Introduction
Today, innovative technologies penetrate every sector of the global community’s life, whether it is private life, finances, businesses, health or personal information. In modern society, everything can be encrypted in the form of code, so tangible assets are transformed into numbers in the computer software for convenience, carrying the same value. Johnson (2016) uses a metaphor and suggests that the global community “puts all of it physical eggs in one virtual basket and its dependence on cyber technology is now absolute” (p. 2). With the development of various programmes that significantly simplify the daily activities of the organisations and individuals, the issues of privacy and security became more spread. People around the world have faced cybercrime, which imposes severe threats on businesses and individuals on the international level. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the issue of cybercrime and discuss how legal and practical provisions can manage the emerging problem and eliminate those criminal activities.
Investigating Cybercrimes
Within the last decades, cybercrime has gained various names and associations, including e-crime, digital crime and hi-tech crime. First, it is crucial to understand the definition of cybercrime and its implications. Cybercrime is “a diverse range of illegal and illicit activities that share in common a unique electronic environment (“cyberspace”) in which they take place” (Yar & Steinmetz, 2019, p. 6). Consequently, one can say that the actions of a criminal nature that violate federal and public laws and regulations and occur within the Internet space are referred to as cybercrime.
Cybercrime implicates numerous challenges for the global community and its sectors, including jurisdiction. The scholars suggest five critical characteristics of electronic crimes, which include accessibility, anonymity, scale, portability and transferability and global reach (Gillespie, 2019). Those features imply that the Internet is available in different corners of the world, which means its availability, but, at the same time, increases the target audience of victims. Besides, keeping anonymous status is possible in cyberspace, which imposes additional challenges for the authorities to fight those types of crimes. Easy access to the information storage and its portability, as well as the ability of cybercrime to transcend borders, demonstrate the difficulties that the e-crime can cause (Gillespie, 2019). Therefore, the cybercrime characteristics emphasise the necessity of firm regulations and practices that will reduce the number of attacks via the Internet significantly and will provide useful ways of the electronic data and assets protection.
Growing Problem
It is possible to say that the scope of cybercrime is continuously growing. The Office of National Statistics, based in the UK, stated that, in 2016, there were almost six million cases of e-crime (Epps, 2017). Breaches in information can have drastic effects on the organisations, including financial losses and aggravated image and reputation. The statistics from the Insurance Information Institute revealed that from 2014 to 2018, the number of cybercrime complaints and reported damage has significantly increased (“Facts and Statistics,” 2019). The situation implicates that the need for protection and security measures and regulations is growing in the global community. One of the suggestions is to employ “a system that not only keeps the information secure but is also cost-effective and results in a faster and more seamless authentication process” (Epps, 2017, p. 15). In such a way, the companies that have experienced or have a potential threat of experiencing data breaches should integrate all possible protection tools and practices not to have substantial losses in the future.
Besides the significance of various safeguard strategies within individual business, it is crucial to remember the global reach feature of cybercrime, which implies that the issue of digital crimes requires precise international regulations. Thus, it is essential to investigate the seriousness of transnational cyber-attacks and analyse the existing solutions and propositions. Transnational cybercrime refers to any digital crime that infiltrates the system, creates disorder and compromises the original information through the coding language (Perloff-Giles, 2018). In other words, according to Gottschalk (2019), transnational cyber-attacks involve various activities that violate the laws with the use of information technology. Hence, one can note that the crimes that include the use of the Internet do not consider physical borders and can influence any country. Transnational cybercrimes can be represented in various forms of illegal actions, such as online grooming, financial frauds within corporations, money laundering or content piracy (Gottschalk, 2019). Thus, nations around the world have the same need to protect their society, their assets and reputation.
Issue of Anonymity
The fact that the Internet space can be anonymous and that anyone can become a victim of digital attacks emphasises the value of international law in the emerging issue. According to Urbas (2012), “legal jurisdiction traditionally is based on geographical territory” (p. 8). For instance, criminal’s actions are considered based on the laws in the country of citizenship. In some cases, the unlawful individual is judged on the current laws of the citizenship country and the land of crime commitment. Nevertheless, those strategies are not always practical in the cases of Internet criminal activities. Still, with the growing need for protecting the global society, the legal authorities from different nations started to co-operate and turn to law enforcement collaboration. The first step to address the severe problem of cybercrime across the borders was the creation of the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime that became effective in 2004 (Gillespie, 2019). This Convention became the first international instrument that considered the significance of cyberspace dangers.
