This 3 page argumentative paper considers a position where a company suffers a denial of service attack (DDOS) and considers if there is any potential culpability if a third party was used as a zombie to carry put the attack. The paper argues the case concerning tort law and the ethical considerations. The bibliography cites 2 sources.
Name of Research Paper File: TS14_TEDDOS3P.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
that have been infected to send, at a specific date and time, a large number of useless packets in order to totally tie up the victims network and deny them
access to the internet services. If we consider the poison where the attacker uses a third party, such as a company, to carry out the attack there are a
range of issues that need to be considered in terms of who may be held culpable. Not all cases that are brought for wrong doing are brought about as the
result of a breach of contractual obligations. If the victim can identify the source of the attacks come in from the third party then it is possible they could argue
a case under tort law. If tort law could be applied then there is the need for a breach of duty to be shown to have taken care (Elliott
and Quinn, 2003). This requires the duty to exist in the first. For this to exist there will need to be proximity. In most cases this means a direct link,
such as a school owing a duty of care for its pupils. In this a direct link is needed, then there is unlikely to be any argument for the case
not to go ahead. However it is not always with a relationship, the proximity may be more random, but still exist. For example, a driver does not know the pedestrians
when they take a car on the road, but they still owe them a duty of care (Elliott and Quinn, 2003). The argument is that it is easy to see
the damage that they could do to the pedestrians if they lost control of the car. Using this as a parallel situation we can argue that as an internet