Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Criminal Regulations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Cybercrimes: A Multidisciplinary Analysis

Abstract

In the 1980s, an entirely new type of criminal began to surface on law enforcement’s radar screen. Unlike a traditional criminal who would engage in wanton destruction of life and property, this criminal, often male, was technologically-savvy and had discovered that he could gain information, wealth, and power through the use of computers and networks. Often he would act alone but, at other times, he would organize groups with cryptic names including 414s, the telephone area code for the city of Milwaukee; Legion of Doom; and the Chaos Computer Club [1, 2]. These individuals would use their technological knowledge and skills to primarily break into computers and networks to either steal proprietary information or fraudulently obtain telecommunications services at no cost. This new group of cybercriminals challenged our legal system and forced Congress and state governments to enact new laws to fight them. This chapter analyzes the substantive and procedural laws that Congress had to enact to combat crimes involving the use of technology and computers. It looks examines the challenges posed by cybercrimes, in particular the difficulties encountered by law enforcement in investigating and prosecuting cybercrimes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    WL 825683, at *1-3 (E.D. La. June 22, 2000).

  2. 2.

    WL 304895, *5-6 (S.D.N.Y. June 5, 1997).

  3. 3.

    Id. at *2.

  4. 4.

    Id. at *1.

  5. 5.

    see USAM §9-43.000.

  6. 6.

    USC §1029(e)(1).

  7. 7.

    See 18 USC §1029(c)(1)(A).

  8. 8.

    See 18 USC §1029(c)(1)(B).

  9. 9.

    See 18 USC §1029(c)(1)(C), (c)(2).

  10. 10.

    See H.R. Rep. No. 105-551 (II), at 23 (1998); S. Rep. No. 105-190, at 8 (1998).

  11. 11.

    Davidson & Associates v. Jung, 422 F.3d 630, 641-42 (8th Cir. 2005).

  12. 12.

    Bowers v. Baystate Techs., Inc., 320 F.3d 1317, 1325 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

  13. 13.

    Rivendell Forest Prods., Ltd. v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., 28 F.3d 1042, 1046 (10th Cir. 1994).

  14. 14.

    Cong. Rec. 27,116 (1996).

  15. 15.

    See 18 USC §1028A(a)(1).

  16. 16.

    USC §1028A(a)(2).

  17. 17.

    USC §1028A(b).

  18. 18.

    Civil Code Sec. 1798.80-1798.82.

  19. 19.

    The DoJ’s Prosecuting Computer Crimes Manual clarifies that this section applies to scenarios in which intruders threaten to penetrate a system, and encrypt or delete a database.

  20. 20.

    S. Rep. No. 90-1097 (1968), reprinted in 1968 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2112, 2153.

  21. 21.

    USC §411(a).

  22. 22.

    The “Computer Crime and Security Survey” conducted by the CSI in collaboration with the San Francisco Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) Computer Intrusion Squad.

  23. 23.

    United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 02-15742, D.C. No. CV-01-04166-MMC, Amended 17 Feb 2004.

  24. 24.

    USC §2701(a)(1).

  25. 25.

    USC §2510(17)(B).

  26. 26.

    H.R. Rep. No. 647, 99th Congress at 65 (1986).

  27. 27.

    United States v. Morris, 928 F. 2d 504, 510 (2d Cir. 1991)

  28. 28.

    Cf. Morris, 928 F. 2d at 510.

  29. 29.

    USC §1030(a)(2)(C), (g).

  30. 30.

    United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 05-10067, D.C. No. MISC-04-234-SI, Filed 26 August 2009.

  31. 31.

    United States v. Tamura, US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 694 F.2d 591, 10 Dec 1982.

  32. 32.

    Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, Certiorari to the Appeals Court of Massachusetts, Supreme Court of the United States, No. 07-591, Decided June 25, 2009.

  33. 33.

    USC §3122(b)(2).

  34. 34.

    USC §3127(3).

  35. 35.

    United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, No. 06-4092; Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati, No. 06-00357 – Susan J. Dlott, District Judge; Decided and Filed 11 July 2008.

  36. 36.

    Id §2703(d).

  37. 37.

    JA 48,51; see 18 USC §2703(d).

  38. 38.

    USC §2703(b)(1)(B).

  39. 39.

    Warshak, 490 F.3d at 473.

References

  1. The Learning Channel. (2001, July 25). Hackers: Computer outlaws. Cable Television.

    Google Scholar 

  2. A brief history of hacking.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Keeney, J. C., Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, US DoJ. (1983, November 18). Statement before The Subcommittee on the Judiciary, citing two computer crime cases involving prosecutions under the wire fraud statute.