Main Provisions
As far as this document represents one of the most influential works for the management of cyber-attacks at the international level, it is crucial to look at its main provisions. Keyser (2016), suggests that the Convention on Cybercrime became “a new, powerful, and timely piece of international legislation” (p. 132). The Convention includes the guidelines for the measures that nations should undertake at domestic levels and the suggestions for international collaboration (Gillespie, 2019). Hence, it is possible to claim that the solution for the evolving problems can start at the local level, within the country. It is crucial not just for businesses and public organisations to secure the information but also for the country’s authorities to implement the measures that will protect its citizens. Starting with the integration of protection methods at the local level can have a favourable impact on the overall picture.
Still, not always a robust cyberspace defence system within a specific nation can prevent foreign hackers or other types of digital criminals from intervening. As a result, the Convention on Cybercrime also encourages cooperation among countries. Although many states made various attempts to fight cybercrime, the EU “remains at the forefront” in establishing the proper framework to combat digital criminal activities (Mittal & Sharma, 2017, p. 1372). The Convention seeks to harmonise the existing laws within various nations by offering procedures, related definitions and real-time collection of data (Mittal & Sharma, 2017). Moreover, it endorses collaborative assistance in “handling traffic and stored computer data,” which represent the primary cybercrime targets (Hui, Kim, & Wang, 2017, p. 499). Thus, the Convention’s primary purpose is to initiate the collective work of the laws in different states through the requirements to combat cybercrime.
Another significant point about the Convention on Cybercrime and its efficiency is the fact that since the time it was drafted, the cyberspace went through substantial modifications. This document aims to harmonise domestic laws, while in the global world, some nations do not have specific legislation concerning digital crimes (Mittal & Sharma, 2017). Though there are particular weaknesses of the Convention, scholars point out that introducing international agreements in the future can become a substantial step towards fighting the crimes related to cyberspace (Mittal & Sharma, 2017). Therefore, cybercrime represents a critical issue in the global arena and can touch any country. The Council of Europe Convention represents a substantial effort to determine the existing problems of the Internet space and provide possible solutions to gaps in combating digital offences.
In the global community, cybercrime is a complex phenomenon that requires serious actions and modifications, not only according to the Convention. Without any doubt, the Convention portrays one of the essential measures of eliminating cybercrime, but the issue has to be solved on various levels (Sabillon, Cano, Cavaller Reyes, & Serra Ruiz, 2016). Consequently, scholars state that protective measures should start from personal data security implementation and escalates to societal, organisational, military and international levels (Sabillon et al., 2016). It is crucial to remember that, though cybercrime involves technological advancements, integrating security measures only through technology would not be enough. The integration of various fields besides international cooperation, such as training, culture and awareness, in combination with proper technical improvements, will create new opportunities to confront cybercrime (Sabillon et al., 2016). As a result, the existence of a solid defence will decrease the likelihood of cyberattacks and will contribute to the minimisation of digital crime around the globe.
It is useful to observe the suggestions that the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) in the UK has issued. The general concept offers a four-component approach, which includes victims’ protection, deterring the UK-based cyber criminality, tackling international cybercrime groups and the criminal marketplace (Saunders, 2017). One can notice that although those provisions were implemented on the domestic level, they concern transnational activities related to cybercrime. Therefore, it implies that internal policies have an influence on international collaboration and encourage nations to work together.
At this point, it is necessary to look at the statement that cybercrime is a challenge, but it is nothing that existing legal and practical provisions cannot handle. It is possible to say that the authorities and law enforcement figures in different nations aim to fight cybercrime, and the continuous work on the current situation improvement is taking place. Still, it is controversial to say that the existing practices have all the necessary means in tackling digital attacks. For instance, in the statistics from the Insurance Information Institute, one can see that from 2015 to 2018, the number of identity thefts did not drop significantly (“Facts and Statistics,” 2019). However, one can trace the improvement and notice the unstoppable development process directed towards fighting cyber-attacks. The promotion of such activities at the domestic level, stronger encouragement of agencies to collaborate and the introduction of universal requirements for fighting cybercrime can solve the problem.
