If there is one thing in this world that should truly matter to you, it is the lock on your front door. Depending on the type or brand of lock, defines how long an individual can take to break it down. A nice heavy duty Schlage with a steel strike plate, going to take them a minute if they do not give up first! Just a side note of entry issues, your lock is only as strong as your hinges. So, what have we learned here? Strong lock, weak hinges, no good. Similarly, our passwords are the locks to our online lives.

Our passwords can legitimately make us or break us. Your passwords guard your personal information, from emails to financial details. If someone gains access, they could misuse or steal your data. Strong passwords make it harder for cybercriminals to impersonate you. They cannot easily access your accounts and pretend to be you. Banking and shopping online are convenient but risky if your passwords are not strong. Protecting financial details prevents fraud and unauthorized transactions. A secure password reduces the risk of losing data. Imagine if someone accessed your cloud storage or important documents!

Justifiable hacking

These scenarios touch on ethical and legal dilemmas. In both cases, the primary objective is to save a life, yet they involve breaking the law to do so. In the case of breaking into a car to take a friend to the hospital, it is seen as an act of necessity or "justified emergency" in some legal contexts. Courts might consider the intent behind the action (saving a life) when determining culpability. However, this does not mean a person would not face legal consequences; they might still be held accountable for breaking the law, but the circumstances could influence the severity of the consequences.

Regarding hacking into a computer database for medical information (such as a HIPAA-protected system), similar ethical considerations may apply. HIPAA strictly regulates the handling of medical information to protect patient privacy. Breaking into such a system, even for noble intentions, violates these regulations and might result in legal repercussions . Not to mention, ransomware attacks are on hospitals are on the rise. Since 2016, the numbers have doubled.

Courts often weigh the intent and the context of actions when making legal judgments. Instances where hackers breach systems for altruistic reasons have been seen, and some have faced legal action despite their good intentions. For instance, ethical hackers or security researchers who uncover vulnerabilities and breaches in systems without authorization might face legal consequences even if their intention was to improve security. Courts might consider factors like the severity of the situation, the individual's intent, the potential harm caused, and whether other options were available. However, legality and morality can sometimes conflict. In some jurisdictions, there might be specific laws or provisions that could offer some protection for such actions under extreme circumstances, but this can vary widely. Good Samaritan laws for instance, cover individuals from lawsuits if they were acting with the intent of aiding someone else.

As I go through this and spew out all the jargon that makes complete sense, but I cannot for the life of me come up with a legitimate reason to ethically hack a HIPAA system to save a life. I have been in the medical field; I have been a patient and the only instance that remotely makes sense would be to hack an emergency room registration to move me or someone up in line! If I continue along that line, hacking into personal records to change medication administration, maybe hook us up with oxycodone! At the end of the day, unethical, and not saving a life.

Cyberstalking

Cyberstalking refers to the use of electronic communication to repeatedly harass, threaten, or intimidate an individual. It involves persistent and unwanted contact through various online platforms, causing fear or emotional distress (Gordon, 2023). As with any form of harassment there is a mental deterioration for those being bullied. We were tasked to locate the three states that do not have laws, but aside from that, we should really be talking about the six states that include vernacular of cyber stalking. Florida, Illinois, Louisianna, Maine, Mississippi, and Rhode Island, are the only states that include words to cover social media and online life

New York for instance, one of my least favorite places to dwell, has a stalking clause, fourth degree and is constituted with the "fear" or "harm" that may come from the act of stalking. The NYS Penal law on harassment (240.30) covers more about uses of telephones and computers, but that is the extent . The issue we bare today is that the victim has lost their voice. Our society is now basing its justice system on the thoughts and feelings of the criminal and how much money he/she has.

States like New York have learned that cashless bail and orders of protection are nothing more than a paper trail. I am not going to go deep into it, but one can google New York repeat offenders and find one after the other of people released on Recognizance, just to wind up back in front of a judge hours later for the same offense. For anyone paying attention, the NY Times is a highly "left" political newspaper. But published this article "New York's New Bail Laws Harm Public Safety" in January of 2020. So, you arrest someone, do the paperwork, release them with a misdemeanor, I mean that is what harassment is, and off they go . Right back to where you took them from. That is where the focus needs to turn in my eyes, back to the victims.

There are a couple ways to do that. Increasing Penalties and ensuring that penalties for cyberstalking are proportional to the harm caused, considering the emotional distress and fear it inflicts on victims. Punishment is not a deterrent. We look at death penalty as a deterrent for murder. But psychologically, if someone is going to kill someone, the death penalty is a gleam in their eye, they are caught up in the moment.

Implementing measures to protect victims, including restraining orders or no-contact orders that extend to online communication. Here again, Orders are paper not a protector. But, with something in place there is a fall back if and when something happens. Promoting awareness and education about cyberstalking and how individuals can protect themselves online. Moreso with our children. They are the most susceptible to online bullying and harassment. We also need to equip law enforcement with the necessary tools and training to handle cyberstalking cases effectively and not just law enforcement, JUDGES AS WELL!