Computer Security Measures and the Impact of Licensing to Sharing of Information - Example

Student Name: Tutor: Title: Accounting Information Systems Course: Executive Summary This report analyzes different views concerning computer security measures and the impact of licensing to sharing of information. Licensing has been deemed as antisocial and this report explores the impact licensing while reviewing the advantage of ethical teaching. Removal of computer security controls may not completely eliminate fraud and other threats. The introduction sets the pace for the report findings. The discussion covers software licensing and whether it is antisocial to license. It further covers ethical teaching and its impact on security challenges and the eventuality of removing computer security systems on fraud. Free software requires backing from government to encourage developers. The report echoes import points in the conclusion and provide suggestions for the ways forward in the recommendation. Table of Contents Table of Contents 3 Introduction 4 Discussion 4 Is software licensing antisocial? 4 Conclusion 8 Recommendations 8 References 10 Introduction Software license refers to a legal instrument that governs the redistribution or use of software. Licensing grants rights and imposes restrictions on the software use. The issue of free software has raised heated debates without a concrete conclusion. Software licensing gives the owner the rights to his investment and prohibits free sharing or adaptation to the program (Singer & Friedman, 2014).Whereas the practice promotes entrepreneurship and payment for the effort of new product development, it hinders sharing which is regarded as antisocial. However, the owners of the program have to enjoy the benefits of their research and development in coming up with the software. This report presents the arguments against and for software licensing and the impact of ethical teaching or removal of computer security measures. Discussion Is software licensing antisocial? Software licensing is deemed to be antisocial. To some extent software licensing is antisocial since it prevents quick sharing of information. Richard Stallman sentiments are true to a certain degree. Enhanced computer security is a source of new challenges that include sluggish response time, user antagonism, as well as performance that is hampered. With this point in focus, software licensing is antisocial and hindering integration hence, it is retrogressive. The best way to encourage news ideas is to make software and information available to all people. It is argued that the most creative ideas are invented when individuals are free to apply all available resources. Any restrictions on modification and distribution of software do not enhance its use. They can only be attributed to interference (Lee, 2015). Obstruction on the use of a software leads to fewer people using the program. Besides, none of the users can fix or adapt the software program. Consequently to some extend computer security systems hinder sharing of information with neighbors hence it is antisocial. Nevertheless, where businesses cannot protect their investment through licensing the software to other users, it will not be possible for them to get payment for their investment efforts in the development of computer software. Economic systems that do not have such incentives also kill the morale of new product development. On the other hand, if a restriction to the distribution of a program that has been developed is harmful to the welfare of the society, then a software developer with ethical considerations will reject the option. There will be no development of new software (Singer & Friedman, 2014). Each degree of material harm has a concomitant type of psychosocial harm. This refers the impact of decisions of people have on their subsequent feelings, predispositions, and attitudes. The changes in the way of thinking of people will further impact on their relationships with other fellow citizens, and possess material consequences. The levels of material harm affect part of the value that the software can contribute, but will not be reduced to zero. If the value of the program has to be wasted to zero, then writing the program harms society by at most the investment that went into writing the software (Rid, 2012). The advantage of giving a neighbor a copy of a software program is automatically cancelled by the harm that is experienced by the owner. Whereas software licensing is antisocial, it is necessary for business development and protection of the user effort in investing in the technology. Free software is possible where the government can fund the developers. Impact of ethical teaching on computer security problems Majority of systems consultants and security experts see ethical teaching as a vital solution to most security problems. Nevertheless, there is no single approach that is the only solution to the challenge of computer abuse and fraud. To some extent ethical teaching can reduce computer security problems to users who are still young but cannot eliminate completely the incidents of fraud. Moral values and good behaviour can deter deviant behavior that consist of fraud but cannot eliminate the problem completely. There are people are despite being taught moral values and ethical standards still defy and decide to engage in crime or other fraudulent activities (Singer & Friedman, 2014). One cannot be so sure that ethical teaching is the solution to computer security challenges. People engage in fraud despite knowing beforehand that it is wrong. The use of ethical teaching requires a total revolution in the behaviour of people to ensure responsible behavior and respect for property. Employees represent the greatest control weakness and greatest control strength. Employees that skilled and honest are most fraud deterrent. However, in incidences of fraud, it most often than not involves an employee that has been trusted by the company. About 90% of all computer frauds are inside jobs done or aided by employees of a company (Andrues, 2010). There is no guarantee that someone who has been faithful and trustworthy will not turn around be a villain. Teaching ethical behavior can reduce incidences of fraud but cannot eliminate them. It is important to have an organizational culture that focuses on commitment and integrity to both ethical to both ethical competence and values (Lewis, 2011). The management style use by the organization should minimize risks that encourage the likelihood of fraud. It is important to train employees on ethical behavior that can be reinforced by the organizational culture. Workers have to be conversant with fraud awareness, ethical considerations, security measures, and the eventual punishment for any unethical behavior. These measures can be taken to discourage fraud and the organization applies ethical teaching. Impact of the removal of computer security measures on computer fraud Whereas there is no system of security that is impenetrable, system security measures can to a great extend reduce the chances of damages from both unintentional and intentional threats by employees. However, controls can make the cost more that the intended benefit to the perpetrator. Removing computer security measures cannot eliminate completely incidences of fraud in the society although it can encourage responsible behavior (Lee, 2015). There are bad people in the society who are bent on doing wrong or committing a crime whether there are rules or not. Removal of computer security measures can only work in a society that is free of crime and people respect each other’s right. Achieving that level of commitment in the society is rare. As Stallman put it, eliminating computer security may reduce the temptation of hacking but may not eliminate this desire in some employees or other malicious individuals (Andrues, 2010). Teaching responsible behavior will encourage students to respect boundaries and to live within their designated areas without being tempted to discover protected regions. Removal of computer security systems can open a window for fraudsters to engage in more crime without inhibition since their no checks. It is a gamble to remove computer security system hoping that it will reduce incidences of fraud. The security systems have to be removed in a monitored way in order to avoid ambush from unscrupulous people who will want to take advantage of unprotected system. Where the users are responsible and uphold moral values, removal of computer security systems will enhance sharing of information without putting information database at risk. There adventurous people in any society who would want to access information that is not useful to them. Computer security systems avoid damages to information that can be caused with such threats (Chwan-Hwa & Irwin, 2013). Removal of security systems from computers is not a sure way of ending fraud. Confidential information can be accessed by all and sundry if security systems are completely removed. Sabotaging and use of viruses can be escalated following the removal of security controls. Conclusion The issue of computer security system and protection of software through licensing is crucial to the entrepreneurship spirit and sharing of information. Whereas security of software is important, sharing of information by removal of barriers encourage responsible behavior as long as ethical teaching is carried out. Despite this, removal of computer security measures is not a sure way of eliminating incidences of fraud. Every community has people who will want to engage in crime despite deterrent measures put in place moral teaching and principles. Program developers can be supported through funding in order to develop free software. Confidentiality of information is at risk with removal of security systems of computers. There should be a balance between protecting and sharing of information. Recommendations Employers have to implement human resource policies for compensating, hiring, counseling, evaluating, discharging and promoting employees that send strong messages on the required degree ethical integrity and behavior. A company must have an effective firing and hiring practices. The workers have to be thoroughly investigated before hiring to check their backgrounds and use written test to assess their integrity. Employees who have been fired must be removed from the computer system and denied access to avoid any chances of sabotage. Some of the employees that involve themselves in fraud are often disgruntled and seeking ways of avenging their frustrations. Employees have to keen to single out these employees and recommend counseling or deny them access to jobs that can compromise the security system. Without counseling and addressing the complaints of disgruntled employees, a company runs the risk of having is computer security system compromised by the workers. Organizations have to find a balance between the need for protection and operational and cost considerations for using this protection. Protection of a system should not hamper information sharing in the organization. References Andrues, WR. 2010, What U.S. Cyber Command Must Do, Joint Forces Quarterly 4 (59): 115-20. Chwan-Hwa, W. & Irwin J.D., 2013, Introduction to Computer Networks and Cyber-security, CRC Press, Boca Raton. Lee, N., 2015, Counterterrorism and Cyber-security: Total Information Awareness, Springer International Publishing, Switzerland. Lewis, J., 2011, Confidence-building and international agreement in cyber-security, Disarmament Forum, 4: 56. Rid, T. 2012, Cyber War Will Not Take Place, The Journal of Strategic Studies 35 (1): 16-7 Singer, P.W., & Friedman, A., 2014, Cyber-security and Cyber-war: What Everyone Needs to Know, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Read More