However, the investigation of cybercrimes is a complicated process that has numerous challenges that might prevent agencies and authorities from achieving the desired objectives. Maras (2019) lists the issues that include the lack of or inadequate national and international laws, slow information and evidence sharing networks and deficit in national capacities. Hence, those barriers might slow down the successful cybercrime investigation conducted collaboratively. Still, great work is done to overcome those obstacles and prosper in the cybercrime fight. For instance, Interpol has established a National Central Bureau in all countries that serve the role of the “contact point for law enforcement” (Maras, 2019, p. 284). Consequently, despite numerous challenges, the legislature makes attempts to improve the situation.
Conclusion
The paper has discovered the features of cybercrime that implicate severe challenges, including the burdens on legislation. The problem is that cyber-attacks are connected to technological progress, while jurisdiction is developing at slower rates. Day and Bryant (2014) claim that many insist that “more laws are required to protect individuals, e-commerce, and society” (p. 83). Nations possess diverse jurisdiction procedures concerning cybercrime management and solution. Apart from being a useful tool in eliminating the issue, these regulations can have inadvertent effects on the private lives of individuals or confidentiality. Without any doubt, the increased attention towards the problem of cybercrime will tackle those issues. A powerful transnational collaboration, including individual countries’ approaches that naturally involve international groups’ tracking and law enforcement, will continue finding solutions for the growing problem of cybercrime.
In conclusion, cybercrime and its implications impose severe challenges on the global community. Investigations related to the crimes committed in cyberspace have a complex nature and require strict guidelines. Today, the Europe Council Convention on Cybercrime is one of the most potent international instruments in combating digital criminal activities. Despite the burdens and continuous debates over the effectiveness of the existing laws and regulation, new developments and strategies are integrated into the system, aiming to manage cybercrime efficiently and minimise losses.
References
Day, E., & Bryant, R. (2014). Law and digital crime. In R. Bryant & S. Bryant (Eds.), Policing digital crime (pp. 83–110). Farnham, England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
Epps, C. (2017). Best practices to deal with top cybercrime activities. Computer Fraud & Security, 2017(4), 13-15.
Facts and statistics: Identity theft and cybercrime. (2019). Web.
Gillespie, A. A. (2019). Cybercrime: Key issues and debates (2nd ed.). Abingdon, England: Routledge.
Gottschalk, P. (2019). Transnational cybercrime and cybercrime by transnational organisations. In V. Mitsilegas, S. Hufnagel, A. Moiseienko, S. Yanan, & L. Mingxiang (Eds.), Transnational crime: European and Chinese perspectives (pp. 86–100). New York, NY: Routledge.
Hui, K. L., Kim, S. H., & Wang, Q. H. (2017). Cybercrime deterrence and international legislation: Evidence from distributed denial of service attacks. MIS Quarterly, 41(2), 497-523.
Johnson, M. (2016). Cybercrime, security, and digital intelligence. New York, NY: Routledge.
Keyser, M. (2016). The Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime. In I. Carr (Ed.), Computer crime (pp. 131–170). New York, NY: Routledge.
Maras, M. H. (2019). Cybercrime laws and investigations. In M. Natarajan (Ed.), International and transnational crime and justice (2nd ed., pp. 281–286). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Mittal, S., & Sharma, P. (2017). A review of international legal framework to combat cybercrime. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science, 8(5), 1372-1374.
Perloff-Giles, A. (2018). Transnational cyber offenses: Overcoming jurisdictional challenges. Yale Journal International, 43(1), 191-227.
Sabillon, R., Cano, J., Cavaller Reyes, V., & Serra Ruiz, J. (2016). Cybercrime and cybercriminals: A comprehensive study. International Journal of Computer Networks and Communications Security, 4(6), 165-176.
Saunders, J. (2017). Tackling cybercrime–The UK response. Journal of Cyber Policy, 2(1), 4-15.
Urbas, G. (2012). Cybercrime, jurisdiction, and extradition: The extended reach of cross-border law enforcement’. International Journal of Internet Law, 16(1), 7-17.
Yar, M., & Steinmetz, K. F. (2019). Cybercrime and society (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.