Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Defining Cybercrime

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of International Cybercrime and Cyberdeviance

Abstract

As the study of cybercrime has evolved, researchers have explored how to best define the term. To date, no universal definition of cybercrime has been developed. In this chapter, attention is given to why cybercrime definitions matter, challenges that arise in developing cybercrime definitions, and frameworks used to conceptualize the concept. Specifically, making the case that cybercrime definitions impact estimates about the extent of cybercrime, policies used to respond to the problem, strategies used to prevent the behavior, and theories used to explain the behavior, it is demonstrated that cybercrime can be conceptualized as either traditional criminal activity, deviant behavior, a legal issue, a political issue, a white-collar crime, the product of a social construction, or a technological problem. This framework is guided by recognition that cybercrime is global in nature, committed in the vast area called cyberspace, different from many other crimes, infrequently studied in criminal justice/criminology, and best understood through a multidisciplinary lens.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 699.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 699.99
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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alazab, M., Venkatraman, S., Watters, P., Alazab, M., & Alazab, A. (2012). Cybercrime: The case of obfuscated malware. In C. K. Georgiadis, H. Jahankhani, E. Pimenidis, R. Bashroush, & A. Al-Nemrat (Eds.), Global security, safety and sustainability & e-democracy. E-democracy 2011, ICGS3 2011. Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boes, S., & Leukfeldt, E. R. (2017). Fighting cybercrime: A joint effort. In R. Clark & S. Hasim (Eds.), Cyber-physical security (pp. 185–203). New York: Springer International Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, S. (2001a). State cybercrime legislation in the United States. Richmond Journal of Law and Technology, 7. Available at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/jolt/vol7/iss3/4.

  • Brenner, S. (2001b). Is there such a thing as ‘virtual crime. California Criminal Law Review, 4. Available at: http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/bjcl/vol4/iss1/3.

  • Brenner, S. W. (2002). Transnational evidence gathering and local prosecution of international cybercrime. John Marshall Journal of Computer and Information Law, 20, 347–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, S. W. (2004). Cyber crime metrics: Old wine in new bottles? Virginia Journal of Law and Technology, 9(13), 1–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, S. W. (2006). Cybercrime jurisdiction. Crime, Law and Social Change, 46, 189–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, S. W. (2012). Cybercrime and the law: Challenges, issues, and outcomes. UPNE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charney, S., & Alexander, K. (1996). Computer crime. Emory Law Journal, 45, 931.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clough, J. (2012). The council of Europe convention on cybercrime: Defining ‘crime’ in a digital world. Criminal Law Forum, 23, 363–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, J., Sainato, V., & Khey, D. (2010). Organizational data breaches, 2005–2010. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 5(1), 794–810.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cottim, A. (2010). Cybercrime, cyberterrorism and jurisdiction. European Journal of Legal Studies, 2, 55–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, B., & Bachmann, M. (2015). Out of the beta phase: Obstacles, challenges, and promising paths in the study of cyber criminology. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 9(1), 24–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etter, B. (2001). Forensic challenge of e-crime. Marden: Australian Center for Policing Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fafinski, S., Dutton, W., & Margetts, H. (2010). Mapping and measuring cybercrime. Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Federal Bureau of Investigation. (n.d.). Internet crime schemes. Available at https://www.ic3.gov/crimeschemes.aspx.

  • Finklea, K., & Theohary, C. A. (2012). Cybercrime: Conceptual issues for congress and U.S. law enforcement. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedrichs, D. (2009). Trusted criminals (4th ed.). Belmont: Cengage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gogolin, G. (2010). The digital crime tsunami. Digital Investigation, 7(1–2), 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goode, D. (2015). Drugs in American society (9th ed.). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, M. (2010). International dimensions of cybercrime. In S. Ghosh & E. Turrini (Eds.), Cybercrimes: A multidisciplinary analysis (pp. 311–3390). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, S., & Ford, R. (2006). On the definition and classification of cybercrime. Journal of Computer Virology, 2, 13–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grabosky, P. (2001). Virtual criminality: Old wine in new bottles? Social and Legal Studies, 10, 243–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grabosky, P. (2004). The Global Dimension of Cybercrime. Global Crime, 6, 146–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabosky, P. (2006). Electronic crime. New York: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, J., & Marion, N. (2016a). Presidential rhetoric and cybercrime. Criminology, Criminal Justice Law, and Society, 17, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, J., & Marion, N. (2016b). Presidential rhetoric on cybercrime: Links to terrorism? Criminal Justice Studies, 29, 163–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoar, S. (2005). Trends in cybercrime. Criminal Justice, 20, 4–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollinger, R. C., & Lanza-Kaduce, L. (1988). The process of criminalization: The case of computer crime laws. Criminology, 26, 101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt, T. J. (2010). Examining the role of technology in the formation of deviant subcultures. Social Science Computer Review, 28(4), 466–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt, T. J., & Copes, H. (2010). Transferring subcultural knowledge on-line: Practices and beliefs of persistent digital pirates. Deviant Behavior, 31(7), 625–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt, T. J., & Kilger, M. (2012). Examining willingness to attack critical infrastructure online and offline. Crime & Delinquency, 58(5), 798–822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt, T. J., Bossler, A. M., & Fitzgerald, S. (2010). Examining state and local law enforcement perceptions of computer crime. In Crime on-line: Correlates, causes, and context (pp. 221–246).

    Google Scholar 

  • Holt, T. J., Kilger, M., Chiang, L., & Yang, C. S. (2017). Exploring the correlates of individual willingness to engage in ideologically motivated cyberattacks. Deviant Behavior, 38(3), 356–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooper, C., Martini, B., & Choo, K. R. (2013). Cloud computing and its implications for cybercrime investigations in Australia. Computer Law & Security Review, 29(2), 152–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, Y., Chen, X., & Bose, I. (2013). Cybercrime enforcement around the globe. Journal of Information Privacy & Security, 9, 34–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jewkes, Y., & Yar, M. (2010). Handbook of internet crime. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanellis, P. (2006). Digital crime and forensic science in cyberspace. Indiana: Idea Publisher Group.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kardya, M., & Mitrou, L. (2012). Internet forensics: Legal and technical issues. Second international workshop on digital forensics and incident analysis (WDFIA 2007). https://doi.org/10.1109/WDFIA.2007.4299368.

  • Kävrestad, J. (2017). Guide to digital forensics: A concise and practical introduction. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kerbs, J., & Jolley, J. (2007). The joy of violence. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 32(1–2), 12–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krone, T. (2005). Concepts and terms. High Tech Crime Brief. Australian Institute of Criminology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lastowka, F., & Hunter, D. (2004). The laws of the virtual worlds. California Law Review, 92, 1–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leman-Langois, S. (Ed.). (2008). Technocrime. New York: Willan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, A., & Ilinka, D. (2013). International comparisons of cyber crime. Toronto: Ryerson University Privacy and Cyber Crime Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luppicini, R. (2014). Illuminating the dark side of the internet with actor-network theory. Global Media Journal, 7, 35–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcum, C. D., Higgins, G. E., & Tewksbury, R. (2011). Doing time for cyber crime: An examination of the correlates of sentence length in the United States. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 5(2), 825.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcum, C. D., Higgins, G. E., & Tewksbury, R. (2012). Incarceration or community placement: Examining the sentences of cybercriminals. Criminal Justice Studies, 25(1), 33–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moitra, S. (2004). Cybercrime. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 28, 105–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O'Neill, M. (2000). Old crimes in new bottles: Sanctioning cybercrime (pp. 237–288). George Mason Law Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, D. (1976). Crime by computer. New York: Scribner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, B. K. (2016). Expanding the boundaries of criminal justice: Emphasizing the “S” in the criminal justice sciences through interdisciplinary efforts. Justice Quarterly, 33, 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, B. (2018). White-collar cybercrime: White-collar crime, cybercrime, or both? Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law and Society. in press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponemon. (2017). Ponemon Institute’s 2017 Cost of Data Breach Study. Available online at https://www-01.ibm.com/marketing/iwm/dre/signup?source=urx-15763&S_PKG=ov58441.

  • Richardson, R. (2008). 2008 CSI/FBI computer crime and security survey. Computer Security Issues and Trends, 8, 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabell, E., Manaf, A., & Ismail, Z. (2012). Development of Malaysian digital forensics investigator competency identification methods. In A. E. Hassanien, A.-B. M. Salem, R. Ramadan, & T.-h. Kim (Eds.), Advanced machine learning technologies and applications. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinmetz, K. F., & Nobles, M. (2017). Technocrime and criminological theory. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland, E. (1940). White-collar criminality. American Sociological Review, 5(1), 12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabansky, L. (2012). Cybercrime: A national security issue. Military and Strategic Affairs, 4, 117–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tappan, P. W. (1960). Crime, justice and correction (Vol. 10). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, M., & Quayle, E. (2003). Child pornography: An internet crime. New York: Brunner-Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, R., Fritsch, E., & LIederbach, J. (2014). Digital crime and digital terrorism. New York: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin, S. (1961). Foresight and understanding: An enquiry into the aims of science. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valiquet, D. (2011). Cybercrime: Issues. Parliamentary Information and Research Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verma, M., Hussain, S., & Kushwa, S. (2013). Cyber Law. International Journal of Research Review in Engineering Science and Technology, 1, 123–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Solms, R., & Van Niekerk, J. (2013). From information security to cyber security. Computers and Security, 38, 97–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wall, D. S. (2004). What are cybercrimes. Criminal Justice Matters, 58, 20–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wall, D. S. (2007). Cybercrime: The transformation of crime in the information age. Oxford: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wall, D. S. (2008a). Cybercrime and the culture of fear. Information Communication and Society, 11, 861–884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wall, D. S. (2008b). Cybercrime, media and insecurity: The shaping of public perceptions of cybercrime. International Review of Law Computers and Technology, 22, 1–2, 45–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wall, D. (2013). Policing identity crimes. Policing and Society, 23, 437–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Z. (2012). Method for providing terminals of IMS network firewall and firewall system. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent Application.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, J. P., Beaver, K. M., DeLisi, M., Vaughn, M. G., Boisvert, D., & Vaske, J. (2008). Lombroso’s legacy: The miseducation of criminologists. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 19, 325–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yar, M. (2005). The novelty of cybercrime. European Journal of Criminology, 2(4), 407–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yen, T., Lin, I., & Chang, A. (2012). A study on digital forensics standard operation procedure for wireless cybercrime. International Journal of Computer Engineering Science, 2, 26–39.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA

    Brian K. Payne

Authors
  1. Brian K. Payne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brian K. Payne .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Social Science, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

    Thomas J. Holt

  2. Department of Criminal Justice and Criminology, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA, USA

    Adam M. Bossler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Payne, B.K. (2020). Defining Cybercrime. In: Holt, T., Bossler, A. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of International Cybercrime and Cyberdeviance. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78440-3_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy