No abstract

No abstract

A persistent refrain in both the academic literature and the popular press is that cybercrime is a largely anonymous activity that exists in cyberspace (e.g., Gabrys 2002. For relevant discussions, see Grabosky 2004;Wall 2007;Lusthaus 2013). Cybercriminals 'meet' anonymously in virtual marketplaces (see, for instance, Décary-Hétu and Dupont 2013; Holt and Lampke 2010; Hutchings and Holt 2015). Shadowy attackers could strike from anywhere at any moment. They are a new type of threat, unlike any criminal activity that has been observed before. In short, these offenders challenge existing paradigms of crime and policing, and vastly new models are required to comprehend this new challenge.In this paper, we seek to add greater nuance to understandings of cybercrime by highlighting a neglected aspect of the phenomenon: the offline and local dimension (see Lusthaus 2016: 24-31). As a starting point it is vital to acknowledge that all cyber-attacks stem from a person who physically exists in a certain location. This basic consideration helps us better understand, investigate and counter cybercrime. It contextualises the threat. We should expect a degree of variation as to how cybercrime presents in each case. The economic and social dynamics of different settings are likely to influence who gets involved in cybercrime, what types of cybercrime they carry out and the way they are organised. In short, both the individuals behind cybercrime and the offline worlds they inhabit deserve study.Cybersecurity should not just be about the analysis of fast changing technical threats and the challenges they pose. Alongside the online and technical, there is an offline, human and contextual element that matters.

It is well known that criminals, who operate outside the law and the protection of the state, face difficulties in cooperating due both to the requirement of secrecy and a deficit of trust. For cybercriminals the anonymity of the Internet creates further challenges, making it even more difficult to assess trustworthiness and enforce agreements. Yet, contrary to expectations, collaboration among cybercriminals is prevalent, and a sophisticated industry has emerged. The purpose of this paper is to address this puzzle in relation to profit-driven cybercrime. It draws on a collection of interviews with former cybercriminals that provide a valuable form of data on micro-level and often secretive interactions. It examines four key mechanisms that lead to improved cooperation: reputation, appearance, performance and enforcement. It also addresses the rarely discussed, and somewhat counterintuitive, role that offline interactions may play in enhancing collective action among cybercriminals.