Chapter 1 – Perceptions of Cybercrime

Q: What are the common concerns of cybercrime?

Common concerns include economic threats (fraud, hacking, piracy, vandalism), national security threats (cyberwarfare, cyberterrorism, hybrid warfare), personal safety (predators, stalkers, child exploitation), and surveillance fears (government overreach, “Big Brother”).

Q: How does media influence perceptions of cybercrime?

Media coverage has grown dramatically (e.g., 462 articles in 2000 → 4,460 in 2017). Media often frames cybercrime as threats linked to nationality or crises, creating “moral panics.” Popular films like Hackers, The Net, and Black Hat reinforce dystopian imagery, shaping opinion and policy.

Q: What is a moral panic in relation to cybercrime?

A moral panic occurs when rapid technological change triggers public fear, often exaggerated by media. Examples include panics over online pornography, child safety, and social media. These panics distort reality but influence legislation and enforcement priorities.

Q: What key questions do cybercrime researchers ask?

Researchers ask: What is cybercrime? How is it similar or different from offline crime? Who commits cybercrime, and why? What is the impact on victims? How do law enforcement and policymakers respond? How do public perceptions shape responses?

Q: Why is studying cybercrime considered interdisciplinary?

Cybercrime research spans criminology, sociology, law, political science, psychology, and computer science. Each discipline brings different insights (e.g., legal definitions, technical methods, social norms), highlighting the complexity of studying cybercrime.

Q: What are the origins of the internet?

The internet began with Cold War projects. In the 1950s, the SAGE system introduced military networking. In the 1960s, DARPA developed ARPANET for secure communications. By the 1970s, email and networks like NSFNET expanded connectivity. In the 1990s, ARPANET became civilian, and the World Wide Web launched.

Q: How did the internet grow globally?

Internet use skyrocketed: 16 million users in 1995 → 580 million in 2002 → 3.89 billion by 2017 (about 52% of the world population). Access, however, remains unequal both between and within countries.

Q: How do routine activities online create opportunities for cybercrime?

E-commerce enables fraud and identity theft. Politics invites cyber-espionage and propaganda. Entertainment brings piracy and obscene imagery. Social media leads to harassment and scams. IoT (Internet of Things) devices create new vulnerabilities for hacking.

Q: What are the layers of the internet?

The surface web is indexed and searchable (about 10–16% of all content). The deep web includes unindexed content like private databases or password-protected sites. The dark web requires special browsers (Tor, I2P), enabling anonymity for illicit trade but also used for privacy advocacy.

Q: What does the term “cyber” mean?

Originally from “cybernetics” (study of feedback systems), “cyber” became a buzzword for tech-related issues. Today, it often carries negative connotations, associated with crime or harm (e.g., cybercrime, cyberterrorism).

Q: How do Thomas & Loader (2000) define cybercrime?

They define it as “computer-mediated activities which are either illegal or illicit.” This includes both crimes (illegal acts) and deviance (socially disapproved but not always illegal acts).

Q: How does Furnell (2002) classify cybercrimes?

Furnell categorizes them by the role of technology: (1) Computer-assisted crimes (fraud, harassment, laundering). (2) Computer-focused crimes (hacking, malware, defacement).

Q: How does Wall (2001) classify cybercrimes?

Wall’s five categories are: (1) Cyber-trespass (hacking, viruses, defacement). (2) Cyber-deceptions/thefts (fraud, intellectual property theft). (3) Cyber-pornography (obscenity). (4) Cyber-violence (harassment, hate speech, stalking). (5) Cybercrimes against the state (terrorism, espionage).

Q: What does the continuity view say about cybercrime?

The continuity view argues that cybercrime is “old wine in new bottles.” Traditional crimes (fraud, theft, harassment) are simply updated with new digital tools, but the core activities remain similar.

Q: What does the novelty view say about cybercrime?

The novelty view argues that cyberspace fundamentally transforms crime. It eliminates spatial and temporal boundaries, enables mass targeting by a single offender, and allows anonymity/identity manipulation, making crimes harder to detect and regulate.

Q: What is the “Where” problem in explaining cybercrime?

Traditional criminology relies on physical spaces (neighborhoods, hotspots). Cyberspace is “anti-spatial,” with no physical boundaries, so place-based theories struggle to explain online crime.

Q: What is the “Who” problem in explaining cybercrime?

Offline crime often involves marginalized groups. Cybercrime requires skills, resources, and access, meaning offenders are often more privileged, educated, or technically skilled compared to traditional offenders.

Q: What challenges do police face in addressing cybercrime?

Cybercrime is global, crossing jurisdictions. Agencies like INTERPOL, Europol, and UNODC promote cooperation, but enforcement is inconsistent. Local police often lack funding, training, and expertise. Laws vary worldwide, some clashing with rights (e.g., censorship). Federal budgets grow, but resource gaps persist.