Dealing with the Problem of Cybercrime

  • Ali Alkaabi
  • George Mohay
  • Adrian McCullagh
  • Nicholas Chantler
Part of the Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering book series (LNICST, volume 53)


Lack of a universally accepted and comprehensive taxonomy of cybercrime seriously impedes international efforts to accurately identify, report and monitor cybercrime trends. There is, not surprisingly, a corresponding disconnect internationally on the cybercrime legislation front, a much more serious problem and one which the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) says requires ‘the urgent attention of all nations’. Yet, and despite the existence of the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime, a proposal for a global cybercrime treaty was rejected by the United Nations (UN) as recently as April 2010. This paper presents a refined and comprehensive taxonomy of cybercrime and demonstrates its utility for widespread use. It analyses how the USA, the UK, Australia and the UAE align with the CoE Convention and finds that more needs to be done to achieve conformance. We conclude with an analysis of the approaches used in Australia, in Queensland, and in the UAE, in Abu Dhabi, to fight cybercrime and identify a number of shared problems.


Cybercrime Computer Crime CoE Convention on Cybercrime 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Grabosky, P., Smith, R.G., Dempsey, G.: Electronic Theft: Unlawful Acquisition in Cyberspace. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grabosky, P.: The Global and Regional Cyber Crime Problem. In: Broadhurst, R.G. (ed.) Proceedings of the Asia Cyber Crime Summit, pp. 22–42. Centre for Criminology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Furnell, S.M.: The Problem of Categorising Cybercrime and Cybercriminals. In: 2nd Australian Information Warfare and Security Conference, Perth, Australia, pp. 29–36 (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    United Nations (UN). International Review of Criminal Policy - United Nations manual on the prevention and control of computer-related crime (1999), (cited December 6, 2006)
  5. 5.
    G8 Government/Industry Conference on High-Tech Crime. Report of Workshop 3: Threat assessment and prevention. G8 Government/Industry Conference on High-Tech Crime (2001), (cited March 6, 2007)
  6. 6.
    Krone, T.: High Tech Crime Brief: Concepts and terms (2005), (cited February 1, 2007)
  7. 7.
    Kelly, J.X.: Cybercrime - High tech crime (2002), (cited March 1, 2007)
  8. 8.
    Gordon, S., Ford, R.: On the Definition and Classification of Cybercrime. Journal of Computer Virology 2(1), 13–20 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Broadhurst, R., Grabosky, P. (eds.): Cyber-crime: The challenge in Asia, p. 434. Hong Kong University Press, Hong Kong (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Smith, R.G., Grabosky, P., Urbas, G.: Cyber Criminals on Trial, p. 262. Cambridge University Press, Melbourne (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pokar, F.: New Challenges for International Rules Against Cyber-crime. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 10(1), 27–37 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada. Cyber Crime, August 16 (2004), (cited December 5, 2006)
  13. 13.
    Cybercitizenship. What is Cyber Crime? (2008), (cited February 19, 2008)
  14. 14.
    Symantec Corporation. What is Cybercrime? (2007), (cited February 5, 2007)
  15. 15.
    Kshetri, N.: The Simple Economics of Cybercrimes. IEEE Security & Privacy 4(1), 33–39 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wall, D.S.: Cybercrimes: New wine, no bottles? In: Davies, P., Francis, P., Jupp, V. (eds.) Invisible Crimes: Their Victims and their Regulation. Macmillan, London (1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grabosky, P.N.: Virtual Criminality: Old Wine in New Bottles? Social & Legal Studies 10(2), 243–249 (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Council of Europe. Convention on Cybercrime (2001), (cited February 10, 2009)
  19. 19.
    Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section Criminal Division at U.S. Department of Justice. Prosecuting computer crimes (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    UK Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). Progress of MPS E-crime Strategy (2007), (cited January 10, 2008)
  21. 21.
    Secretariat of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Crime Commission. Cybercrime (2004), (cited January 15, 2008)
  22. 22.
    Brenner, S.W.: U.S. Cybercrime Law: Defining offences. Information Systems Frontiers 6(2), 115–132 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sukhai, N.B.: Hacking and Cybercrime. In: Proceedings of the 1st Annual Conference on Information Security Curriculum Development, I.s.c. development, Editor, pp. 128–132. ACM Press, Kennesaw (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Koenig, D.: Investigation of Cybercrime and Technology-related Crime (2002), (cited June 25, 2008)
  25. 25.
    Wilson, C.: Botnets, Cybercrime, and Cyberterrorism: Vulnerabilities and policy issues for congress (2008), (cited June 26, 2008)
  26. 26.
    Lewis, B.C.: Preventing of Computer Crime Amidst International Anarchy (2004), (cited November 17, 2008)
  27. 27.
    Australian High Tech Crime Centre (AHTCC): Fighting the Invisible. Platypus Magazine: Journal of the Australian Federal Police 80, 4–6 (2003), Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Urbas, G., Choo, K.-K.R.: Resources Materials on Technology-enabled Crime, No. 28 (2008), (cited November 16, 2008)
  29. 29.
    Thomas, D.: An Uncertain World. The British Computer Society 48(5), 12–13 (2006)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kanellis, P., et al. (eds.): Digital Crime and Forensic Science in Cyberspace. Idea Group Inc., London (2006)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chakrabarti, A., Manimaran, G.: Internet Infrastructure Security: A taxonomy. IEEE Network 16(6), 13–21 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Krone, T.: High Tech Crime Brief: Hacking motives (2005), (cited February 12, 2007)
  33. 33.
    Keyser, M.: The Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime. Transnational Law and Policy Journal 12(2), 287–326 (2003)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Brenner, S.W.: Defining Cybercrime: A review of the state and federal law. In: Clifford, R.D. (ed.) Cybercrime: The Investigation, Prosecution and Defence of a Computer-Related Crime, pp. 12–40. Carolina Academic Press, North Carolina (2006)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Coleman, K.: Cyber Terrorism (2003), (cited February 10, 2009)
  36. 36.
    The UK Parliament Office of Science and Technology. Computer crime (2006), (cited March 1, 2007)
  37. 37.
    Markoff, J.: Computer Intruder is put on Probation and Fined $10,000 (1990), (cited October 7, 2008)
  38. 38.
    Wyld, B.: Cyberterrorism: Fear factor (2004), (cited October 7, 2008)
  39. 39.
    CIO Asia. A Hacker Story (2005), (cited May 28, 2008)
  40. 40.
    Attfield, P.: United States v Gorshkov Detailed Forensics and Case Study: Expert witness perspective, pp. 3–24. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Berghel, H.: Fungible Credentials and Next-generation Fraud. Communications of the ACM 49(12), 15–19 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ninemsn. Cop’s Child Porn Case Delayed to Friday (2008), (cited June 6, 2008)
  43. 43.
    Grow, B., Bush, J.: Hacker Hunters (2005), (cited October 21, 2006)
  44. 44.
    SCAMwatch. The Holiday Prize Which Nearly Cost Nicole Thousands of Dollars (2008), (cited October 17, 2008)
  45. 45.
    U.S. Department of Justice. Fourth defendant in massive Internet scam pleads guilty to fraud and money laundering charges (2004), (cited November 3, 2008)
  46. 46.
    Gulfnews. New Department to Fight Cyber Crimes (2009), (cited December 25, 2009)
  47. 47.
    Alkaabi, A., et al.: A Comparative Analysis of the Extent of Money Laundering in Australia, UAE, UK and the USA. In: Finance and Corporate Governance Conference, Melbourne (2010),
  48. 48.
    International Telecommunication Union. ITU Toolkit for Cybercrime Legislation (2009) (updated on February 2010), (cited November 3, 2009)

Copyright information

© ICST Institute for Computer Science, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ali Alkaabi
    • 1
  • George Mohay
    • 1
  • Adrian McCullagh
    • 1
  • Nicholas Chantler
    • 1
  1. 1.Information Security InstituteQueensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations