Information being stored by businesses should be obtained lawfully and fairly, used for stated purpose and relevant to the intended use. It should also be up to date and kept no longer than dated time. Example: As per the Data Protection Act 1998, Faceable still couldn’t control hackers from getting into people’s accounts and stealing their details and sometimes even their photos. Obviously this shows Faceable broke the Data Protection Act 1998 law as they didn’t keep peoples personal information safe.
Although hackers are difficult to control it still stands to question whether or not Faceable did all the security tests they could before starting up. Http:// www. Dilemma. Co. UK/news/article-2927847/Faceable-lemongrass-worldwide- hack-HTML The Computer Misuse Act 1990 The Computer Misuse Act 1990 was a law set up in the UK to stops certain activities from happening on a computer, such as hacking, misuse of software or helping another to gain access to protected files and accounts.
Examples Of Computer Misuse Act 1 990 Faceable broke this when they found they had had some of their users accounts hacked by clicking on a link on the Internet. To this the hackers also told other people about it on a hacking website where it was found that 1. 32 million accounts were at risk of being hacked without the need of a password or e-mail. Again in one sense this is not exactly Passbook’s fault. More Examples: R v Pivot Simenon and Patria Surgical Manchester Crown Court 18 December 2013 Computer Misuse Act 1990.
Blackmail Backpackers threatened a MEME online casino with Dos denial of service attacks. The Register The Inquirer Guilty plea. Both sentenced to five years and four months in prison. R v Stephen Barrel Northampton Magistrates Court 28 November 2013 Computer Misuse Act 1 990, s 2 Unauthorized access with intent, s 3 : unauthorized modification Barrel unlawfully accessed the accounts of 3,872 players of online game Reinsurance with intent to steal gaming resources and actually modified 105 player accounts Daily Mail Guilty plea.
Sentenced on 28 November 2013 to 12 month community order with supervision and 150 hours of unpaid work, Costs of El 00 and surcharge of EYE R v Lewis Stephen Martin Mudstone crown court 16 May 2013 T20130081 Computer Misuse Act 1 990, s 1 : Unauthorized access, s 3 : Unauthorized modification; s AAA : Making, supplying or Obtaining articles for use in offence under section 1 or 3 Nullifier hastiest Lewis Martin aka SSI ink launched Denial of Service (DOS) attacks on the websites of Kent Police (site temporarily unavailable to the public) and universities of Oxford and
Cambridge; both universities estimated that around two man weeks were spent dealing with the attacks. BBC News centerline Guilty plea to five counts of Unauthorized modification, two counts of Unauthorized access and two counts of Making, supplying or obtaining articles. Sentenced to two years imprisonment. R v Martin Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) 31 SST July 201 3 Appeal on sentencing. Planning of the attacks was sophisticated and they Were intended to cause harm and did so. The Offences found to be of the highest level of culpability. Custodial sentences measured in years rather than months should now be expected.
Sentence of two years’ imprisonment was “amply justified”. Judgment Appeal Dismissed  EACH Crime 1420 Source: http://www. Computerizing. Co. UK/Cases/CAM. HTML The Freedom of Information Act 2000 The Freedom of Information Act 2000 was put into pace in 2005 to provide people the right to request information held by the public authority. The public authority’s should then tell the applicant whether or not they hold any information and hand it over within 20 days in the requested format. Example: On the 1 lath October 2012 a Faceable group was started to try and free Barry
Thee. Barry Thee is the man who, after hearing of two police officers being killed in an accident, decided to write on his T-Shirt “one less pig perfect justice”. After he was arrested and sentenced a Faceable group started to try and free him. Although there is the Freedom of Information Act 2000 there are still limits at to what should be said and what shouldn’t be said on social networking sites like Faceable. As this may not have been breaking the law it still may be seen as wrong or even immoral of the principle of social and personal ethics. Source: HTTPS://developers. Cookbook. Com/policy/ http://www. BBC. Com/news/technology-20180229 Ethical issues Involve right and wrong or what is considered good, and what is considered evil in a society. Legal and ethical issues for social networking sites are usually different from other businesses. Twitter has their own legal and ethical issues, these are: Make sure you conform with advertising regulation This means for the users to respect the principles of fair competition generally accepted in business. Not mislead by inaccuracy, uncertainty, exaggeration or otherwise. Don’t make any offensive statements
For example two people have faced claims for slander after making comments about another person on Twitter. Don’t invade anyone’s intellectual property It is not allowed to ;et anything which might be protected by copyright or any other intellectual property right. This includes all sorts Of material, including photos and articles. Http://www. A hermeneutics RSI. Co articles/twitter/top- 10- legal – issues-to-consider-when-using-twitter Operational issues An issue to do with a process or how something is done. It can also be a statement that describes how to measure a certain variable or how to define certain term.