Computer Fraud and Abuse TechniquesChapter 66-1.docx

Computer Fraud and Abuse Techniques
Chapter 6
6-1
Copyright © 2015 Pearson Education, Inc.

1
Types of Attacks
Hacking
Unauthorized access, modification, or use of an electronic
device or some element of a computer system
Social Engineering
Techniques or tricks on people to gain physical or logical
access to confidential information
Malware
Software used to do harm
6-2
Hacking
Hijacking
Gaining control of a computer to carry out illicit activities
Botnet (robot network)
Zombies
Bot herders

Denial of Service (DoS) Attack
Spamming
Spoofing
Makes the communication look as if someone else sent it so as
to gain confidential information.
6-3
Forms of Spoofing
E-mail spoofing
Caller ID spoofing
IP address spoofing
Address Resolution (ARP) spoofing
SMS spoofing
Web-page spoofing (phishing)
DNS spoofing
6-4

Why is there spoofing? Well its because the perpetrator of the
fraud wants you to think that they are someone else that you’d
trust. For example:
E-mail spoofing, allows you to think that the e-mail you
received is from someone you know. This type of attack is often
combined with a social engineering technique called phishing.
For example, perpetrators will send an e-mail spoofing the
senders address from your bank. Inside the e-mail they will
embed a link which they hope you will click on it and use your
login and password basically giving them access to your bank
account.
Caller ID spoofing will display the wrong number on your
phone hoping that you think it’s from a trusted source (e.g.,
Bank).
IP address spoofing is used to conceal the identity of a sender
of DoS attacks.
ARP spoofing allows for man in the middle as well as DoS
attacks. ARP spoofing can allow the perpetrator to “sniff” the
data that is coming over the Internet. Sniffing means that the
perpetrator can see the data as it is passing from the source to

the intended destination over the Internet.
SMS spoofing is falsifying the sender of a text message (it can
also be used in phishing scams).
4
Hacking with Computer Code
Cross-site scripting (XSS)
Uses vulnerability of Web application that allows the Web site
to get injected with malicious code. When a user visits the Web
site, that malicious code is able to collect data from the user.
Buffer overflow attack
Large amount of data sent to overflow the input memory
(buffer) of a program causing it to crash and replaced with
attacker’s program instructions.
SQL injection (insertion) attack
Malicious code inserted in place of a query to get to the
database information
6-5

5
Other Types of Hacking
Man in the middle (MITM)
Hacker is placed in between a client (user) and a host (server)
to read, modify, or steal data.
Piggybacking
Password cracking
War dialing and driving
Phreaking
Data diddling
Data leakage
podslurping
6-6

These types of hacking are used to gain unauthorized access
into a computer system or confidential data.
Piggybacking can be using a neighbors unsecured wifi, an
unauthorized person following an authorized person through a
door bypassing screening or the security code needed to gain
access into a secure area, and tapping into a communications
line and electronically latching onto an authorized user as they
enter the system.
Password cracking is penetrating the system to steal passwords.
War dialing is using a program to dial phone lines looking for
an unsecured dial-up modem line.
War driving is driving around looking for an unsecured wireless
network, this invites unauthorized access into your network.
Phreaking is attacking the phone system to get free service.
Data diddling is falsifying data entry (e.g., timecards for
payroll).
Data leakage is unauthorized copying of data.
Podslurping is using a flash drive to download the unauthorized
data.
6
Hacking Used for Embezzlement
Salami technique:
Taking small amounts at a time
Round-down fraud
Economic espionage
Theft of information, intellectual property and trade secrets
Cyber-extortion

Threats to a person or business online through e-mail or text
messages unless money is paid
6-7
Hacking Used for Fraud
Internet misinformation
E-mail threats
Internet auction
Internet pump and dump
Click fraud
Web cramming
Software piracy
6-8

Internet misinformation is used to spread false or misleading
information.
E-mail threats that require an action by the victim causing them
great expense.
Internet auction fraud can unfairly bid up the price, deliver
inferior products, or not deliver anything at all, or the buyer
fails to make a payment.
Internet pump and dump uses the Internet to inflate the price of
the stock and then sell it. Usually occurs with penny stocks
buying large volumes of the stock, then posts false information
to drive up the stock and sells shares to pocket profit before the
price falls back down.
Click fraud uses botnets to click on ads to get Web click-
through commissions.
Webcramming is a scam that offers a free Web site and then
continuing to charge the person for months after they don’t
want or use the Web site.
Software piracy is unauthorized copying or distribution of
copyrighted software. This can occur by:
Selling a computer preloaded with unauthorized software,
installing single license software on more than one

computer, and
loading software on a server allowing unrestricted access.
8
Social Engineering Techniques
Identity theft
Assuming someone else’s identity
Pretexting
Using a scenario to trick victims to divulge information or to
gain access
Posing
Creating a fake business to get sensitive information
Phishing
Sending an e-mail asking the victim to respond to a link that
appears legitimate that requests sensitive data
Pharming
Redirects Web site to a spoofed Web site
URL hijacking
Takes advantage of typographical errors entered in for Web
sites and user gets invalid or wrong Web site
Scavenging
Searching trash for confidential information
Shoulder surfing
Snooping (either close behind the person) or using technology
to snoop and get confidential information
Skimming
Double swiping credit card
Eeavesdropping
6-9

Why People Fall Victim
Compassion
Desire to help others
Greed
Want a good deal or something for free
Sex appeal
More cooperative with those that are flirtatious or good looking
Sloth
Lazy habits
Trust
Will cooperate if trust is gained
Urgency
Cooperation occurs when there is a sense of immediate need
Vanity
More cooperation when appeal to vanity
6-10

Minimize the Threat of Social Engineering
Never let people follow you into restricted areas
Never log in for someone else on a computer
Never give sensitive information over the phone or through e-
mail
Never share passwords or user IDs
Be cautious of someone you don’t know who is trying to gain
access through you
6-11
Types of Malware
Spyware

Secretly monitors and collects information
Can hijack browser, search requests
Adware
Keylogger
Software that records user keystrokes
Trojan Horse
Malicious computer instructions in an authorized and properly
functioning program
Trap door
Set of instructions that allow the user to bypass normal system
controls
Packet sniffer
Captures data as it travels over the Internet
Virus
A section of self-replicating code that attaches to a program or
file requiring a human to do something so it can replicate itself
Worm
Stand alone self replicating program
6-12

Cellphone Bluetooth Vulnerabilities
Bluesnarfing
Stealing contact lists, data, pictures on bluetooth compatible
smartphones
Bluebugging
Taking control of a phone to make or listen to calls, send or
read text messages
6-13
Bluesnarfing and bluebugging may take advantage of bluetooth
technology on smartphones.
13
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journal

Code=rprn20
Porn Studies
ISSN: 2326-8743 (Print) 2326-8751 (Online) Journal homepage:
https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rprn20
A sex worker perspective
Filippa Fox
To cite this article: Filippa Fox (2018) A sex worker
perspective, Porn Studies, 5:2, 197-199, DOI:
10.1080/23268743.2018.1434111
To link to this article:
https://doi.org/10.1080/23268743.2018.1434111
Published online: 05 Mar 2018.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 174
View Crossmark data
Code=rprn20
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.10
80/23268743.2018.1434111
https://doi.org/10.1080/23268743.2018.1434111
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalC
ode=rprn20&show=instructions

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1080/23268743.20
18.1434111&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2018-03-05
FORUM
A sex worker perspective
Filippa Foxa,b
aSex worker, Australia; bMelbourne School of Population and
Global Health, University of Melbourne, Australia
I write this article as a femme academic who works both in the
public health sector and in
the sex industry. Due to anti-sex work stigma in both academia
and public health, I have
chosen to author this article under a pseudonym. This act of
self-erasure speaks to the
epistemic injustice sex workers face in scholarly and policy
dialogues about our health.
My own understanding of epistemic injustice is drawn from the
work of José Medina
and Gaile Pohlhaus Jr, as well as Miranda Fricker (Fricker
2009; Medina 2011; Pohlhaus
Jr 2012). The notion of epistemic injustice marks those ways in
which we can be
harmed in our capacity as knowers when communicating with
others (Fricker 2009).
Medina amends Fricker’s original account by arguing for a
temporal understanding of
durable epistemic injustices, using the term ‘dominant social
imaginary’ to refer to the
mainstream understanding of particular aspects of the world and

the limits of that under-
standing. Durable epistemic injustices are those which occur
when groups of marginalized
persons fail to be recognized in the dominant social imaginary
for long historical periods
as subjects who can speak for themselves (Medina 2011).
Pohlhaus Jr uses the term ‘wilful
hermeneutical ignorance’ to describe how, despite epistemic
resistance and knowledge
production by marginally situated knowers, ‘dominantly
situated knowers nonetheless
continue to misunderstand and misinterpret the world’ (2012,
716).
I am wearily familiar with the longstanding ideological
coalition between the religious
right and sex worker exclusionary radical feminism in the
United States. Aziza Ahmed
(2011) has written an excellent article on the history of this
coalition and its impact on
HIV/AIDS prevention and policy around the world. The current
public health policies pro-
posed by this coalition – exemplified by the longstanding anti-
prostitution pledge pre-
venting foreign non-governmental organizations from receiving
US HIV/AIDS funding if
they do not oppose ‘prostitution’ – make life considerably
harder for those of us involved
in the sex industry. At every turn, we are made invisible from
dialogues about our own
health and well-being.
One of the most longstanding strategies of sex worker
exclusionary radical feminism
has been to insist on a causal relationship between pornography
and violence against

women, exemplified by Robin Morgan’s (1980) ‘Theory and
Practice: Pornography and
Rape’ and Andrea Dworkin’s (1980) ‘Beaver and Male Power in
Pornography’. The small
number of articles that serve as an evidence base for this myth
have been discredited
time and time again, and yet the myth itself endures as an all-
too-effective discursive strat-
egy for justifying the erasure of sex worker voices from public
discourse.
© 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
CONTACT Filippa Fox [email protected] Sex worker, Australia;
Melbourne School of Population and Global
Health, University of Melbourne, Australia
PORN STUDIES
2018, VOL. 5, NO. 2, 197–199
https://doi.org/10.1080/23268743.2018.1434111
18.1434111&domain=pdf
mailto:[email protected]l.com
http://www.tandfonline.com
We are understood as victims of violence whose knowledge is
coerced and therefore
untrustworthy. Those of us who refuse to be victims are seen
instead as threats to the
social order – illegitimate, criminal subjects unable to be
assimilated into polite society.
Our bodies are understood reductively as vectors of disease;
either literally through unsub-
stantiated claims of heightened STI rates, or figuratively as

agents of moral decay. To
engage the services of sex workers or to consume the
pornography we produce is seen
as morally reprehensible. It is assumed that we are all cisgender
women who exist in con-
trast to good wives and good mothers in monogamous,
reproductive sexual relationships.
We are seen as a threat to these relationships. Just as our bodies
are believed to be infec-
tious, we are believed to pollute the social environment,
encouraging violence and under-
mining the heteronormative family unit. We are constructed
both as helpless victims and
as powerful manipulators of the social order.
This construction of the sex worker subject did not arise with
the coalition between the
religious right and sex worker exclusionary radical feminism. It
has been with us since at
least the earliest stages of British imperialism exemplified by
the 1864 Contagious Diseases
Act in British-occupied India. In the dominant social imaginary,
we have been understood
for a long historical period as subjects unable to speak or reason
for ourselves.
It is because of this durable epistemic injustice that it does not
occur to many non-sex
workers that we have uniquely useful, nuanced, and plural
perspectives on our own health
and work. Although we actively resist, most non-sex workers
continue to dismiss the epis-
temic resources we develop. They maintain their ignorance
about our lives while simul-
taneously claiming to have expertise over them. For sex workers
who experience

compounding historical injustices, such as transfemme workers,
Indigenous and First
Nations workers, or Black workers, this ongoing exclusion from
the dominant social ima-
ginary is even more thorough and violent.
The coalition between the religious right and sex worker
exclusionary radical feminism
in the United States is effective precisely because it can
comfortably expect non-sex
workers not to have access to sex worker perspectives. Non-sex
workers who may not
share the political orientation of the religious right may
nevertheless find it easier to
believe what the dominant social imaginary says about
pornography than to seek out
the epistemic resources developed by porn workers.
Sex workers remain stigmatized and hidden from the dominant
social imaginary in
ways which make it hard for others to understand us as potential
conversational partners
with expert knowledge about our own lives. The social
epistemological perspective I have
traced here clarifies how the marginalization of sex workers
makes possible the endurance
of myths which are at odds with our lived experience. This
perspective also clarifies the
wilful failure of dominantly situated persons to use the
epistemic resources we develop.
Furthermore, the erasure of porn and other sex workers from the
ongoing public dialo-
gue about pornography and health prevents us from addressing
the very real health crises
which we do face. At present, I live and work in Australia in a

