Introduction: new directions in cybercrime research

Abstract

The Internet, computers, cell phones, and other forms of technology have revolutionized every aspect of human life over the last several decades, including how we communicate, bank, shop, obtain the news, and entertain ourselves (Holt and Bossler 2016). These technological advancements have also created myriad opportunities for offenders to commit various forms of crime. Online crimes are often referred to as cybercrime and occur because 'the perpetrator uses special knowledge of cyberspace' (Furnell 2002, 21). Cybercrime can therefore be viewed as a large umbrella term that encompasses computer-assisted crime in which computers and technology are used in a supporting role, such as the use of a computer to send harassing messages. At the same time, the term cybercrime also includes computer-focused crimes that are a direct result of computer technology and would not exist without it, such as unauthorized computer system trespassing (Furnell 2002; McGuire and Dowling 2013). Cybercrimes can be classified into different categories, including cyber-trespass (e.g., unauthorized system access), cyber-deception/theft (e.g., identity theft, online fraud, digital piracy), cyberporn/obscenity (e.g., child sexual exploitation materials), and cyber-violence (e.g., cyberstalking; cyber terrorism) (Holt, Bossler, and Seigfried-Spellar 2018; Wall 2001). It is nearly impossible to estimate the amount of cybercrime that occurs in most nations across the world because of a lack of standardized legal definitions for these offenses and few valid, reliable official statistics (Holt and Bossler 2016). Evidence demonstrates, however, that cybercrime rates are increasing as the rates for many forms of traditional street crimes continue to decrease (Tcherni et al. 2016). The amount of research on cybercrime has grown exponentially over the last few decades. Much of the preliminary work in this area focused on exploring how the nature of cybercrime and cyberspace differed from traditional crime and terrestrial space (e.g., Grabosky 2001; Wall 1998). A significant challenge for cybercrime scholars, both historically and currently, is the lack of official statistics on most forms of cybercrime. In the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Report's Summary Reporting System (SRS), the most commonly used source for crime data, provides no information on cybercrime or whether any form of technology was involved in the commission of a crime. The National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), which the U.S. is fully moving to in 2021, also does not provide a specific cybercrime category, but does allow agencies to indicate whether a computer was involved in the commission of a crime. Since necessity is the mother of invention, scholars studying cybercrime were required to collect primary data in innovative ways, such as by analyzing forum discussions, bulletin boards, and blogs, deploying honeypots, and developing field experiments (see Holt and Bossler 2016 for review). In addition, many scholars surveyed differen...

Researching Cybercrimes

“…Grabosky (2001); (2014) sees cybercrime as little more than an online version of existing types crime, whereas Holt and Bossler (2014) and Crown Prosecution Service (n.d.) include both traditional crime moving online and exclusively online activities. By contrast, Wall (2004) and subsequently (Bossler & Berenblum, 2019) identify traditional crime with cyber elements as distinct from cybercrime that solely exists online. For the current discussion, Wall's original typology (2001) summarised in Table 1 provides a useful starting point for this discussion.…”

Antecedents of Cybersecurity Implementation: A Study of the Cyber-Preparedness of U.K. Social Enterprises

“…Rising academic interest in cybercrime detection and prevention is evidenced by several recent special issues in journals across management, technical and professional disciplines. These include the special issue in which this article is published, the Journal of Crime and Justice (Bossler and Berenblum, 2019), Information Technology & People (Shah, Jones and Choudrie, 2019) and Computers and Security (Choo, Gai, Chiaraviglio and Yang, 2020).…”

Community Learning Center Efforts to Improve Information Literacy in the Community for Cyber Crime Prevention during a Pandemic

“…(Nodeland et al, 2019;Wahid & Labib, 2005). Online crime is also called cybercrime since the attacker uses unique cyberspace information (Bossler & Berenblum, 2019) Cybercrimes can be classified into different categories, including cybertrespass (e.g., unauthorized system access), cyberdeception/theft (e.g., identity theft, online fraud, digital piracy), cyber-porn/obscenity (e.g., child sexual exploitation materials), and cyber-violence (e.g., cyberstalking; cyber terrorism) (Hansen et al, 2019). Cybercrime is increasing very rapidly due to technological developments.…”