Overview and Analysis of the PAPA Model

Overview and Analysis of the PAPA ModelPAPA Model Today, the wide use of computer science education technology in the calling world and separate intuitions has brought m some(prenominal) estimable issues and concern. Mason introduced four approximately crucial ethical issues of the education era on 1986 which argon silence, accuracy, home and overtureibility abbreviated to PAPA. Masons PAPA model focussed on the individual impairment which could a surface from the unethical or corrupt of schooling and data technology. Based on the Framework developed by Mason we move analyse and reach the conclusion on ethical issues emerged by the unethical use of data technology. PAPA model enlightens tuition k outrightledge on what the Privacy, accuracy, property and accuracy marrow, how they are interrelated, what are their differences and how they service us to reach the conclusion on ethical issues.Privacy In general understanding, l unmatchableliness way of life the right to be free from obscure scrutiny and to determine whether, when, how and to whom, ones individualised or organisational information is to be revealed. The privacy behave 1988 regulates how personal information is handled. The Privacy Act defines personal information asinformation or an opinion, whether true or not, and whether recorded in a material form or not, slightly an identified individual, or an individual who us reasonably identifiable. There are two main factors which threaten our privacy today, firstly growth of information technology with its capacity of scrutiny, communication, computing, retrieval and storage, and secondly the increased nurse of information in decision making.Accuracy It is the condition or quality of universe true, correct or exact free from error or defect. Inaccuracy may cause detracting situation on persons life, organisations and business values. here a burn downs some question who should be responsible for accuracy and authenticity of se lf-collected information? How can one believe that the data will be correctly inputted, processed properly and presented to users? On what basis should we believe bugs in database or system and processing are not done with end and occurred accidently. Who blasts the responsibility for glitch in information and how the victim will be reimbursed.Property Property issues are concentrated on ingestership and value of information. It also seeks the firmness of few questions like, who is the owner of the information. What is the value of the exchange, and in which agency the access to information or the recourses should be allocated? Here property means the intellectual property and its right. Once the intellectual property is provided somewhere or transmitted, it is complicated to keep the person as it becomes communicable and more demanding to be reimbursed.Accessibility its issues are concerned on who has the permission to access the information, who holds the rights or keys to a ccess it, what data an individual or organisations are permit to acquire with which safeguards and under what terms and conditions?After going through the scenario provided and from my own research I con nerver, all four areas have given rise to ethical issues for Joseph where some have higher level of the issue whereas other has a low level effect. Most importantly it gives rise to privacy issues followed by others.Privacy issues Josephs personal or we can severalize the very confidential information was compromised which could lead to very disastrous consequences, indistinguishability theft makes life miserable. If Joseph had given attention on lectures warning to them to be headacheful and vigilant while providing personal information to companies over the internet, he dexterity be on safe side but rather he supposition him old-fashioned and never thought some issues may arise while providing information to a confederacy like Sony. How can one decide on whom to trust? How ofttimes information can one give to others?Accuracy Issues Being the customer of Sony Joseph had right to get accurate and timely information, to whom he had provided his personal information to credit card details with trust. Accurate information of personal information and credit card details being hacked was provided only after a whole week of the incident following by other misdirect and fake information. Though, the hackers couldnt do any misuse of data they might have destroyed everything in a week time customers could take precaution toProperty Issues When Joseph could not restore the backup file it gives rise to property issues. He bought games from Sony he collected trophies but did he legitimately own that? Did Sony own the data that customers provided?Sonys data breach is one of the biggest data breach to date which has given rise to various concerns in the Sonys privacy policy and security measures. Though, other issues also pronounced a question to Sonys management especially it has fueled to Privacy concern. When an organisation gathers personal information of its customers, employees and other stakeholders they mustiness assure the natural rubber and security of those. Breach of personal information can be turn up very dangerous and it has been proved in many cases, for example, Jessicas explanation of the mail scam. The main issue and the question arise to Sony is where they really serious-minded on Privacy issues, had they meet all the privacy measures and followed the protocol. If they had done so how someone could hack and enter into their system. Breach of over 77million accounts including all the personal details and credit card of the customer was not a smallish issue. This issue gave a big question mark to Sony. The management took a whole week to inform its customer of the actual reason for ending of its network, which is questionable. If a breach does occur, effective handling of the response is a key. This means planning a nd preparing for such an event in advance. A policy should be drawn up, under which it is suggested that prompt notification is make to both the customers and the regulators. all in all staff should have data protection training sequester to their role, and appropriate compensation, support and remedial plans should be prepared. Though it was Sony violated the privacy of its customer Appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data and against accidental loss or demise of, or damage to, personal data.I find some statements make by Privacy commissioner Timothy Pilgrim questionable. He stated that Sony did have a case to answer as they did not intentionally disclose any confidential information is not surprising, simply put Australia has no real commercial Privacy or security legislation for Sony to breach. The fact that Sony did not show a duty of care and/or displayed a cut lack regard for the personal information entrusted to them by their clients is completely unheeded by the commissioner. Sonys duty of care is to nourish appropriate IT security systems, policies and procedures to maintain client data confidential, private and available whether at rest, in go through or in a process. It is obvious that they did not take these duties of care obligations seriously until that proverbial substance hit the fan. Statement by Pilgrim Sony has now extra security measures to strengthen protection around the network platforms highlights its diachronic disregard for client confidentiality in their corporate culture and I do not think that any Australian Government officials should comment and decide to forgive such obvious laissez-faire behaviour. Can he answer us, what reasonable steps Sony took to protect individuals credentials? Now, they actually created a CSO role. They didnt have this before? What fines were handed down for this breach? How can he show that legislation protect s individuals information to abroad organisations? I opened this investigation because I was concerned that Australians personal information may have been compromised,Pilgrim said. However, his concerns were unfounded, with Pilgrim finding that the company hadnt breached the Act. Seriously, just why does Sony potbelly require our full date of birth? Year only should be adequate to verify a customer is over 18 test further only if the year reveals someone turning 18 that year. As such, Sony should be 100% liable for any loss plus return for emotional distress to any customer, their spouse and immediate family, in regard of any customer who has their identity was stolen and fraud committed. And also it has to be made clear that whether it identified a culprit in the intrusion. Guilty must be punished.