jurisdiction where sex work is
legalized and licensed. Unlicensed and non-compliant workers
continue to face criminaliza-
tion and punitive interference by the police. The Australian
healthcare system provides ade-
quate care to a greater proportion of marginalized people,
including sex workers;
nonetheless, sex work stigma regularly affects the quality of the
care we receive.
Mikey Way, Australian porn worker and activist, noted to me in
conversation:
198 F. FOX
Medical practitioners here have no knowledge of the standard
practices in the porn industry
and often need to be taught them during medical appointments,
effectively requiring us to
out ourselves and place ourselves at risk of discriminatory
behaviour. On top of that, many
of the things we rely on as porn performers are under-
researched – e.g., the effects of men-
strual sponges on physical health, the impact of anal douches
and enemas on health, harm
minimization for [consensual] bareback sexual contact, and the
success or lack thereof of a
testing-based [STI] transmission prevention method.
Much of what Mikey brought up has parallels in my own
experience with other sectors
of sex work: discriminatory behaviour on the part of health
professionals, the requirement
to educate doctors, incorrect diagnoses based on false

assumptions about risk, and a
dearth of evidence related to my needs and health practices as a
worker.
Many of us face even greater barriers accessing mental health
care and finding provi-
ders who respect our occupation and do not assume, for
example, that we are sex workers
because we have experienced trauma, or that our work is the
sole cause of our ill-health.
American porn worker Andre Shakti (2017) addresses a number
of similar points related
to sex worker health in her excellent Rewire commentary ‘No
One in the Porn Industry Likes
a Broken Vagina’, including the lack of workplace protections,
the difficulty of accessing
private insurance in the United States as a sex worker, and the
potential legal ramifications
of disclosing sex worker status to health professionals.
As a scholar, activist, and worker dedicated to improving sex
worker access to appropriate
and adequate healthcare, I find the language of pornography as
a ‘public health crisis’ to be
deeply and deliberately disingenuous. It is the latest strategy in
a long history of epistemic
injustice committed against sex workers. Because of the
persistent erasure of porn and other
sex workers from the public dialogue on pornography and
health, it is difficult for us to join
this conversation and use it is as a platform to improve our own
occupational health and
safety. I call this an erasure because I want to be clear that we
are having ongoing conversa-
tions about our health. It is the responsibility of health

professionals and policy-makers to
listen to us. It is the responsibility of non-sex workers to exhibit
epistemic humility and
make an effort to understand and use the epistemic resources we
create.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
References
Ahmed, Aziza. 2011. ‘Feminism, Power, and Sex Work in the
Context of HIV/AIDS: Consequences for
Women’s Health.’ Harvard Journal of Law and Gender 34: 226–
258.
Dworkin, Andrea. 1980. ‘Beaver and Male Power in
Pornography.’ New Political Science 1 (4): 37–41.
Fricker, Miranda. 2009. Epistemic Injustice: Power and the
Ethics of Knowing. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Medina, José. 2011. ‘The Relevance of Credibility Excess in a
Proportional View of Epistemic Injustice:
Differential Epistemic Authority and the Social Imaginary.’
Social Epistemology 25 (1): 15–35.
Morgan, Robin. 1980. ‘Theory and Practice: Pornography and
Rape.’ In Take Back the Night: Women on
Pornography, edited by Laura Lederer, 134–140. New York:
William Morrow.
Pohlhaus Jr, Gaile. 2012. ‘Relational Knowing and Epistemic
Injustice: Toward a Theory of Willful

Hermeneutical Ignorance.’ Hypatia 27 (4): 715–735.
Shakti, Andre. 2017. ‘No One in the Porn Industry Likes a
Broken Vagina.’ Rewire. February 17. Accessed
August 1, 2017. https://rewire.news/article/2017/02/17/no-one-
porn-industry-likes-broken-vagina/.
PORN STUDIES 199
https://rewire.news/article/2017/02/17/no-one-porn-industry-
likes-broken-vagina/Disclosure statementReferences
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
Code=rprn20
Porn Studies
ISSN: 2326-8743 (Print) 2326-8751 (Online) Journal homepage:
Constructing a crisis: porn panics and public
health
Valerie Webber & Rebecca Sullivan
To cite this article: Valerie Webber & Rebecca Sullivan (2018)
Constructing a crisis: porn panics
and public health, Porn Studies, 5:2, 192-196, DOI:
10.1080/23268743.2018.1434110
To link to this article:
https://doi.org/10.1080/23268743.2018.1434110

Published online: 20 Mar 2018.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 1371
View Crossmark data
Code=rprn20
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.10
80/23268743.2018.1434110
https://doi.org/10.1080/23268743.2018.1434110
INTRODUCTION
Constructing a crisis: porn panics and public health
Valerie Webbera and Rebecca Sullivanb
aCommunity Health & Humanities, Memorial University of
Newfoundland, St. John’s, Canada; bDepartment of
English, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
Who has the luxury to worry about porn’s impact on health?
And who has the power to define
what is ‘healthy sexuality’?

Labelling porn a public health crisis has become the newest
tactic for anti-porn activists
seeking to curtail pornography distribution. Thus far, seven
American states have declared
pornography a public health crisis and four more have filed
similar bills. Hearings on the
matter were held in Canada, although the final decision was that
the evidence was too
contradictory to draw any conclusions. Lobbyists in Australia
and the United Kingdom
are asking their governments to investigate not so much whether
there is a public
health crisis, but to leap ahead and determine how to solve the
crisis of pornography.
Yet not one global health agency – the usual experts to identify
and define the scope
of a public health issue – supports their claims. Traditionally,
the field of public health
has concerned itself with disease prevention by addressing the
systemic causes of perva-
sive health problems that impact either a significant majority of
people (e.g. sanitation
systems or childhood vaccinations) or the most marginalized
segments of a population
(e.g. HIV prevention or safe injection sites). Pornography
consumption meets neither of
these criteria. Why then has this debate occupied valuable
government time and
resources?
Treating pornography as a ‘public health crisis’ is a gross
misallocation of priorities. We
do not believe such claims are motivated by a desire to ensure
the physical and social well-
being of the populace. Rather, employing the language of

‘public health’, ostensibly apo-
litical and objective, is a well-devised strategy to impose
sexually conservative moral
imperatives. The fact that the public health argument is
operationalized primarily by
moral activists with a retrograde understanding of both health
and media scholarship,
not by public health professionals or people involved in the
pornography industry,
should be enough to give any person pause. Thus, the pieces in
this special forum do
not engage with the question ‘is porn a public health crisis’ so
much as they critically
reflect upon the catalysts and consequences of this particular
turn to public health dis-
course by anti-porn groups.
It is our contention that framing pornography as a health issue
is a privileged and pol-
itically motivated misdirection of public health resources. As
such, we want to claim our
own space here not to debate on their terms the data,
definitions, and untested assump-
tions embedded in that frame. Rather, we regard this effort as an
opportunity to diversify
the limited narratives of pornography consumption that
presently dominate. The call for
© 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
CONTACT Valerie Webber [email protected]
PORN STUDIES
2018, VOL. 5, NO. 2, 192–196
https://doi.org/10.1080/23268743.2018.1434110

18.1434110&domain=pdf
mailto:[email protected]
http://www.tandfonline.com
specific types of ‘evidence’ grants us opportunity to conduct
research that makes visible
the experiences of sexual subjectivities which are so often
silenced. Indeed, as Filippa
Fox argues, the maintenance of the theory that pornography
damages the public’s
health requires the wilful exclusion of the voices of sex
workers. This denial that sex
workers are in fact part of ‘the public’ has real and direct
consequences on sex workers’
ability to access adequate and respectful healthcare, while
health questions of actual rel-
evance to sex workers’ lives go unanswered.
Cicely Marston demonstrates that much of the public health
rhetoric about pornogra-
phy begins from the assumption that a healthy sexuality is one
that conforms to the social
and cultural conventions of white, settler, heterosexual, middle-
class, monogamous pro-
priety. It also singles out pornography as a uniquely and
exclusively negative form of
media. Katie Newby and Anne Philpott present ways to think
about how explicit sexual
content could be ethically produced and incorporated into
sexual health curricula,
especially to discuss consent, safer sex, and distinguishing
between visual fantasy and
real-life sex. These efforts by public heath scholars to integrate
critical media studies of
sexuality into their research opens up an exciting new vista of

academic collaboration
long missing from the media effects models that have dominated
public health and
social psychology studies.
If porn is a public health crisis, then, what exactly are the
health outcomes of watching
too much pornography? That is the fundamental stumbling block
of anti-porn advocates.
David Ley, an American sex therapist, outlines a series of
epistemological and methodo-
logical fallacies that are central to anti-porn claims about the
health risks of porn. While
the science of porn addiction and negative neurological effects
is contentious at best,
there is something well worth studying here: that is, the shift in
political lobbying from
claims of undiagnosable ‘harms’ to women and children, to
insisting that young men
are the unwilling victims of a runaway epidemic of
pornography. Very little of the
public health debates even acknowledges that porn may be
consumed by young
women, or that it has particular and distinct saliency for
LGBTQ2IA+ youth. Indeed, as
Madita Oeming points out, the conversation of porn’s supposed
harms revolves largely
around the mainstream white, heterosexual, cisgendered male, a
victim of his own limit-
less capacity for porn consumption. Diseases of over-
consumption are quintessentially
moral, not health crises. They require and invoke a class of
passive and entitled consumers
whose supposed well-being outweighs any public or
occupational health programmes to
support porn workers, a phenomenon Heather Berg unravels in

