In accordance with that commitment, software engineers shall adhere to the following Code of Ethics and Professional Practice. The Code contains eight Principles related to the behavior of and decisions made by professional software engineers, including practitioners, educators, managers, supervisors and policy makers, as well as trainees and students of the profession. The Principles identify the ethically responsible relationships in which individuals, groups, and organizations participate and the primary obligations within these relationships.
The Clauses of each Principle are illustrations of some of the obligations included in these relationships. The Code prescribes these as obligations of anyone claiming to be or aspiring to be a software engineer.
It is not intended that the individual parts of the Code be used in isolation to justify errors of omission or commission. The list of Principles and Clauses is not exhaustive. The Clauses should not be read as separating the acceptable from the unacceptable in professional conduct in all practical situations. The Code is not a simple ethical algorithm that generates ethical decisions. In some situations standards may be in tension with each other or with standards from other sources.
These situations require the software engineer to use ethical judgment to act in a manner which is most consistent with the spirit of the Code of Ethics and Professional Practice, given the circumstances. Ethical tensions can best be addressed by thoughtful consideration of fundamental principles, rather than blind reliance on detailed regulations. These Principles should influence software engineers to consider broadly who is affected by their work; to examine if they and their colleagues are treating other human beings with due respect; to consider how the public, if reasonably well informed, would view their decisions; to analyze how the least empowered will be affected by their decisions; and to consider whether their acts would be judged worthy of the ideal professional working as a software engineer.
The dynamic and demanding context of software engineering requires a code that is adaptable and relevant to new situations as they occur. However, even in this generality, the Code provides support for software engineers and managers of software engineers who need to take positive action in a specific case by documenting the ethical stance of the profession. The Code provides an ethical foundation to which individuals within teams and the team as a whole can appeal.
The Code helps to define those actions that are ethically improper to request of a software engineer or teams of software engineers. The Code is not simply for adjudicating the nature of questionable acts; it also has an important educational function. As this Code expresses the consensus of the profession on ethical issues, it is a means to educate both the public and aspiring professionals about the ethical obligations of all software engineers.
Software engineers shall act consistently with the public interest. In particular, software engineers shall, as appropriate:. Moderate the interests of the software engineer, the employer, the client and the users with the public good.
Approve software only if they have a well-founded belief that it is safe, meets specifications, passes appropriate tests, and does not diminish quality of life, diminish privacy or harm the environment. The ultimate effect of the work should be to the public good. Disclose to appropriate persons or authorities any actual or potential danger to the user, the public, or the environment, that they reasonably believe to be associated with software or related documents.
Cooperate in efforts to address matters of grave public concern caused by software, its installation, maintenance, support or documentation.
Be fair and avoid deception in all statements, particularly public ones, concerning software or related documents, methods and tools. Consider issues of physical disabilities, allocation of resources, economic disadvantage and other factors that can diminish access to the benefits of software.
Be encouraged to volunteer professional skills to good causes and contribute to public education concerning the discipline. Software engineers shall act in a manner that is in the best interests of their client and employer, consistent with the public interest. Provide service in their areas of competence, being honest and forthright about any limitations of their experience and education. Ensure that any document upon which they rely has been approved, when required, by someone authorized to approve it.
Keep private any confidential information gained in their professional work, where such confidentiality is consistent with the public interest and consistent with the law.
Identify, document, collect evidence and report to the client or the employer promptly if, in their opinion, a project is likely to fail, to prove too expensive, to violate intellectual property law, or otherwise to be problematic.
Identify, document, and report significant issues of social concern, of which they are aware, in software or related documents, to the employer or the client.
Promote no interest adverse to their employer or client, unless a higher ethical concern is being compromised; in that case, inform the employer or another appropriate authority of the ethical concern. Software engineers shall ensure that their products and related modifications meet the highest professional standards possible.
Strive for high quality, acceptable cost and a reasonable schedule, ensuring significant tradeoffs are clear to and accepted by the employer and the client, and are available for consideration by the user and the public. Ensure proper and achievable goals and objectives for any project on which they work or propose. Identify, define and address ethical, economic, cultural, legal and environmental issues related to work projects.
Ensure that they are qualified for any project on which they work or propose to work by an appropriate combination of education and training, and experience.
Ensure an appropriate method is used for any project on which they work or propose to work. Work to follow professional standards, when available, that are most appropriate for the task at hand, departing from these only when ethically or technically justified. Ensure that specifications for software on which they work have been well documented, satisfy the users requirements and have the appropriate approvals. Ensure realistic quantitative estimates of cost, scheduling, personnel, quality and outcomes on any project on which they work or propose to work and provide an uncertainty assessment of these estimates.
Ensure adequate testing, debugging, and review of software and related documents on which they work. Ensure adequate documentation, including significant problems discovered and solutions adopted, for any project on which they work. Work to develop software and related documents that respect the privacy of those who will be affected by that software. Be careful to use only accurate data derived by ethical and lawful means, and use it only in ways properly authorized.
Software engineers shall maintain integrity and independence in their professional judgment. Maintain professional objectivity with respect to any software or related documents they are asked to evaluate. Not engage in deceptive financial practices such as bribery, double billing, or other improper financial practices. Disclose to all concerned parties those conflicts of interest that cannot reasonably be avoided or escaped.
Refuse to participate, as members or advisors, in a private, governmental or professional body concerned with software related issues, in which they, their employers or their clients have undisclosed potential conflicts of interest.
Software engineering managers and leaders shall subscribe to and promote an ethical approach to the management of software development and maintenance. In particular, those managing or leading software engineers shall, as appropriate:. Assign work only after taking into account appropriate contributions of education and experience tempered with a desire to further that education and experience.
Ensure realistic quantitative estimates of cost, scheduling, personnel, quality and outcomes on any project on which they work or propose to work, and provide an uncertainty assessment of these estimates. Attract potential software engineers only by full and accurate description of the conditions of employment. Not unjustly prevent someone from taking a position for which that person is suitably qualified.
Ensure that there is a fair agreement concerning ownership of any software, processes, research, writing, or other intellectual property to which a software engineer has contributed. Software engineers shall advance the integrity and reputation of the profession consistent with the public interest. Extend software engineering knowledge by appropriate participation in professional organizations, meetings and publications.
Support, as members of a profession, other software engineers striving to follow this Code. Obey all laws governing their work, unless, in exceptional circumstances, such compliance is inconsistent with the public interest. Over the years, a number of organizations and individuals have attempted to codify developer ethics into a variety of oaths, pledges, and codes of conduct.
Common themes appearing throughout these examples include a commitment to honesty, integrity, and fairness.
To date, since most software developers do not belong to — and are not governed by — any official order, guild, association, or society, no single, codified ethical standard has been widely adopted.
The Software Engineering Ethics Research Institute of the Department of Computer and Information Sciences at East Tennessee State University published a series of Case Studies to help sensitize practicing software developers and students to the various types of ethical dilemmas they may face. The International Standard for Professional Software Development and Ethical Responsibility forms the basis for much of the analysis in each case.
There have been a number of well publicized cases in which software was used to deceive users or even break the law. At the heart of these cases is a breach of ethics on the part of one or more developers.
Such cases include:. Software engineers and companies are finding themselves more and more often in situations where they are held accountable for undesirable results and irregularities resulting from the use of software or the way in which it is developed. While it may seem inappropriate and short-sighted to shift responsibility entirely onto the developers, nevertheless software companies still feel a stronger obligation now to address these questions and to promote ethically secure development.
This is true for two key reasons: Firstly, companies are confronted with setbacks caused by software that has ethically questionable features — both in legal terms and in terms of their reputations as trustworthy actors in society. Secondly, companies and their employees are intrinsically motivated to develop better and ethically sound software. Software systems are inherently complex: they consist of different components, such as presentation front-end and data access back-end , which must in themselves meet normative standards.
Furthermore, their compositionality again generates further ethical requirements. Finally, the use of software systems must also be taken into account, as further normative tensions can arise in their application. Complex systems are characterised precisely by the fact that not all consequences are known ex ante. Moreover, certain counter-intuitive interactions and motivations arise and become visible only in the later application of a product. They represent a more or less complete and well-engineered conglomerate of different normative positions, values or declarations of intent, which are to be implemented in the process of software development in an adequate form.
As mentioned above, there are indeed various and understandable reasons why it may seem sensible to provide engineers with instructions. They should provide guidance for those who are confronted with ethically relevant questions and give them an overview of desirable values and principles. Most codes agree on key values such as data protection, transparency and security. Disagreement, though, arises as soon as we need to go beyond this abstraction level, when the technical design process forces us to go into detail.
At that point, there are significant differences regarding the prioritisation of values and the derivation of focal points. This raises the question: if there is broad agreement on core values, why do various codes differ in their statements?
One explanation could be that this is mainly due to the nature of values themselves, that is their under-determination.
Lack of clarity is in turn directly linked to the problem that codes are barely able to provide concrete normative orientation in software development. In principle, most codes contain values that are crucial to the ethical handling of software and cannot easily be refuted. Examples are the call to respect the dignity of man or an aspiration to develop technology in the service of man humanistic perspective.
Furthermore, not all other values can be deduced from these central tenets. Rather, they tend to take on the role of general statements which, seen individually, cannot provide concrete and hence practical guidance.
0コメント