1) Public perception and necessity for security measures
The explosion in the use of the Internet, about how some services can be regulated, has seen an effervescent argument in all over the world. Legislation plays an important role of how the humanity can decrease the digital crimes. Computer crimes is a world wide problem because of the rapid growth of the digital technology and especially in the networks field, which brings hackers and organised crime from all over the world together.
It is commonly known that there are difficulties in the detection of hackers or other persons who commit computer crimes. A truly sophisticated intrusion leaves no track, no proof of a crime. On the other hand, how many crimes can be characterised as perfect crimes? Computer security industry knows that there is a huge number of perfect crimes . If the crime cannot be perceived, with any evidence, the most likely possibility is to be overlooked. Another aspect of the problem is that companies, which are based on customers confidence, are afraid to declare in public that are targeted by hackers. Perhaps, all these companies think that they may lose the customers trust or to be accused of having inadequate security systems.
In addition to this, companies have no confidence in the police, because they believe that police is inexperienced and unskilled in the field of computer crime: In the UK, this might well be a fair perception: the numbers of computer specialist officers and of successful prosecution are very small. In the USA, it is less fair: the FBI secret service and military investigators have gained experience and capability very rapidly-and willing both to work with and to educate local forces .
Consequently, it is very crucial that the police must have the experience and skills for the detection of computer crime: In a survey conducted by the Ontario provincial police: 321 responses received from 648 companies questioned, only 13 companies reported experience of a loss through computer crime; only 5 of these 13 incidents were reported to the police at the time, and it seems that only three prosecutions were undertaken.
All of the above show us the necessity for international co-operative measures. However, there is an international and national dialogue between industries, users and governments to encounter the computer-related crime through security systems.
2) Computer security
Computer security includes the technical and managerial measures, which need to maintain the safety of computer-based systems. According to Mandell S, there are physical menaces to security like fire, physical disaster, environmental problems and sabotage:
Fire: Is an important problem for computer security. This happens because most of the computer s parts consist of flammable materials like papers or magnetic types. Furthermore, water is impossible to be used as counter measure because it can cause serious damage on hardware. Some kind of extinguisher is very effective, like chemical gas, but is very costly.
Natural disaster: Earthquakes floods or hurricanes have impaired a large number of computer centres. The best protection is to choose a location, which is not prone to natural disasters.
Environmental problems: Computers are usually installed in non-specialised buildings for this purpose. This is an aspect, which is not originally planned (accommodate computers) and may cause environmental problems. For example, data on magnetic media can be destroyed by magnetic fields created by electric motors in the vicinity of the computer room. Some other environmental problems could be power failures or external radiation.
Sabotage: sabotage stands for the greatest physical risk to computer installations. Saboteurs may cause great damage to computer centres with little risk of apprehension. For example, magnets can be used to mess up coding on tapes, bombs can be planted and communication lines can be cut.
3) Security measures against hacking
Additionally, in order to protect computer systems from natural disasters, enterprises must take measures about unauthorised access by hackers, frauds or internal sabotage by personnel. For instance, people who work in a company as chief executives and have special access codes may steal important and valuable information. Insurance companies and banks are very prone at this kind of activity.
One method to protect computer-based systems from unwelcome visitors is to record all the activities, which occur in the system. This method is called security events: this is a major requirement in the case of those systems accredit within the official procedures for government or military use and an important element within the financial world. This type of method can record all the moves of the malicious hacker. Although this method is very credible, many levels of defence which called defence of depth is also a significant element for system security: It might not be possible to stop the hacker, but it is usually possible to slow them down long enough to track and record their activities and even to alert operators who can disconnect the hacker. The more the technology flourishes the computer security industry discovers new protection methods: the best speech recognition systems offer 99 per cent success rate in recognise individual voices. Manufactures should be encourage to take these and other biometrics methods to a high level of efficiency. (Financial Times, 4/12/93). Finding new ways to protect citizens from malicious hackers is an important step for the future of the electronic commerce.
4) Hackers – Internet and law
One of the most vital issues in which there is an argument about internet legislation is among the requirements of governments and companies: this exemplified by arguments over the use of encryption, with companies saying they should be allowed to protect information-one of the most valuable assets- by encrypting it, and governments arguing that in the fight against crime, they must have the right to control the use of encryption, and to monitor and decrypt Internet traffic. (Financial Times, 1/04/1998).
On the other hand, some governments decided to vote a draft about hacking. The most serious contraventions would carry a maximum five-year penalty. In spite of these difficulties, in some cases, there is perfect conduct between countries and organisations. For instance, Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) is an organisation, which is associated with Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and the metropolitan police in the UK. The scope of the IWF is to oversee and hinder the use of Internet to transmit unethical and unlawful material, in the UK. The initial priority of IWF is to stop the child pornography. In this situation, the advantage is that if IWF in the UK finds illegal material, which comes from a site in France, then it would be possible for the organisation to give a relevant report in France.
Finally, as we have seen up to now some aspects of the Internet need the extension of today s relevant laws concerning hacking and information protection, as in the most of cases the computer crime is covered by existing laws.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the Internet presents some enormous challenges in relation to hacking. The issues of illegal acts, which may simply be unsuitable for companies or other organisations, raise various issues and require several responses. But in my point of view, through the industry s law enforcement agencies, if community groups and government work together there is the assurance that the responses would be practical proportionate and workable in the new information age.
Hackers say that it is our social responsibility to share information because information hoarding and disinformation cause crimes. However, the ethic of resource and information sharing is different with computer security policies. These are based on authorisation and “need to know” basis. It is important at this point to examine the differences between the standards of hackers, systems managers, users and the public. These differences may represent a breakdown in current practices, and may present new opportunities to design better policies and mechanisms for making computer security more safe and information more widely available.
I began my investigation on hackers asking the question: who are they and what motives they have. My investigation also continued by a wider question: is it legal to have access and knowledge on information? As I have mentioned previously the majority of hackers does not have malicious purpose. The answers to these questions are crucial because they tell us whether our policies and practices serve us or not. The issue is not simply concerning hackers vs. system managers security or law enforcement; it is a much more larger question about values and practices in an information society.
Bibliography
Last accessed: 7/12/1999 Address: www.4yi.com/030199hackers/graphic.html
Last accessed: 7/12/1999 Address: http://www.infowar.com
Barrett N (1996) The state of the cybernation: cultural, political and economic implications of the Internet. Kogan page, London.
Barrett N (1997) Digital crime: policing the cybernation. Kogan Page, London.
Bequai A (1987) Technocrimes. Lexington Books, Lexington, Mass.
Doswell R T and Simons G L (1986) Fraud and abuse of IT systems. Ncc, Manchester.
Forester T and Morrison P (1994) Computer ethics: cautionary tales and ethical dilemmas in computing.(2nd) MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Guisnel J (1997) Cyberwars: espionage on the Internet. Plenum Press, New York.
Lobbecke C Content providers on the Internet: A dicussion paper on opportunities, limits and impacts.
Mandell S L (1992) Computers and information processing: concepts and applications.(6th) West Publishing, St. Paul, Minnesota.
Plant S (1997) Zeros + ones: digital women + the new technoculture. Fourth Estate, London.
Porter D (1996) Internet culture. Routledge, London.
Sieber U (1986) The international handbook on computer crime: computer related economic crime and the infringements of privacy. Wiley, Chichester.
Taylor P (1999) Hackers: crime the digital sublime. Routledge, New York.
Wasik M (1990) Crime and the computer. Oxford university press, Oxford.
Whitley E In cyberspace all they see is your words: A review of the relationship between body, behaviour and identity drawn from the sociology of knowledge.