Forbidden love in the time of the Internet.

The logic under which AM operated seems to be that it is quite acceptable to cheat on your partner so long as you do not disturb society’s collective conscience.

Technology can be disruptive, but it cuts both ways — bicycles in Victorian England led to the emancipation of women; they are also known to have scandalised folks of that time by enabling love affairs… In the 21st century, the Internet is a lead exemplar of disruptive technology.

Sporting a tagline, “Life is short. Have an affair!” Ashley Madison (AM), a dating portal set up in 2001 for married/attached people has enabled extramarital affairs, in huge numbers. Now, with the portal being hacked by a group calling itself “The Impact Team,” its Canadian parent, Avid Life Media (ALM), faces lawsuits even as it attracts flocks of new members. The hacking culminated in the Impact Team stealing over 30 million members’ names, addresses and details of bank transactions and emails. The hackers then anonymously dumped this data in the “dark web”, accessible through the anonymity network Tor —for anyone to see. The issue itself though lurks within nested arguments about technology, morality and privacy.

The AM saga is a call to learn about cyber safety and not blindly accept promises of concealment of data. While in AM’s case, the passwords of the portal’s clients had at least been encrypted, there have been other hacking victims whose passwords were not encrypted by websites and which were revealed. AM had promised its clients that for a fee of $19, it would erase all related user data. However, the hacking job showed up addresses of several people who had, in fact, paid the erasure fee. Incidentally, the hackers did issue several warnings before dumping the data in public, and therefore AM did have ample time to delete the information that was revealed. The deeper question is — how ethical is it to charge for deletion of data, once you have attracted users with free guest accounts and minor credits for full use? This amounts to saying: once you have exposed yourself, you have to pay to get out!

Apropos morality, positions on extramarital affairs could vary, depending on the local culture and social norms, but there is no doubt that the business model followed by AM is questionable and dicey. Even more so, considering that a sizeable number of the users are/were government officials, begging the question whether any thought was given to cyber-security by these users of the portal.

At first glance, that there was technology available which enabled “cheating” at this scale and with such ease, could come under scrutiny. But the larger question is about the lack of public discussion about the website, even when it gained a huge following of about 39 million users in 53 countries (including India) as mentioned in Wikipedia. Until of course, the hacking scandal turned the spotlight on it. Ashley Madison has had a pretty successful run for 14 years since its inception. The logic under which it operated seems to be that it is quite acceptable to cheat on your partner so long so you do not disturb society’s collective conscience. This may have always been a prized social commandment even earlier, but lifting infidelity out of the physical world and embedding it in cyberspace also has its own manifestations. In society, there are various checks that streamline our social actions. Social norms, the existence of caring individuals, common friends, all of these add important regulations on such acts, which may go missing when these are consummated in cyberspace. The ease of this process has enabled membership in sites like AM to burgeon to mindboggling numbers.

In terms of privacy, it has to be asked, whose prerogative is it, anyway, to reveal this data. Also, the dumped data has to be analysed and read carefully, because it included even those who merely checked in and out. It included people who had decided to close longstanding accounts because they wished to be true to their partners and, not the least, people working on stolen or fake identities. An analysis by technology blog Gizmodo’s editor-in-chief Annalee Newitz shows that many of the women who used the site – they were small enough in number to start with, compared to the male users – abandoned it soon afterwards. Perhaps they were just checking on their partners!

A minor digression may be warranted here to look at how women handle knowledge of the husband’s infidelity. The knowledge does not always translate into action of any kind. While some may not mind, those who do are often trapped between wanting out but not having the means to get out of the relationship, and feeling tortured and frustrated at the knowledge.

Although there appears to be no differential in the number of women who cheat as compared to men, when the Internet is not involved, the same is not true in cyber-assisted infidelity. The release of data is a way to urge women to be more self-reliant, not to depend on alimony and never to take it for granted that her relationship is on stable ground and that her husband, or boyfriend, is faithful. This then is the liberating face of the scandal — a wake-up call to women who prefer to stay in comfort zones. This has also called into question, the idea of institutionalised relationships.

Following the hacking incident, two suicides were reported in Toronto, though the spouse of the victim in one case came forward to say that there was no direct link. The repercussions in India, which also had a sizeable number of members, are not known. There could be other impacts. The leaked data could be used by intelligence agencies for extracting “useful” information. The Impact Team may also face a long list of charges such as theft, extortion, mischief to property, criminal harassment and intimidation.

The complex range of issues involved in the hacking and in the aftermath makes it difficult therefore, even for the thoughtful among us to take sides.