    Google Scholar 

  4. H.R. Rep. No. 894, 98TH Cong., 2nd Sess. 1984, 1984 U.S.C.C.A.N. 3689. (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  5. S. Rep. No. 432, 99TH Cong., 2nd Sess. 1986, 1986 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2479. (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  6. US DoJ. Retrieved from http://www.cybercrime.gov/1030\_anal.html and http://www.cybercrime.gov/PatriotAct.htm

  7. Retrieved from http://www.cybercrime.gov/tranPlea.htm

  8. Computer Crime & Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS), US DoJ. Other network crime statutes (pp. 77–91). Retrieved March 12, 2007, from http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/ccmanual/03ccma.pdf-2007-03-12

  9. Liccardi, G. M. (2008). The computer fraud and abuse act: A vehicle for litigating trade secrets in federal court. In J. Marshall (Ed.), Law school review intellectual property law (Vol. 8, pp. 155–189).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Computer Crime & Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS), US DoJ. Prosecuting intellectual property crimes manual (3rd ed.). Retrieved October, 2006, from http://www.cybercrime.gov/ipmanual/index.html

  11. H.R. Rep. No. 894, 98th Cong., 2nd Session, 1984, 1984 U.S.C.C.A.N. 3689. (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Retrieved from http://news.com.com/2100-1023-954591.html?tag=fd\_top

  13. Retrieved from http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2127714,00.html

  14. Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Release. (2002, February 6). Security researchers drop scientific censorship case, government, industry claim DMCA not a threat to science. Retrieved from http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/Felten\_v\_RIAA/20020206\_eff\_felten\_pr.html

  15. Retrieved from http://www.cybercrime.gov/woodardIndict.htm

  16. Retrieved from http://www.cybercrime.gov/crimes.html\#IXg

  17. Retrieved from http://www.ncvc.org/resources/statistics/references/index.html\#74

  18. Consumers Union. (2009, January 7). Notice of security breach state laws. Retrieved from http://www.consumersunion.org/campaign//financialprivacynow/002215indiv.html

  19. Erin Nealy Cox. (2009, July/August). Data breaches have bred a patchwork of state laws. In Executive Counsel (Vol. 6).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Computer Crime & Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS), US DoJ. CCIPS prosecuting computer crimes manual (p. 5). Retrieved March, 2007, from http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/ccmanual/00ccma.html

  21. Businessweek. (2002, June 5). Cloaking your movements in cyberspace. Retrieved from http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2002/tc2002065\_1287.htm

  22. Unlawful Conduct Report.

    Google Scholar 

  23. McCullagh, D. Bin Laden: Steganography master? Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,41658,00.html

  24. Retrieved from http://www.privacyfoundation.org/resources/webbug.asp\#1

  25. Hacking victims’ ID to stay secret. Retrieved November 1, 2002, from http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/internet/11/01/reporting.hackers.ap/index.html

  26. Retrieved from http://www.infragard.net

  27. Retrieved from http://www.secretservice.gov

  28. Computer Crime & Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS), US DoJ. Digital forensic analysis methodology flowchart (PDF). Retrieved August 22, 2007, from http://www.cybercrime.gov/forensics\_chart.pdf

  29. Computer Crime & Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS), US DoJ. CCIPS manual on electronic search and seizure. Retrieved August 24, 2009, from http://www.cybercrime.gov/ssmanual/

  30. H.R. Rep. No. 99-647 (1986). (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  31. US DoJ. (2002). Retrieved from http://www.cybercrime.gov/s\&smanual2002.htm

  32. Brenner, S. (2008, July 12). Warshak: 6th Circuit blinks. Retrieved from http://cyb3rcrim3.blogspot.com/2008/07/warshak-6th-circuit-blinks.html

  33. Slobogin, C. (2007, November). Privacy at risk: The new government surveillance and the fourth amendment. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from http://www.press.uchicago.edu/presssite/metadata.epl?mode=synopsis\&bookkey=236643

  34. Kerr, O. S. (2009, April). Do we need a new fourth amendment? University of Michigan Law Review, 107, 951–966.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ghosh, S. (2002, April). Principles of secure network systems design. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Brewin, B. (2002, July 15). Watch out for wireless rogues. Retrieved from http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/story/0,10801,72664,00.html

  37. Verton, D. (2002, August 14). Mapping of wireless networks could pose enterprise risk. Retrieved from http://www.computerworld.com/mobiletopics/mobile/technology/story/0,10801,73479,00.html

  38. Di Gregory, K. V., Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, US DoJ. (2000, September 7). Foreign ownership interests and foreign government ownership interests in the American Communications Infrastructure, statement before the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer Protection Committee on Commerce.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Washington, USA

    Jessica R. Herrera-Flanigan

  2. 917 Joel Drive, Tyler, Texas, 75703, USA

    Sumit Ghosh

Authors
  1. Jessica R. Herrera-Flanigan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sumit Ghosh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Joel Drive 917, Tyler, 75703, Texas, USA

    Sumit Ghosh

  2. Babbitt Rd 10, Mendham, 07945-1802, New Jersey, USA

    Elliot Turrini

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Herrera-Flanigan, J.R., Ghosh, S. (2011). Criminal Regulations. In: Ghosh, S., Turrini, E. (eds) Cybercrimes: A Multidisciplinary Analysis. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13547-7_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation