Introduction
This essay explores the ethical issues surrounding the computer science sector, concentrating on a professional function that arises five years after graduation. The proposed role examined is cybersecurity analyst, a profession with significant duties in protecting digital assets. The essay focuses on the expert’s background knowledge to meet more intense ethical problems specific to the cybersecurity industry. Cybersecurity analysts have a crucial role in organizations, where their primary responsibility is to protect and constantly overcome cyber threats. The emphasis on the job of the cybersecurity analyst highlights the critical nature of choices beyond simple technical expertise. In addition to being the custodian of digital assets, cybersecurity analyst looks out for user privacy, organizational integrity, and, indirectly, the welfare of society. In this case, ethical issues include cooperating with the government, disclosing vulnerabilities, or striking a balance between private rights and national security mandates. The essay examines the moral choices that fall under the jurisdiction of the cybersecurity analyst, recognizing that moral frameworks like deontology, consequentialism, or virtue ethics are essential for resolving these moral problems. Using well-established ethical models offers a framework for assessing individual rights, decision-making consequences, and the community’s influence.
The Role of a Cybersecurity Analyst
A cybersecurity analyst plays a critical function as an advocate of an organization’s digital strongholds. The cybersecurity analyst is essential in assuring sensitive information’s confidentiality, integrity, and availability (Ghelani). Cybersecurity experts have to stop illegal access to private information. This entails encryption, access restrictions, and other safeguards to guarantee that only people with permission may access private data. They must also be on the lookout for possible data breaches, utilizing techniques like network traffic analysis and invasion detection systems to find and stop security risks.
Maintaining data integrity is essential to preventing unwanted changes or manipulation. Cybersecurity analysts employ digital signatures, database integrity rules, and checksums to ensure that data is reliable and undisturbed. Frequent integrity checks and audits are carried out to find any irregularities or discrepancies in the data so that quick remedial action may be taken. Cybersecurity specialists strive to keep vital systems and data accessible. This entails putting safeguards like backup systems, disaster recovery initiatives, and redundancy systems to guarantee that services continue to function even in the case of unforeseen circumstances or cyberattacks (Nguyen et al.).They are responsible for spotting and eliminating possible risks, such as Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) assaults, that could cause interruptions in service.
There is no one-size-fits-all approach to cybersecurity. Analysts prepare meticulously, considering the special features of the company’s digital environment, its resources, and any dangers. Various technologies, rules, and processes must be used strategically to build a complete defense system. Invasion prevention systems, firewalls, antivirus software, and staff training initiatives are a few examples.
Cyber dangers are dynamic and always changing. Cybersecurity specialists carry out continuous security assessments to find and fix weaknesses in the digital architecture of the company. This proactive strategy includes penetration testing, vulnerability checking, and threat alert monitoring. It necessitates being always prepared and having the flexibility to modify security protocols in response to novel threats. Analyzing cybersecurity requires a thorough comprehension of the aims and purposes of the company. This understanding allows them to coordinate security measures with the overarching company plan. To foresee and neutralize new dangers, one must adopt a strategic attitude. Analysts can enhance the safeguarding of an organization’s digital assets by anticipating and outwitting attackers.
Their main responsibilities include careful planning and strategic implementation of security solutions. It involves more than just protecting computer systems and networks; it involves building a strong defense system that can withstand the constantly changing dangers posed by cyberspace. The constant security assessment, which involves continuously exploring and assessing digital environments to reveal possible vulnerabilities, is one of their duties. Therefore, a cybersecurity analyst requires a keen awareness of goals, a strategic way of thinking, and a dedication to always being one step ahead of cyber threats.
Moral Dilemma
In cybersecurity, the ethical dilemma arising from the dispute between individual privacy rights and national security imperatives is a complicated and recurrent problem. This ethical dilemma frequently surfaces when government officials ask cybersecurity teams for backdoor access to popular encryption technologies, claiming that such access is essential for national security initiatives. Due to the possibility of compromising people’s security and privacy for a larger social benefit, this situation raises serious ethical questions and may result in civil rights abuses.
Deontology
As an ethical framework, deontology offers a coherent method for assessing an action’s morality based on its intrinsic qualities rather than its effects. A deontological study would determine if developing such a weakness is in line with basic ethical principles or infringes against certain rights, most notably the right to privacy, in the context of a government’s request for a backdoor into encryption technologies ( Cabanayan). According to deontological ethics, some behaviors are intrinsically good or bad, independent of how they turn out. A deontological study would investigate creating a vulnerability if a government requested a backdoor. Professionals in cybersecurity influenced by deontological principles would evaluate whether it is intrinsically immoral to compromise someone’s security and privacy. Deontology emphasizes the importance of following general moral rules. When presented with a government request for a backdoor, cybersecurity experts should consider whether exposing such a vulnerability goes against core moral values like integrity, honesty, and respect for personal autonomy.
It would also examine whether the behavior complies with a universally applicable set of norms. A rights-based viewpoint is frequently included in deontological ethics. The right to privacy takes center stage when a backdoor request is made. Cybersecurity experts would assess if violating an individual’s right to privacy goes against the moral precepts that protect it. The analysis’s main task is determining if the activity respects the autonomy and secrecy that people are born with. Deontology would make cybersecurity experts wonder if violating someone’s privacy is always unethical, even if doing so would help the country’s security. This viewpoint opposes the notion that the goals should always outweigh the means and upholds a categorical imperative, according to which some decisions should never be made, regardless of the potential benefits.
Consequentialist
An ethical theory known as consequentialism determines the morality of deeds only by looking at their results or repercussions. Consequentialist ethics focuses on how an action affects people and society as a whole, as opposed to deontology, which emphasizes the intrinsic essence of deeds. Employing a consequentialist viewpoint, cybersecurity experts would put the evaluation of results ahead of the vulnerability’s intrinsic design in the case of a government request for a backdoor into encryption technologies.
Cybersecurity experts are directed by consequentialism to thoroughly consider the possible consequences of granting a backdoor request (Johnson et al.). Weighing the benefits—like increased national security and the potential to stop security threats—against the drawbacks—like compromised personal privacy and the possibility of malevolent actors abusing the vulnerability—is necessary. The consequentialist method calls for balancing an action’s advantages and disadvantages. Cybersecurity experts need to examine if the harm caused by violating an individual’s privacy is greater than the overall benefit to society regarding enhanced security. This entails measuring and contrasting the results while accounting for immediate and long-term impacts.
Consequentialism places a strong focus on maximizing the greater good. Cybersecurity experts are responsible for evaluating whether the possible benefits of sacrificing privacy outweigh the risks, such as averting a serious security danger in the event of a backdoor request. This utilitarian calculation compares the possible harm to individual rights with the general well-being of society. Cost-benefit analysis is a common component of consequentialist ethics. Cybersecurity experts must determine whether the overall result is morally acceptable by balancing the costs (privacy breach) against the advantages (better security). Consequentialism acknowledges that an action’s ethical assessment can change depending on the situation. When using this approach, cybersecurity analysts must consider the dynamic nature of the rapid advancement of technology and the possibility of unanticipated outcomes. This necessitates a continuous evaluation of the circumstances and the willingness to modify moral conclusions.
Virtue Ethics
An ethical paradigm known as virtue ethics emphasizes the moral agent’s qualities and character more than laws or penalties (Kantar &Terrell, 329). Employing virtue ethics in the field of cybersecurity entails considering the virtues that are essential to the job description of a cybersecurity expert. When confronted with an official request for a backdoor, cybersecurity experts would consider values like accountability, reliability, and honesty. The moral agent’s character is emphasized centrally in virtue ethics. Professionals are advised to consider their morality and character in the context of cybersecurity. This entails thinking about what behaviors are morally acceptable and the sort of person one should aspire to be as a cybersecurity expert.
Virtue ethics identifies the qualities that are especially important to cybersecurity workers. Ethical consideration is around virtues like integrity, which is acting with honesty and truth; trustworthiness, which is important in an area where trust is vital; and accountability, which is taking responsibility for one’s decisions and actions. Cybersecurity experts must assess if granting the government’s request is morally righteous in light of virtue ethics. They would evaluate whether or not their behavior demonstrates accountability, honesty, and reliability.
Cybersecurity professionals are also encouraged by virtue ethics to consider how their activities affect society. In the event of a backdoor request, they would consider whether complying with it is in line with moral principles that advance the welfare of society. This viewpoint considers not just the qualities of the individual but also the larger picture of society. Ethical role modeling is important in virtue ethics. Professionals in cybersecurity operate as moral role models for their peers and the community by exhibiting virtues. Maintaining moral principles like accountability, honesty, and reliability helps foster an ethical culture in the cybersecurity industry. The cultivation of practical wisdom is a common component of virtue ethics. This is the capacity to form morally decent decisions via experience and introspection. Cybersecurity experts would use their practical knowledge to resolve moral dilemmas and make moral choices in case of a backdoor request.
Establishing Ethical Foundations
As a cybersecurity analyst, it is critical to advocate for openness and accountability. Communication within the team and, if necessary, with key stakeholders should be part of the decision-making process. Transparency assures that all team members comprehend the ethical significance of their activities, establishing a shared commitment to making responsible decisions. As a cybersecurity expert, I see the defense of individual privacy rights as a core ethical precept and prioritize their preservation, driven by deontology. I firmly uphold the notion that privacy is an inalienable right in the face of a government request for a backdoor into encryption technologies, refusing to back down even in the face of pressure regarding national security. Upon receiving a backdoor request, I evaluate if introducing a vulnerability for a particular scenario may be used generally as a general rule. If violating someone’s privacy is seen to be intrinsically bad, my deontological perspective opposes the creation of exceptions. It supports a uniformly negative position against these kinds of behaviors.
Using the categorical imperative, I question whether it is ever ethically acceptable for someone to jeopardize someone else’s privacy for the sake of national security. If the response is negative, it supports my deontological case against introducing vulnerabilities. I approach the situation’s complexity by methodically weighing the rights and ethical precepts. This framework provides a systematic approach to ethical decision-making by encouraging me to consider the underlying character of the proposed action, its compatibility with universal values, and its alignment with fundamental rights. I use a comprehensive approach for a comprehensive analysis, considering how deontological principles interact with different ethical frameworks, such as consequentialism or virtue ethics. This enables me to prioritize fundamental rights in my decision-making process while also considering the larger ethical environment. My deontological viewpoint motivates me to promote moral behavior in my company and the cybersecurity sector. I contribute to a culture that values privacy, honesty, and behaviors that are universally applicable by steadfastly respecting ethical ideals. This advocacy goes beyond my choices to impact industry norms and organizational practices consistent with moral values.
I understand the importance of weighing the bigger picture in my profession. Using consequentialism, I would carefully consider any advantages that could arise, including improved national security due to possible threat avoidance. In addition, I would closely assess the drawbacks, such as people’s privacy being jeopardized due to a backdoor being created. Consequentialism is my guide when balancing competing interests, like the need for both individual privacy protection and national security. I want to choose the course of action that maximizes the well-being of society as a whole by methodically weighing the implications while accounting for the moral issues surrounding individual rights and national security.
I do an in-depth cost-benefit analysis using a consequentialist lens. This entails calculating the advantages and disadvantages of building a backdoor. With my evaluation, I hope to ascertain if, from an ethical standpoint, the benefits—like increased security—outweigh the drawbacks—like lost privacy. Consequentialism recognizes that moral judgments are dynamic. I understand that in the rapidly evolving field of cybersecurity, it is critical to modify my ethical assessments in response to fresh data, new dangers, and technological developments. This guarantees that my choices will always be pertinent and consistent with moral standards.
Knowing consequentialism gives me the tools to explain my moral choices adequately. I can clearly explain to stakeholders, legislators, or the general public how I took society’s overall effects into account and how my choice complies with intending to maximize the greater good. Among the many stakeholders, this transparency promotes understanding and confidence. I am prompted to think about the long-term effects of my actions when I use a consequentialist approach. Possible long-term repercussions, especially in cybersecurity, where actions might have lasting effects. This guarantees that my choices are consistent with more general ethical standards and advance the long-term welfare of people and society.
Applying virtue ethics in this situation necessitates thoroughly examining your morality, character, and the effects of your choices on the larger society. By conducting myself in a way consistent with values that support moral principles, I help foster an ethical culture in the cybersecurity industry. I will start by reflecting on accountability, honesty, and reliability. I will consider these values concerning my role and how I should live them out in my choices and actions. I shall assess if granting the government’s request is morally righteous. I will consider how it affects my integrity and whether I am telling the truth. I’ll evaluate how it impacts my credibility, which is important in an industry where credibility is everything. I will also consider how accountable I am for protecting people’s security, privacy, and the systems.
I shall consider how granting the request’s requests advances society. Virtue ethics prompts my activities to consider whether they advance the common good rather than just my interests. Building a backdoor is morally righteous and in line with values that benefit the community at large and the field of cybersecurity. I’ll admit how crucial it is to set an example of ethics. By acting with values, I will lead by example for my peers and the larger cybersecurity community. I will think about how my choice is consistent with the values I hold dear and how it advances the development of an ethical culture in our industry.
Impact on Stakeholders
The idea of developing an encryption backdoor directly jeopardizes user privacy. One of the main security features of encryption is its ability to protect sensitive data and private communications from prying eyes. This privacy is at risk if the government’s request is granted, as it would enable illegal access to private information and communications. Users trust encryption systems to protect their private correspondence, including monetary transactions, private messaging, and confidential business conversations. The secrecy of these communications might be jeopardized by introducing a vulnerability caused by establishing a backdoor. People could no longer be able to trust that their conversations with others would be completely secret.
The proposal’s approval increases the likelihood of users being subjected to unauthorized access. Once a backdoor has been established, it may be used by unauthorized parties or malevolent actors to access private data. This exposure affects consumers in various sectors and businesses and goes beyond the individual level. The development of an encryption backdoor gives rise to concern about unauthorized monitoring. Users who think that their digital communications are safe might have their confidence undermined if the suggested backdoor permits unauthorized surveillance. This affects individual privacy and safeguarding private information in work and institutional settings.
Individuals’ rights and trust are jeopardized if the government’s plan is accepted. Potential backdoor disclosure jeopardizes the right to private communication and the faith in encryption measures to protect this right. This breakdown of trust affects the connection between users and the digital technology they depend on for safe interactions. Consumers will experience an instant decline in digital trust. Users rely on encryption as the cornerstone of their online safety. People’s behavior may significantly change if this trust is betrayed, with people being more wary and doubtful of the security of digital platforms and communication tools.
Values Guiding Decision-Making
This will majorly impact the cybersecurity team assigned to either build the backdoor or oppose the request. Their professional integrity may be pressured if they comply with the government’s demand since it will mean sacrificing the values they are paid to uphold. Defying the request might damage the team’s professional connections and jeopardize career paths. It could also result in possible confrontations with government bodies. The choice directly affects national security agencies’ access to data for identifying and mitigating security risks. Fulfilling the request might improve their monitoring skills, helping to identify and stop possible security breaches. However, rejecting the request might make it more difficult for them to obtain intelligence effectively, jeopardizing efforts to maintain national security.
Key players are technology businesses that develop encryption software. Fulfilling the government’s request might result in legal battles, harm to the brand, and a decline in user confidence. On the other hand, turning down the request might damage ties with the administration and have legal and regulatory implications. The ruling affects society at large because it establishes a standard for striking a balance between personal privacy and national security. Backdoor creation might undermine public confidence in digital technology by fostering a monitoring culture. Refusing the request upholds the value of individual liberty while preserving a precarious balance between security and civil liberties.
Connection Between Values and Decision-Making
My moral compass in negotiating this moral predicament is my dedication to individual liberties, confidentiality, and moral behavior. The decision-making process is guided by autonomy, fairness, and integrity. Respecting each user’s right to privacy and shielding them from unauthorized access is crucial. Transparency is critical because it builds confidence among the cybersecurity team members and helps them grasp the ethical ramifications. The dedication to accountability guarantees that choices are compliant with legal requirements and ethical guidelines, encouraging a feeling of accountability among industry experts.
In addition, one of the main factors is society’s long-term welfare. A stronger and more resilient society is achieved by respecting individual rights and establishing an environment for digital communication based on security and trust. This viewpoint promotes a proactive approach to cybersecurity that prioritizes moral standards and ethical concerns more than quick fixes that violate them. The goal is to persuade people of the usefulness of a principled approach in handling moral dilemmas within the computer science sector by outlining these ideals and their compatibility with larger ethical frameworks. This strategy protects individual rights and helps create a more responsible and ethically aware professional environment.
My decision-making prioritizes acts consistent with morality, honesty, and truthfulness, which highlights a primary commitment to maintaining my integrity. This commitment shows a commitment to moral ideals and ethical standards, especially in the face of potential difficulties from following this course of action. To maintain my integrity, I must put honesty and truthfulness first in all communications. This entails giving truthful information, being open and honest about intentions, and refraining from lying. Being transparent with others guarantees they comprehend the aspects that impact my choices and builds trust.
My commitment to integrity is synonymous with a consistent alignment with my core moral principles. I recognize the importance of staying true to my values, and this recognition becomes the compass guiding my decision-making process. Each decision reflects these deeply held beliefs, contributing to a sense of authenticity and moral coherence. Upholding my integrity involves consistently making ethically sound decisions. This requires a thorough consideration of the moral implications of each option and a commitment to choosing paths that stand up to ethical scrutiny. The focus is not solely on the outcome but on the ethical journey to reach that outcome.
Upholding my integrity means confronting ethical dilemmas head-on, even if the resolution requires navigating challenging terrain. This commitment acknowledges that ethical decision-making is not always straightforward and may involve complexities and uncertainties. Resilience in Ethical Standpoints. Despite adversity or external pressures, upholding my integrity requires resilience in staying true to ethical principles. This may involve resisting compromises that could compromise ethical standards, even when external factors make adherence to these principles challenging.
My commitment to integrity extends beyond immediate decisions to consider their long-term impact. Upholding ethical standards ensures the sustainability of my actions, contributing to a reputation for moral conduct and ethical leadership over time. Prioritizing honesty, truthfulness, and moral principles contributes to building trust in relationships. Whether personal or professional, others can rely on the consistency of my ethical conduct, promoting a culture of ethics within organizations or communities. I contribute to an environment where ethical decision-making is valued, encouraging others to follow suit and fostering a culture of integrity. The commitment to prioritizing actions aligned with honesty, truthfulness, and moral principles in decision-making is a personal choice and a foundational aspect of my character.
Reflection
My integrity acts as a springboard for personal development, and the habits of introspection and ongoing development form the basis of this life-changing experience. Adopting these procedures enables me to grow as a person on a personal and professional level, in addition to upholding a high standard of ethics. Conducting routine self-reflection entails analyzing my values in-depth and ensuring my behaviors are consistent. By engaging in this reflective procedure, I may evaluate if my choices and actions are consistent with the values of moral integrity, honesty, and truthfulness.
By engaging in self-reflection, I can comprehend the reasons behind my decisions. It assists in exposing any prejudices or unconscious factors that could affect my dedication to honesty. I can make more informed decisions by delving into the underlying reasons for my behavior. I recognize my flaws and places where I might not uphold the ethical norms I strive to via self-reflection. This acknowledgment is a commitment to addressing areas that may be strengthened, not a show of weakness, and is necessary for personal progress.
Identifying areas that require development entails constructive self-criticism. I critically evaluate previous choices and actions, looking for trends or reoccurring issues. This self-awareness is crucial for encouraging a growth mentality, in which setbacks are seen as chances for personal improvement. Maintaining integrity fosters continuous self-awareness. This increased self-awareness permeates all aspects of my life and transcends particular decision-making experiences. It knows my feelings, ideas, and actions in different contexts. Through consistent self-awareness, I can monitor how consistently I act morally. By observing my actions, I can maintain my integrity and ensure that morality always comes first when making decisions.
The journey of personal growth involves embracing a growth mindset. I view challenges not as insurmountable obstacles but as opportunities for learning and development. This mindset fosters resilience and adaptability, crucial qualities for navigating the complexities of personal and professional life. Personal growth is nurtured by actively seeking learning opportunities. Through formal education, mentorship, or experiential learning, I engage in activities that expand my knowledge, skills, and perspectives. This commitment to continuous learning contributes to a well-rounded and evolving personal development. Holistic Development: The commitment to integrity extends beyond professional contexts to encompass all aspects of my life. Personal growth is a holistic endeavor that integrates professional development with the cultivation of ethical values in personal relationships, community engagement, and other facets of life. Recognizing that personal and professional growth are interconnected, I strive to balance ethical values and professional success. This balance ensures that my commitment to integrity permeates through all areas of life, fostering a harmonious and integrated approach to personal development.
Because of its unrelenting emphasis on safeguarding inherent rights, I have selected the deontological method to ethically analyze the national security vs individual privacy conundrum. The ethical framework in question regards the right to privacy as inviolable, as it is a fundamental concept that ought to be respected irrespective of any potential benefits to national security. I have taken the deontological position that violating someone’s right to privacy is intrinsically bad. Even in the face of strong arguments pertaining to national security needs, it prioritizes the essential essence of some rights, viewing them as unalienable and untouchable.
This decision is justified by the conviction that certain moral precepts, including the right to privacy, form the cornerstone of a just and equal society. In this situation, the deontological approach offers a moral compass that directs choices by acknowledging that some rights are fundamental and shouldn’t be given up for selfish interests. In reaching this decision, the deontological method might only sometimes align with a consequentialist viewpoint that considers an action’s ultimate effects. However, upholding inherent rights preserves our moral beliefs’ integrity and strengthens society’s ethics, so I am committed to the deontological framework.
Anticipated Objection: Balancing Reputation and Disclosure
Rejecting the plan will make it evident to industry stakeholders that protecting privacy is a top concern. The significance of protecting sensitive data is emphasized by this ruling, which also supports the notion that privacy shouldn’t be violated when pursuing goals related to national security. It fosters a shared commitment to prioritizing privacy in creating and applying technology. Technology businesses have a significant influence on how the digital world is shaped. The proposal’s rejection encourages These businesses to provide strong privacy safeguards for their goods and services. This might result in creating encryption technologies that put user privacy first, guaranteeing that platforms and communication tools are created with a strong emphasis on safeguarding sensitive data.
As a result of the proposal’s rejection, cybersecurity experts could implement procedures that improve the overall cybersecurity posture. This might entail implementing more sophisticated encryption procedures, carrying out in-depth security evaluations, and monitoring for new risks. A proactive approach to cybersecurity is encouraged by the emphasis on privacy, which promotes innovation and constant development. The backdoor proposal’s denial may persuade legislators to prioritize privacy protection in upcoming laws and regulations. This may result in legislation that upholds private rights, controls data processing procedures, and penalizes privacy infractions. Legislators could be more likely to back programs that strengthen privacy protections and encourage ethical data handling.
The proposal’s rejection may impact industry practices, which may accelerate the creation of safer technology. Technology corporations may allocate resources toward research and development to build encryption solutions resistant to attacks. Systems and solutions that offer enhanced protection for user data and communications are developed by concentrating on security innovation. The proposal’s rejection could encourage industry parties to work together to create and uphold privacy standards. To create best practices for privacy protection, IT firms, cybersecurity experts, and legislators might collaborate. This cooperative endeavor could enhance the degree of privacy assurance across several industries by establishing industry-wide standards.
The larger influence on business procedures encompasses promoting a societal movement favoring privacy awareness. The concept that privacy is a basic right that has to be respected at all stages of the digital ecosystem is strengthened by rejecting the plan. This culture change can impact industry conventions, staff conduct, and organizational values, resulting in a setting that appreciates and respects user privacy.
Conclusion
Three well-known ethical theories—deontology, consequentialism, and virtue ethics—have been examined in depth to understand the ethical aspects of the national security vs individual privacy dilemma. Every idea presents a different angle on tackling the current moral conundrum. The deontological approach has been selected because of its steadfast dedication to upholding the right to privacy, emphasizing the fundamental essence of rights and principles. This approach views violating someone’s privacy as intrinsically bad, regardless of the possible advantages to national security. This decision is based on the conviction that some rights are essential and must be unaffected to preserve society’s moral foundation.
However, it is important to understand that ethical decisions are complicated and multidimensional. Although the deontological method offers a definite and moral position, ethical analysis frequently considers several points of view. Two important perspectives that add depth to the ethical discourse are consequentialism, which assesses acts according to results, and virtue ethics, which emphasizes the moral agent’s character. Making moral decisions is not a one-size-fits-all process. Instead, it entails carefully weighing the values, ramifications, and principles within the specific circumstances of every individual case. The selected deontological approach emphasizes how crucial it is to defend basic rights and recognizes the need to stick to your principles when faced with ethical dilemmas. This investigation emphasizes the complexity of ethical thinking and shows how several ethical theories may work to provide a thorough grasp of challenging moral dilemmas. The capacity to incorporate information from several viewpoints, promoting a comprehensive strategy that considers the rights of persons, the effects of decisions, and the moral principles that direct moral actors, makes ethical decision-making so rich.
Work Cited
Cabanayan, Jawel. “Deontological Ethics Case Study.” (2020).
Ghelani, Diptiben. “Cyber security, cyber threats, implications and future perspectives: A Review.” Authorea Preprints (2022).
Johnson, Emma, Eloy Parrilla, and Austin Burg. “Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in Society.” American Journal of Undergraduate Research 19.4 (2023).
Kantar, Nesibe, and Terrell Ward Bynum. “Global ethics for the digital age–flourishing ethics.” Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 19.3 (2021): 329-344.
Nguyen, Thanh Thi, and Vijay Janapa Reddi. “Deep reinforcement learning for cyber security.” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems (2021).
write