Hacking into HarvardCASE 2.1 Hacking into HarvardEveryone wh o has ever applied for admission to a selective college or who has been interviewed for ahighly desired job knows the feeling of waiting impatiently to learn the result of one?s application. Soit?s not hard to identify with those applicants to some of the nation?s most prestigious MBA programswho thought they had a chance to get an early glimpse at whether their ambition was to be fulfilled.While visiting a Businessweek Online message board, they found instructions, posted by an anonymoushacker, explaining how to find out what admission decision the business schools had made in their case.Doing so wasn?t hard. The universities in question? Harvard, Dartmouth, Duke, Carnegie Mellon, MIT, andStanford? used the same application software from Apply Yourself, Inc. Essentially, all one had to dowas change the very end of the applicant-specific URL to get to the supposedly restricted pagecontain-ing the verdict on one?s application. In the nine hours it took Apply Yourself programmers topatch the security flaw after it was posted, curiosity got the better of about two hundred applicants,who couldn?t resist the temptation to discover whether they had been admitted. 19 Some of them gotonly blank screens. But others learned that they had been tentatively accepted or tentatively rejected.What they didn?t count on, however, were two things: first, that it wouldn?t take the business schoolslong to learn what had happened and who had done it and, second, that the schools in question weregoing to be very unhappy about it. Harvard was perhaps the most outspoken. Kim B. Clark, dean of thebusiness school, said, ? This behavior is unethical at best? a serious breach of trust that cannot becountered by rationalization.? In a similar vein, Steve Nelson, the executive director of Harvard?s MBAprogram, stated, ? Hacking into a system in this manner is unethical and also contrary to the behaviorwe expect of leaders we aspire to develop.? It didn?t take Harvard long to make up its mind what to doabout it. It rejected all 119 applicants who had attempted to access the information. In an officialstatement, Dean Clark wrote that the mission of the Harvard Business School ? is to educate principledleaders who make a difference in the world. To achieve that, a person must have many skills andqualities, including the highest standards of integrity, sound judgment and a strong moral compass? anintuitive sense of what is right and wrong. Those who have hacked into this web site have failed to passthat test.? Carnegie Mellon and MIT quickly followed suit. By rejecting the ethically chal-lenged, saidRichard L. Schmalensee, dean of MIT?s Sloan School of Management, the schools are trying to ? send amessage to society as a whole that we are attempting to produce people that when they go out intothe world, they will behave ethically.? Duke and Dartmouth, where only a handful of students gainedaccess to their files, said they would take a case- by-case approach and didn?t publicly announce theirindividual-ized determinations. But, given the competition for places in their MBA programs, it?s a safebet that few, if any, offending applicants were sitting in classrooms the following semester. Forty- twoapplicants attempted to learn their results early at Stanford, which took a different tack. It invited theaccused hackers to explain themselves in writing. ? In the best case, what has been demonstrated here isa lack of judgment; in the worst case, a lack of integrity,? said Derrick Bolton, Stanford?s director ofMBA admissions. ? One of the things we try to teach at business schools is making good decisions andtaking responsibility for your actions.? Six weeks later, however, the dean of Stanford Business School,Robert Joss, reported, ? None of those who gained unauthorized access was able to explain his or heractions to our satisfaction.? He added that he hoped the applicants ? might learn from theirexperience.? Given the public?s concern over the wave of corporate scandals in recent years and itsgrowing interest in corporate social responsibility, business writers and other media com-mentatorswarmly welcomed Harvard?s decisive response. But soon there was some sniping at the decision bythose claiming that Harvard and the other business schools had overreacted. Although 70 percent ofHarvard?s MBA students approved the decision, the undergraduate student newspa-per, The Crimson,was skeptical. ? HBS [ Harvard Business School] has scored a media victory with its hard- line stance,? itsaid in an editorial. ? Americans have been looking for a sign from the business community, particularlyits leading educa-tional institutions, that business ethics are a priority. HBS?s false bravado has giventhem one, leaving 119 victims in angry hands.? As some critics pointed out, Harvard?s stance overlookedthe possibility that the hacker might have been a spouse or a parent who had access to the applicant?spassword and per-sonal identification number. In fact, one applicant said that this had happened to him.His wife found the instructions at Businessweek Online and tried to check on the success of hisapplication. ? I?m really distraught over this,? he said. ? My wife is tearing her hair out.? To this,Harvard?s Dean Clark responds, ? We expect applicants to be personally responsible for the access tothe website, and for the identification and passwords they receive.? Critics also reject the idea that theoffending applicants were ? hackers.? After all, they used their own personal identi-fication andpasswords to log on legitimately; all they did was to modify the URL to go to a different page. Theycouldn?t change anything in their files or view anyone else?s informa-tion. In fact, some critics blamedthe business schools and Apply Yourself more than they did the applicants. If those pages weresupposed to be restricted, then it shouldn?t have been so easy to find one?s way to them. In aninterview, one of the Harvard applicants said that although he now sees that what he did was wrong, hewasn?t thinking about that at the time? he just followed the hacker?s posted instructions out ofcuriosity. He didn?t consider what he did to be ? hacking,? because any novice could have done the samething. ? I?m not an IT person by any stretch of the imagination,? he said. ? I?m not even a great typist.?He wrote the university a letter of apology. ? I admitted that I got curious and had a lapse in judgment,?he said. ? I pointed out that I wasn?t trying to harm anyone and wasn?t trying to get an advantage overanyone.? Another applicant said that he knew he had made a poor judgment but he was offended byhaving his ethics called into question. ? I had no idea that they would have considered this a big deal.?And some of those posting messages at Businessweek Online and other MBA- related sites believe theoffending applicants should be applauded. ? Exploiting weaknesses is what good business is all about.Why would they ding you?? wrote one anonymous poster. Dean Schmalensee of MIT, however, defendsHarvard and MIT?s automatically rejecting everyone who peeked ? because it wasn?t an impulsivemistake.? ? The instructions are reason-ably elaborate,? he said. ? You didn?t need a degree in compu-terscience, but this clearly involved effort. You couldn?t do this casually without knowing that you weredoing something wrong. We?ve always taken ethics seriously, and this is a seri-ous matter.? To thoseapplicants who say that they didn?t do any harm, Schmalensee replies, ? Is there nothing wrong withgoing through files just because you can?? To him and others, seeking unauthorized access to restrictedpages is as wrong as snooping through your boss?s desk to see whether you?ve been recommended for araise. Some commentators, however, suggest there may be a generation gap here. Students who grewup with the Internet, they say, tend to see it as wide- open territory and don?t view this level of websnooping as indicating a character flaw.Discussion Questions1. Suppose that you had been one of the MBA applicants who stumbled across an opportunity to learnyour results early. What would you have done, and why? Would you have considered it a moral decision?If so, on what basis would you have made it?2. Assess the morality of what the curious applicants did from the point of view of egoism, utilitarianism,Kant?s ethics, Ross?s pluralism, and rule utilitarianism.3. In your view, was it wrong for the MBA applicants to take an unauthorized peek at their applicationfiles? Explain why you consider what they did morally permissible or imper-missible. What obligations,ideals, and effects should the applicants have considered? Do you think, as some have suggested, thatthere is a generation gap on this issue?4. Did Harvard and MIT overreact, or was it necessary for them to respond as they did in order to send astrong message about the importance of ethics? If you were a business- school admissions official, howwould you have handled this situation?5. Assess the argument that the applicants who snooped were just engaging in the type of bold andaggressive behavior that makes for business success. In your view, are these applicants likely to makegood business lead-ers? What about the argument that it?s really the fault of the universities for nothaving more secure procedures, not the fault of the applicants who took advantage of that fact?6. One of the applicants admits that he used poor judg-ment but believes that his ethics should not beques-tioned. What do you think he means? If he exercised poor judgment on a question of right andwrong, isn?t that a matter of his ethics? Stanford?s Derrick Bolton distinguishes between a lapse ofjudgment and a lack of integrity. What do you see as the difference? Based on this episode, what, ifanything, can we say about the ethics and the character of the curious applicants?Order for a custom written PAPER now and one of our online writers will write your assignment from scratch within your deadline! Category: Essay Writing
Unlike most other websites we deliver what we promise;
- Our Support Staff are online 24/7
- Our Writers are available 24/7
- Most Urgent order is delivered with 6 Hrs
- 100% Original Assignment Plagiarism report can be sent to you upon request.
GET 15 % DISCOUNT TODAY use the discount code PAPER15 at the order form.