Management and the Technology Professional – B302
Case study answer 1
I believe the most compelling reason why i would not have developed the rootkit software is based on the principles of personal and professional ethics. The main concern with this software is that of openness and full disclosure, whereby the user is not given sufficient warning of the functions of the DRM or even its effects. The end user is given little or no indication to the nature of the software, or even a chance to authorise the installation of the software (early releases).
The amateur design of the software means to uninstall the rootkit is painfully obscure (or is this done on purpose?) and potentially harmful! There are many cases of user’s attempting to delete the software resulting in their systems being crippled or even need replacing. Surely these issues fall under the Computer Misuse Act of 1990 in one way or another. For example Section 1.(1).(a) states “a person is guilty of an offence if he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure access to any program or data held in any computer”.
The files required to protect the music are cloaked in a way that they are not immediately visible to the user and directly alters the root of the operating system to operate and thus results in corrupting the system if manually deleted or altered! Surely this is in conflict with section 3.(2).which indicates a person is guilty if the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing-(a) to impair the operation of any computer;
(b) to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer; or
(c) to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.
The way in which the DRM cloaks its core files, gives malicious user’s a base platform in which to cloak their virus’s/Trojans etc, with the intent of harming the user’s system.
If a user wishes to remove the protection from the system (legitimately), then they are required to fill out an online form, giving their email at the very least to the company to download further software to remove it (which actually only makes the files visible for manual deletion!) which raises further privacy issues.
The further inclusion of an EULA for music files in itself is ludicrous, and the consequences of this software leading to a security threat and system stability issues would as a developer, question the fidelity to professional responsibilities and common sense would ensue that this is copy right protection gone too far!
These unlawful actions do not warrant the behaviour of this rootkit in a blind attempt to protect profit margins and as the Bush Administration eventually told Sony BMG, "It's your intellectual property, not your computer".
