Financial Fraud, Technology Disruption, and Cyber-Governance

Financial Fraud, Technology Disruption, and Cyber-Governance

Yves Ekoué Amaïzo (Director Afrocentricity Think Tank, Austria)
Copyright: © 2015 |Pages: 13
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-5888-2.ch146
OnDemand PDF Download:
$30.00
List Price: $37.50

Chapter Preview

Top

Background

Opportunity and Threats of Cyberknowledge

Information, science and technology (IST) is an interdisciplinary field of knowledge expertise. With the growing connectivity, cybervulnerability and cyberthreats depend on a secured governance of the World Wide Web infrastructure and the reliability of related technologies otherwise changing threats into opportunities becomes impossible. Mastering the available worldwide knowledge and generating value added information and wealth turns are a competitive issue. Besides the ethical requirements, IST is nowadays highly dependent on the ability to access, produce, store, communicate and manage data, information and knowledge. In an interdependent world economy wired with fast evolving cybersystems with disruptive technologies and cloud networks, IST recurrently faced pervasive and insidious activities on cyberspace. Often, States security has a priority over people’s privacy or organizations’ confidentiality. In recent times, a new frontier of information transparency has emerged with the revelations of diplomatic cables intercepted and published by WikiLeaks. Surprisingly, States which were supposed to guaranty the cybersecurity are part of this controversial issue1.

Issues and Challenges

The sustainability of private and public Internet Safety is a major world challenge. The prevention and adoption of secured digital technologies require a participative system of regulation and control by individuals as well as organizations including States. Failing to master this, Internet governance could yield in high costs in terms of direct liabilities such as unexpected burdens due to technology, network and market disruptions, negative externalities of unsafe and insecure web. It could result in monetary and indirect liabilities such as reputation (Amaïzo, 2012).

Problems

Regulation is required for an efficient cybersecurity framework. Deregulation as an alternative is not an option as the drain on individuals and organizations’ resources might be economically unsustainable. Yet, the principle of disrupting cyberactivities is perceived and sometimes rewarded as a competitive profitability business. Forged and malicious technology disruption resulting in a cyberinformation snatching or a cybermoney grabbing appears as a ‘normal’ trading business especially in a profitable market segment of Electronic (E) commerce and E-marketing.

Controversies

From a formal law (common and criminal) viewpoint, making business on an unsecure and unpredictable Internet system could be perceived and associated with financial fraud, crime or terrorism. The lack of harmonization between several jurisdictional law enforcement entities and legal tax heaven territories is reinforcing this perception. The main controversy consists in the trivialization of cyberpreemptive actions and the potential interference of most influential and technologically advanced actors.

Key Terms in this Chapter

Cyberterrorism: An premeditated, politically motivated attack against data, information, computer systems and programs, digital networks, and architecture implemented through computers that results in violence, death and/or destruction and creates terror for the purpose of coercing a third party, usually Governments, to change its policies. It is usually committed by antiestablishment agents at national or international levels. Against considered powerful entities which have abused their position, it is taking the form of monetary harms, denial of services or damages to reputation operated by groups of activities self-justifying their illegal acts as being done on behalf of the weak influential categories of the world population. The main objective is to create disruption, paralysis and dysfunction in the decision-making of focused targets.

Cyber-Fraud and Crime: A breach of common and criminal law implemented with digital technologies and networks including the use of technology disruption.

Internet Service Providers: A fee-based organization that is providing Internet connections and services to its clients (individuals and organizations).

Economic Cybercrimes: A breach of common and criminal law implemented with digital technologies and networks.

Financial Fraud and Crime: An intentional act of deception involving financial transactions for purpose of personal gain. As a civil law violation, fraud is associated with crime and involves complex transactions usually conducted by knowledgeable professionals with criminal intent. Any intentional offence or any premeditated act, omission or concealment involving a breach of legal obligation or equitable responsibility. It results in a breach of duty or trust, a deprival, a loss, a deception or a disguise. FFC usually harms the victims and give an advantage over others, often by organized groupings operating in a multi-jurisdiction environment with a layer of mutable opportunist accomplices. FFC operations are rooted on unethical misconducts and abuses.

Informal Responsibility: It is important to differentiate between what a company’s legal responsibility is (common law) and what its responsibility in the eyes of the public is. As consequences of a law limbo, cyber-activities are gradually affecting negatively the public. Legal and socially constructed and informal aspects are greatly correlated. For democratic purpose, and in order to secure transparency and trust on the World Wide Web infrastructure, cyberstakeholders may reinvent cyberaccountability at the informal level using a participative approach. It cannot take place without an informal cyber-stakeholders’ court established as first level of jurisdictions and a cyber-supreme court as last-resort level. Informal responsibility consists in a participative approach of securing fair access and use of the cyberspace.

Cybersurveillance: Because of misuse and abuse of wrongdoers on the cyberspace, Cybersurveillance is unavoidable if commitment to transparent e-governance and fair e-services provided to the public are part of a global social obligation. Cybersurveillance is the act of ensuring a secure, undisrupted and fair access and use of digital services for all. Informal and formal participate approaches may guarantee an effective surveillance using Electronic means.

Anonymous: An organized group defined as cyberactivists who are protesting online. Based on a common understanding of what they consider as an ‘injustice’ or ‘non-ethical behavior of an organization’ , these cyberactivists, -in fact computer hackers-, built a cyberchain called ‘Anonymous’. They target organizations guilty for ‘not supporting’ their views. It is clearly a self-justice mechanism which comes as retaliation through an attempt to damage reputation, perpetrate a denial of service attack of targeted organizations or individuals. As a result, target organizations get their cybersystem disrupt or are unable to access. This cyberactivists group with unknown leadership structure specialized on online attacks against anything considered as an attempt to cyberfreedom. Recently, cyberattacks are concentrating on formal law enforcement agencies.

Disruption: A permutable arrangement of interference, disturbance, trouble, interruption, distraction, disorder, confusion, unruliness and fatal break in a service or the access to the technology required to access the service.

Technology Disruption: A breach any common service requiring the use of technology especially digital technology. The disrupting cyber-activities is perceived and sometimes rewarded as a competitive profitability business. Forged and malicious technology disruption could resulting in the breach in accessing Internet, cyberservices or a snatching of cyber-information or a grabbing cybermoney.

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book:
Reset