In recent years the power and reach of prominent hacker groups such as Anonymous and LulzSec has been clearly demonstrated. However, in a world where hackers are able to wield significant online power, can they do so ethically as legitimate agents? To answer this question this paper will develop an ethical framework based on the premise that hackers have exhibited instances where they have acted to protect people from harm at a time when there was no one else to do so. At its core this paper will argue that political hacking can be justified when it is done to protect the vital interests of oneself or others. Moreover, it will also argue that just because hackers are outside the state does not automatically discount them as ethical actors and that when the state fails to protect people – whether it is due to a lack of ability, political will or because the state is the source of the threat – hackers can fill the void. In order to achieve this, first it is necessary to highlight the space for hackers to operate; second, guide hacker activity by creating an ethical framework detailing what actions are justified towards what end; third, to offer mechanisms that can aid in reaching these ethically justified decisions; and as a result, inform further ethical debates on how to react to these political hackers. This means that the framework can be used to both justify and condemn hacking depending on the circumstances, allowing those on the outside to distil and evaluate a political hack, both past and present, while guiding hacker collectives by providing clearer ethical tools for determining the appropriate agendas and methods.

近年来，著名的黑客组织（例如Anonymous和LulzSec）的力量和影响力已得到明确证明。但是，在当今世界上，黑客能够发挥重要的在线力量，他们是否可以像合法代理商一样在道德上做到这一点？为了回答这个问题，本文将建立一个道德框架，其前提是黑客展示了在没有其他人这样做的情况下他们采取行动保护人们免受伤害的实例。从本质上讲，本文将论证说，为了保护个人或他人的切身利益，可以采取政治手段进行黑客入侵。此外，它还将辩称，仅因为黑客不在国家之外，并不会自动剥夺他们作为道德行为者的地位，并且当国家未能保护人们时-无论是由于缺乏能力，政治意愿或因为国家是威胁的根源-黑客可以填补空白。为了实现这一目标，首先必须突出黑客的操作空间；其次，通过创建一个道德框架来指导黑客活动，该道德框架详细说明朝着什么目的采取了哪些行动是合理的；第三，提供有助于做出符合伦理道德的决定的机制；结果，在有关如何对这些政治骇客做出反应的更多道德辩论中提供了信息。这意味着可以根据情况使用该框架来证明和谴责骇客行为，从而允许外部人员利用和评估过去和现在的政治骇客行为，同时通过提供更清晰的道德工具来确定适当的行为来指导黑客团体议程和方法。