@article{YaghmaeivandePoelChristenetal., author = {Yaghmaei, Emad and van de Poel, Ibo and Christen, Markus and Gordijn, Bert and Kleine, Nadine and Loi, Michele and Morgan, Gwenyth and Weber, Karsten}, title = {Canvas White Paper 1 Cybersecurity and Ethics}, series = {SSRN Electronic Journal}, volume = {18}, journal = {SSRN Electronic Journal}, number = {4}, publisher = {SSRN}, doi = {10.2139/ssrn.3091909}, pages = {1431}, abstract = {This White Paper outlines how the ethical discourse on cybersecurity has developed in the scientific literature, which ethical issues gained interest, which value conflicts are discussed, and where the "blind spots" in the current ethical discourse on cybersecurity are located. The White Paper is based on an extensive literature with a focus on three reference domains with unique types of value conflicts: health, business/finance and national security. For each domain, a systematic literature search has been performed and the identified papers have been analysed using qualitative and quantitative methods. An important observation is that the ethics of cybersecurity not an established subject. In all domains, cybersecurity is recognized as being an instrumental value, not an end in itself, which opens up the possibility of trade-offs with different values in different spheres. The most prominent common theme is the existence of trade-offs and even conflicts between reasonable goals, for example between usability and security, accessibility and security, privacy and convenience. Other prominent common themes are the importance of cybersecurity to sustain trust (in institutions), and the harmful effect of any loss of control over data.}, language = {en} } @article{LoiChristenKleineetal., author = {Loi, Michele and Christen, Markus and Kleine, Nadine and Weber, Karsten}, title = {Cybersecurity in health}, series = {Journal of Information, Communication \& Ethics in Society}, volume = {17}, journal = {Journal of Information, Communication \& Ethics in Society}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1108/JICES-12-2018-0095}, pages = {229 -- 245}, abstract = {Purpose Cybersecurity in healthcare has become an urgent matter in recent years due to various malicious attacks on hospitals and other parts of the healthcare infrastructure. The purpose of this paper is to provide an outline of how core values of the health systems, such as the principles of biomedical ethics, are in a supportive or conflicting relation to cybersecurity. Design/methodology/approach This paper claims that it is possible to map the desiderata relevant to cybersecurity onto the four principles of medical ethics, i.e. beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy and justice, and explore value conflicts in that way. Findings With respect to the question of how these principles should be balanced, there are reasons to think that the priority of autonomy relative to beneficence and non-maleficence in contemporary medical ethics could be extended to value conflicts in health-related cybersecurity. Research limitations/implications However, the tension between autonomy and justice, which relates to the desideratum of usability of information and communication technology systems, cannot be ignored even if one assumes that respect for autonomy should take priority over other moral concerns. Originality/value In terms of value conflicts, most discussions in healthcare deal with the conflict of balancing efficiency and privacy given the sensible nature of health information. In this paper, the authors provide a broader and more detailed outline.}, language = {en} } @article{WeberLoiChristenetal., author = {Weber, Karsten and Loi, Michele and Christen, Markus and Kleine, Nadine}, title = {Digital Medicine, Cybersecurity, and Ethics}, series = {American Journal of Bioethics}, volume = {18}, journal = {American Journal of Bioethics}, number = {9}, publisher = {Taylor\&Francis}, doi = {10.1080/15265161.2018.1498935}, pages = {52 -- 53}, language = {en} }