Introduction
Cybercrime investigators work closely with society in their daily routines. Their role includes gathering evidence, preparing reports, testifying in court, training law enforcement, interviewing victims, and using digital forensics to investigate cybercrimes. Cybercrime investigators participate in an interdisciplinary field as they work closely with technology and how it impacts society through a criminal justice and psychological lens. They must remain objective and unbiased when working with offenders and victims. When testifying, it is critical for investigators to follow strict guidelines and regulations when gathering evidence and to avoid its contamination.
Relation to concepts in social science
As a cybercrime investigator, one of the key concepts is understanding what motivates criminals to commit cybercrimes, which varies depending on the crime committed. For example, a hacker may breach an organization’s network and inject ransomware onto a server to get money as a motive. However, when addressing a crime, such as someone blackmailing an ex-partner with revenge porn, the motive would most likely be revenge. In the same aspect, the border may be the motive for someone who is engaging in cyberbullying; this is prominent with Internet Trolls but could also relate to an offender’s personal violence against the victim. Like any traditional crime, understanding the offender’s motives will be key to concluding why the offender has committed a cybercrime. A study on cybercrime found that “Financial gain appeared most frequently (in 68.1% of cases), typically related to crimes against property such as fraud, theft, stolen property, forgery, embezzlement, and the like.” (Neufeld)
Understanding how these crimes impact a victim must also be considered during investigations. Victims of cybercrime are subjected to the same psychological effects that traditional crimes carry. A cybercrime investigator must understand the human factors of the crime being investigated. “Victim precipitation” helps an investigator understand the factors that lead to the victimization of the victim. In financial crimes, the victim may not practice the best cyber security measures in their daily lives, such as creating strong passwords or unknowingly oversharing with a criminal engaging in a social engineering campaign. It is important to note that “Victim precipitation” is not “victim blaming.” It is merely a means of understanding how a crime could occur in the first place. This also includes understanding the victim’s personality traits according to the “ISM Big 5”. According to “The Social Engineering Personality Framework “, “Three out of five personality traits (Conscientiousness, Extraversion, and Openness) show both increased and decreased susceptibility to SE (Social Engineering) depending on context and sub-traits. Agreeableness increases, and Neuroticism decrease susceptibility.” (Uebelacker and Quiel). Crimes of fraud tend to be geared towards those who do not understand technology.
Marginalized groups
Anyone can be a victim of a cybercrime, but there are a few marginalized groups who are more susceptible to attacks. Fraud crimes impact the elderly more than any other group, and this group is also more vulnerable to being victimized. With the elderly, a challenge arises in education relating to good cyber hygiene practices and a fundamental understanding of the technology to identify phishing campaigns and other attempts at fraudulent activity.
Children and teenagers are more likely to be victims of cyberbullying as they spend most of their time on the internet, whether that be in internet chat rooms, social media, or in gaming culture. Social media disorder (SMD) is a challenge for our youth, which is a dependence/addiction to the use of social media. SMD can increase depression and anxiety symptoms among adolescents. Additionally, children and teenagers are less likely to report acts of cyberbullying. In extreme cases, cyberbullying has driven victims to commit suicide. A study that looked at the relationship between Cyberbullying and suicide found that “cyberbullying victims were 1.9 times more likely and cyberbullying offenders were 1.5 times more likely to have attempted suicide than those who were not cyberbullying victims or offenders.” (Hinduja and Patchin). A challenge here is finding ways to prevent cyberbullying and to encourage victims to report these incidents as they can have life-threatening severe consequences.
Conclusion: Cybercrime investigators work closely with all groups in society. Whether they are investigating a large-scale cyberattack on an organization or fraud and bullying with individual victims, cybercrime investigators must understand how crimes occur and develop ways to help protect society. Maintaining high ethical standards when interacting with offenders and victims is essential as this affects credibility and the relationship between law enforcement and citizens. The technical aspect requires understanding technologies to gather evidence and present testimony in court for the prosecution of cyber offenders. They must have compassion and a determination to help victims and create a safe world for everyone online.
Works Cited
Hinduja, Sameer, and Justin W. Patchin. “Bullying, Cyberbullying, and Suicide.” Archives of Suicide Research, vol. 14, no. 3, 2010, pp. 206–221, https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2010.494133.
Neufeld, Derrick J. “Understanding Cybercrime.” IEEE Xplore, 1 Jan. 2010, ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5428417. Accessed 31 Aug. 2020.
Uebelacker, Sven, and Susanne Quiel. “The Social Engineering Personality Framework.” 2014 Workshop on Socio-Technical Aspects in Security and Trust, July 2014, ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6978926, https://doi.org/10.1109/stast.2014.12.