Cybercrime vs. Traditional Crime Techniques: A comparison

It remains a dangerously narrow, if not foolish notion, to consider cybercrime as constrained to pure cyber and 'space' domains, without any physical security involvement or relationships.

That is, all cybersecurity issues have elements (often very significant elements) of physical and conventional security concern.

This includes events leading up to and resulting in criminal acts.

While compared with similar, historical crimes such as identify theft, fraud, extortion and burglary, on the surface, it may seem it is all now the same thing, just through a computer or network connection.

As with all things of the day, there is an element of truth to this but it is not the entire truth.

"Cybercrime refers to criminal activities that specifically target a computer or network for damage or infiltration. For example, it can be a crime to access (“hack into”) a computer without authorization or to distribute viruses. Cybercrime also includes the use of computers as tools to conduct criminal activity such as fraud, identity theft, and copyright infringement. Computers significantly multiply the criminal’s power and reach in committing such crimes. Figure 1 describes and compares cybercrime and traditional criminal techniques."

"Conflicting priorities also complicate cybercrime investigations and prosecutions. Cybercrime can occur without physical proximity to the victim, and thus a cybercriminal can operate without victimizing a citizen in the jurisdiction or federal judicial district in which the crime originated. With no negative impact on the citizens in that district, there may be no incentive for the local citizens to press their law enforcement officers to investigate the crime. According to state officials, it is difficult to commit resources to crimes where the victims are outside their state or jurisdiction, although the suspected cybercriminal may be prosecuted in the jurisdiction where the victim is located."

Crime in the context of public, private and corporate security realm remain complex, intersecting concerns, comprised of various disciplines, data, practices, data and actors.

Including cybercrime.

It is therefore concerning, if not alarming, that so many cybersecurity narratives, practices and advocates lack even rudimentary criminological or physical security content, pedigree or education.

More than one bad actor has come to realise this too.

Tony Ridley, MSc CSyP MSyl M.ISRM

Security, Risk & Management Sciences

Reference

GAO (2007) Cybercrime: Public and Private Entities Face Challenges in Addressing Cyber Threats, Report to Congressional Requesters, United States Government Accountability Office