her contribution to this
forum.
To suggest that a conversation on the health effects of
pornography is a privileged one
is not to say that we do not welcome complex and even
contentious academic debate on
sexuality. Sexual norms and cultures are important for health
outcomes and therefore
require balanced, thoughtful discussion and consideration of the
relationship of sexual
media to sexual health. Indeed, critical media and cultural
scholars have been engaged
in this work for decades. Sophisticated qualitative methods for
understanding how
youth negotiate their media viewing and integrate it with their
sexual becoming is
easily accessible but still poorly integrated even by public
health scholars who contest
the anti-porn arguments. Research on sexting (Burkett 2015;
Albury 2017), online com-
munication (De Ridder and Van Bauwel 2013; Keller 2015;
Naezer 2017), media sexualiza-
tion (McRobbie 2008; Attwood 2010; McKee 2010; Smith 2010;
Duits and van Zoonen
PORN STUDIES 193
2011), and porn consumption (Attwood 2005; McKee 2007;
Smith 2007; Paasonen et al.
2015) that assemble multifaceted analytical frameworks serves
to locate pornography
within a complex matrix of sexual media production,
distribution, and consumption. Fur-

thermore, it provides opportunities to integrate sexual media
into debates on media lit-
eracy and digital citizenship as something other than a risky
behaviour to avoid (Keller
and Brown 2002; Jones and Mitchell 2016). Frameworks already
exist to educate children
and youth on healthy media usage, rights and responsibilities of
social media engage-
ment, critical meaning-making, and identity self-construction.
As these issues spill over
into sexual education curricula, it becomes more urgent that we
talk about ethical pro-
duction and consumption of sexual media. Yet educational,
medical, religious, and
other social systems (not to mention families) still revert to
hand-wringing over media
access rather than considering the wider economic,
sociocultural, and historical contexts
in which sexual media are embedded. Without these contexts,
we cannot have important
conversations about the realities of porn’s pervasiveness in
society – what Brian McNair
calls ‘the pornosphere’ (2002, 35) – and how porn can
contribute to broadening, rather
than narrowing, the possibilities for safe and fulfilling sexual
lives.
The appropriation of public health legislation by anti-porn
advocates also illustrates the
importance of public health ethics. Any interventions on private
sexual practices must
balance individual rights and security with the public good. It
was a hard lesson learned
in the early stages of the HIV/AIDS epidemic – a true public
health crisis, but also one
riddled with stigma and discrimination. As concern over the

disease mounted, many
health practitioners, decision-makers, and activists campaigning
in the name of public
health considered drastic violations of people’s privacy and
autonomy as necessary and
justified. This included interventions such as mandatory testing,
reporting, and quarantine,
as well as the closure of community sexual spaces such as
bathhouses (Herek 1999;
Disman 2003). It continues today in the form of mandatory
testing and reporting
(Webber, Bartlett, and Brunger 2016), blood bans for men who
have sex with men
(Cascio and Yomtovian 2013; Arora 2017; Crath and Rangel
2017), and the criminalization
of non-disclosure of one’s HIV status to sexual partners
(Mykhalovskiy 2011; O’Byrne,
Bryan, and Woodyatt 2013). HIV is an interesting comparative
case study to the current
porn panic because it demonstrates how interventions ostensibly
intended to protect
the health of the ‘public’ deliberately privilege specific forms
of sexual and relational prac-
tice. Public sexual health campaigns and policies based upon
weak evidence are danger-
ous because they conflate moral judgment with health
intervention, further ostracizing
sexually non-normative populations while failing to result in
any measurable improve-
ments to public health.
As the example of HIV illustrates, it is imperative that public
health always first and fore-
most considers the ethical implications of its own practice, in
order to balance ‘the need to
exercise power to ensure the health of populations and, at the

same time, to avoid abuses
of such power’ (Thomas et al. 2002, 1057). Public health ethics
hinges upon defining the
boundaries of the public/private divide. Sexuality, especially
with regards to its relation-
ship with pornography, tends to incite chaotic interpretations of
ethics because of the
many ways in which it brings ‘the public’ and ‘the private’ into
complicated collision
with one another. How the public/private divide is drawn – how
the private is perceived
to ooze out and corrupt the public – is an important factor in
determining when and how
the collective should be entitled to compel the individual
towards ‘healthy’ decisions.
194 V. WEBBER AND R. SULLIVAN
Tragically, the history of public health interventions on
people’s sexuality is rife with
abuse: forced sterilizations, false mental health diagnoses,
criminalization and incarcera-
tion, dangerous and untested therapeutic interventions, medical
incompetence, and
human rights violations. The examples are too long to
exhaustively list, but some that
stand out include the Puerto Rican birth control pill trials
(1956), the Tuskegee syphilis
experiments conducted on African American men (1932–1972),
and the incarceration of
‘promiscuous’ women in Magdalene Laundries (which lasted
until the 1990s in some
countries). Abuses like these have disproportionately impacted
racialized communities,

sex workers, and sexually non-normative folks. The claims in
favour of labelling porn a
public health crisis promise nothing different.
Our reasons for drawing attention to dark chapters in the history
of public regulation of
sexuality is not to say that sex should be off-limits to public
health officials and experts, but
to insist that we learn from past errors and abuses. People of
marginalized genders and
sexualities who have historically encountered stigma and
discrimination due to previous
sexual health policies must be consulted and their experiences
prioritized. In our own
work, as a public health scholar and a media studies scholar, we
seek out sex workers,
LGBTQ2IA+, HIV+ people, and racialized groups unjustly
labelled as ‘hypersexual’ as
those who must be heard first and loudest (Webber 2017;
Sullivan 2014; Sullivan and
McKee 2015). They were all but absent in recent hearings in
Canada, which had substan-
tially more submissions from evangelical leaders and anti-porn
organizations than they did
from public health scientists or sexual health harm reduction
agencies.
Health can be too easily portrayed as value-free and easily
understood. Similarly,
healthy sexuality is often narrowly defined to conform to
heteronormative, middle-class,
nuclear family-oriented ideals. When a public health debate that
could potentially result
in legislation begins from weak frameworks and over-simplified
definitions, the conse-
quences can be catastrophic. As Thomas et al. (2002, 1058)

state, the fundamental
ethical principle of public health is that ‘programs and policies
should incorporate a
variety of approaches that anticipate and respect diverse values,
beliefs, and cultures in
the community’. Porn is a factor of public sexual health, on that
point we heartily
concur. However, it is not necessarily intoxicating our youth or
decaying social values. It
is also sometimes a path to sexual self-discovery, a vehicle for
safer and consensual sex
practices, and a window into the spectrum of gender and sexual
diversity. Thus, we can
perhaps express some gratitude to those who began this debate –
as deceptively as
they did – so that we can begin to develop public health policies
and programmes that
support more expressive, diverse, and inclusive sexualities. The
pieces in this forum are
offered as a beginning of a new debate, thoughtfully framed and
ethically accountable.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
References
Albury, Kath. 2017. ‘Just Because It’s Public Doesn’t Mean It’s
Any of Your Business: Adults’ and
Children’s Sexual Rights in Digitally Mediated Spaces.’ New
Media & Society 19 (5): 713–725.
Arora, Kavita Shah. 2017. ‘Righting Anachronistic Exclusions:
The Ethics of Blood Donation by Men
Who Have Sex with Men.’ Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social

Services 29 (1): 87–90.
PORN STUDIES 195
Attwood, Feona. 2005. ‘What Do People Do With Porn?
Qualitative Research Into the Consumption,
Use, and Experience of Pornography and Other Sexually
Explicit Media.’ Sexuality and Culture 9 (2):
65–86.
Attwood, Feona. 2010. Mainstreaming Sex: The Sexualization
of Western Culture. London: I.B. Tauris.
Burkett, Melissa. 2015. ‘Sex(t) Talk: A Qualitative Analysis of
Young Adults’ Negotiations of the
Pleasures and Perils of Sexting.’ Sexuality & Culture 19 (4):
835–863.
Cascio, M. Ariel, and Roslyn Yomtovian. 2013. ‘Sex, Risk, and
Education in Donor Educational
Materials: Review and Critique.’ Transfusion Medicine Reviews
27 (1): 50–55.
Crath, Rory, and Cristian Rangel. 2017. ‘Paradoxes of an
Assimilation Politics: Media Production of Gay
Male Belonging in the Canadian “Vital Public” From the
Tainted Blood Scandal to the Present.’
Culture, Health & Sexuality 19 (7): 796–810.
De Ridder, Sander, and Sofie Van Bauwel. 2013. ‘Commenting
on Pictures: Teens Negotiating Gender
and Sexualities on Social Networking Sites.’ Sexualities 16 (5–
6): 565–586.

Disman, Christopher. 2003. ‘The San Francisco Bathhouse
Battles of 1984: Civil Liberties, AIDS Risk,
and Shifts in Health Policy.’ Journal of Homosexuality 44 (3–
4): 71–129.
Duits, Linda, and Liesbet van Zoonen. 2011. ‘Coming to Terms
with Sexualization.’ European Journal
of Cultural Studies 14 (5): 491–506.
Herek, Gregory M. 1999. ‘AIDS and Stigma.’ American
Behavioral Scientist 42 (7): 1106–1116.
Jones, Lisa M., and Kimberly J. Mitchell. 2016. ‘Defining and
Measuring Youth Digital Citizenship.’ New
Media & Society 18 (9): 2063–2079.
Keller, Jessalynn. 2015. Girls’ Feminist Blogging in a
Postfeminist Age. New York: Routledge.
Keller, Sarah N., and Jane D. Brown. 2002. ‘Media
Interventions to Promote Responsible Sexual
Behavior.’ Journal of Sex Research 39 (1): 67–72.
McKee, Alan. 2007. ‘The Relationship Between Attitudes
Towards Women, Consumption of
Pornography, and Other Demographic Variables in a Survey of
1023 Consumers of
Pornography.’ International Journal of Sexual Health 19 (1):
31–45.
McKee, Alan. 2010. ‘Everything is Child Abuse.’ Media
International Australia 135: 131–140.
McNair, Brian. 2002. Striptease Culture: Sex, Media and the
Democratization of Desire. New York:
Routledge.
McRobbie, Angela. 2008. ‘Pornographic Permutations.’ The

Communication Review 11 (3): 225–236.
Mykhalovskiy, Eric. 2011. ‘The Problem of “Significant Risk”:
Exploring the Public Health Impact of
Criminalizing HIV Non-Disclosure.’ Social Science & Medicine
73 (5): 668–675.
Naezer, Marijke. 2017. ‘From Risky Behaviour to Sexy
Adventures: Reconceptualising Young People’s
Online Sexual Activities.’ Culture, Health & Sexuality 9: 1–15.
O’Byrne, Patrick, Alyssa Bryan, and Cory Woodyatt. 2013.
‘Nondisclosure Prosecutions and HIV
Prevention: Results From an Ottawa-Based Gay Men’s Sex
Survey.’ Journal of the Association of
Nurses in AIDS Care 24 (1): 81–87.
Paasonen, Susanna, Katariina Kyröjä, Kaarina Nikunen, and
Laura Saarenmaa. 2015. ‘“We Hid Porn
Magazines in the Nearby Woods”: Memory-Work and
Pornography Consumption in Finland.’
Sexualities 18 (4): 394–412.
Smith, Clarissa. 2007. One For the Girls. London: Intellect Ltd.
Smith, Clarissa. 2010. ‘Pornographication: A Discourse For All
Seasons.’ International Journal of Media
and Cultural Politics 6 (1): 103–108.
Sullivan, Rebecca. 2014. Bonnie Sherr Klein’s Not a Love
Story. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Sullivan, Rebecca, and Alan McKee. 2015. Pornography:
Structures, Agency, and Performance. London:
Polity.
Thomas, James C., Michael Sage, Jack Dillenberg, and V. James
Guillory. 2002. ‘A Code of Ethics for

Public Health.’ American Journal of Public Health 92 (7):
1057–1059.
Webber, Valerie. 2017. ‘“I‘m Not Gonna Run Around and Put a
Condom on Every Dick I See”: Tensions
in Safer Sex Activism Among Queer Communities in Montreal,
Québec.’ Sexuality & Culture, https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12119-017-9490-2.
Webber, Valerie, Janet Bartlett, and Fern Brunger. 2016.
‘Stigmatizing Surveillance: Blood-Borne
Pathogen Protocol and the Dangerous Doctor.’ Critical Public
Health 26 (4): 359–367.
196 V. WEBBER AND R. SULLIVAN
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-017-9490-2
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-017-9490-2Disclosure
statementReferences

Computer Fraud and Abuse TechniquesChapter 66-1.docx

More Related Content

Similar to Computer Fraud and Abuse TechniquesChapter 66-1.docx

More from patricke8

Recently uploaded

Computer Fraud and Abuse TechniquesChapter 66-1.docx