktivist actions can undermine legitimate efforts to address complaints through legal means. When hacktivists disclose illegally obtained information, they can damage public perception and compromise investigations that rely on legally obtained evidence. This can impede the work of journalists, watchdog groups, and legal advocates who strive to expose wrongdoing through legitimate channels.
Due process aims to minimize such risks by providing a controlled environment to resolve disputes and address irregularities. This point emphasizes the potential dangers of hacktivism, contrasting it with the structured and balanced approach to due process designed to protect society’s interests and prevent harm.
Thinking about the future
While hacktivism can shed light on pressing issues and serve as a catalyst for change, it cannot replace due process in a democratic society. The legal and ethical boundaries that define due process ensure that justice is delivered fairly, protecting people’s rights while maintaining social order. Accountability and transparency are fundamental to the integrity of legal procedures, as they provide a system of checks and balances that do not exist in hacktivist operations.
Additionally, the possibility of unintended consequences highlights the risks associated with bypassing established legal channels. For a society committed to justice and the rule of law, due process remains indispensable, providing a structured and equitable framework for addressing grievances and resolving conflicts. Hacktivism, while impactful, lacks the legitimacy, accountability, and comprehensive justice that due process provides, underscoring the importance of adhering to legal principles in the pursuit of social change.
We list the best malware removal tools.
This article was produced as part of TechRadarPro’s Expert Insights channel, where we feature the best and brightest minds in today’s tech industry. The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing, find out more here:
