Abstract
This chapter discusses how information and communications technology (computer systems and data transmission) are used as cyber weapons for criminal purposes. It canvasses a number of legislative policy options for controlling their misuse. It concludes with the view that implementing cyber weapons laws—in the same vein as firearms legislation—would not only help ensure society’s domestic wellbeing, it would aid national security.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
For the purpose here, ICTs refer to computer-based data systems that include both hardware devices and software applications.
- 2.
Although on the surface, one would find it hard to discount the merits of such legislation, there are some dissenting voices that argue along the lines of the American National Rifle Association that there is a constitutional ‘...right of the people to keep and bear arms...’ (The Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America, December 15, 1791). In Australia and some other developed countries, by contrast, there is no such constitutional right, and the Commonwealth of Australia moved to further regulate various aspects of firearms when, in 1996, Martin Bryant murdered 35 people and injured 37 others at Port Arthur, Tasmania.
- 3.
Typically, weapons of warfare are categorized as being over 0.50 caliber. Whereas, weapons of 0.50 caliber or less are categorized as small arms. (Mouzos 1999)
- 4.
A virus is a program that contains instructions that allow it to replicate itself by attaching itself to other programs. The ‘infection’ is spread once the program is executed (i.e. run). Viruses can simply replicate themselves or cause damage by performing some harmful action. A worm is a program that replicates itself throughout a network (including the Internet) without the aid of a host program—like a virus. When a worm replicates, it overloads the network creating performance issues—usually with memory, hard drives, and bandwidth. A Trojan horse is like a worm in that it does not require a host program to execute, but rather it substitutes itself for a legitimate program hence its name. A logic bomb is dormant computer code added to software and activated at a predetermined time or by a predetermined event. For example, a cyber vandal might insert code into a program that will destroy important files should an event occur, or not occur. Although discussed as individual cyber weapons, viruses, worms, Trojan horses, and logic bombs can be created as combination weapon. For instance, a virus could gain access to a network through a Trojan horse. This virus could then install a logic bomb within a software application that is running on that network which in turn initiates a worm when that application executes.
- 5.
Note the difference between a weapon and a tool; the latter being an implement to help perform a piece of work. (Australian Institute of Criminology & Australian High-Tech Crime Centre, ‘Acquiring High Tech Crime Tools,’ High-Tech Crime Brief, no. 13, Canberra 2006).
- 6.
Defensive scanners would be expected to stop at the point where vulnerabilities are found. Offensive scanners would then take this information and go one step further—try to determine how to exploit the vulnerability(s).
- 7.
In fact, there is a white market for system exploits where software researchers can sell zero-day vulnerabilities that they discover back to software developers so that the developer can patch the flaw.
- 8.
For instance, there is what seems like and endless stream of emails circulating that promote some form of hoax.
- 9.
A regulation is a legal requirement created by an administrative unit of government which carries the threat of sanction or fine if the provisions are not complied.
References
Arquilla J, Ronfeldt D (eds) (2001) Networks and netwars: the future of terrorism, crime and militancy. Rand Corp, Santa Monica
Associated Press (2017) World cyberattack cripples UK hospitals, demands ransoms. The New York Times, 12 May, available at: https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/05/12/world/europe/ap-eu-britain-hospital-problems.html?_r=0. Accessed 16 May 2017
Bayles WJ (2001) The ethics of computer network attack. Parameters, Spring, pp 44–58
Brenner J (2007), quoted in Jeanne Meserve, Official: international hackers going after US networks. CNN Washington Bureau, 19 Oct [online]. Available at http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/19/cyber.threats/index.html. Accessed 17 May 2017
Campbell, Major General John H., cited in Stephen Green (1999) Pentagon giving cyberwarfare high priority. Copley News Service, 21 Dec, available at http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1999/12/991221-cyber.htm. Accessed 17 May 2017
Choo K-KR (2007) Zombies and Botnets. In: Trends and issues in crime and criminal justice, No. 337. Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra
Choo K-KR, Smith RG, McCusker R (2007) The future of technology-enabled crime in Australia. In: Trends and issues in crime and criminal justice, No. 341. Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra, p 6
Denning D (2000) Reflections on cyber weapons controls. Comput Secur J XVI(4, Fall):43–53
Grabosky PN (2005) Recent trends in cybercrime. 11th United Nations congress on crime prevention and criminal justice, Bangkok, April 22, 13
Grabosky PN, Smith RG (2007) Crime in the digital age: controlling telecommunications and cyberspace illegalities. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick
Mouzos J (1999) International traffic in small arms: an Australian perspective. In: Trends and issues in crime and criminal justice, No. 104. Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra
Prunckun H (2008) Bogies in the wire: is there a need for legislative control of cyber weapons. Glob Crime 9(3):262–272
Prunckun H (2015) Scientific methods of inquiry for intelligence analysis, 2nd edn. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham
Quinney R (1970) The social reality of crime. Little, Brown and Company, Boston
Simpson D (2007) quoted in Logan Ward, Facing down disaster. Popular Mechanics, number 58
Sofaer A, Goodman S, Cuéllar M-F, Drozdova E, Elliott D, Grove G, Lukasik S, Tonya P, Wilson G (2000) A proposal for an international convention on cyber crime and terrorism. Stanford University/The Hoover Institution/The Consortium for Research on Information Security and Policy/The Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford. August
Strauss H (2007a) Cyberwarrior: operationalizing cyberwarfare involves challenges across the defense enterprise and beyond. Gartner Inc., Stamford, p 8
Strauss H (2007b) Findings: cyberwarfare matures as a military option. Gartner Inc., Stamford, p 2
United States (2010) US code. Section 921(3)
Yunos Z, Zin ANM (2003) Future cyber weapons. The Star in Tech, November 13
Acknowledgement
The author would like to thank the editor of the Global Crime for permission to use his previously published paper (Prunckun 2008).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Prunckun, H. (2018). The Rule of Law: Controlling Cyber Weapons. In: Prunckun, H. (eds) Cyber Weaponry. Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74107-9_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74107-9_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-74106-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-74107-9
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)