Two Criminological Theories Of Hacking Behavior

The purpose of this paper is to touch on the issue of Hacking. It will go into detail about the history, evolution, future and prevention of Hacking. In addition, this paper will discuss different types of hackers and their motivation behind hacking. This paper examines the major impact caused by malicious hackers and give modern examples of such attacks. To conclude, it will predict how hacking will be in the near future and give the precautionary measures Information Security professionals can take to mitigate the risk of being victimized.

According to the Australian Institute of Criminology (2009) the US found half of the surveyed participants, both male and female aged 12 to 17 used social media. Having social media being a big part of children’s lives, makes it exceptionally easy for offenders to target their victims. In 2006 the Youth Internet Safety Survey found that over half of the children participating in the survey had been affected by some form of sexual harassment, and exposure to unwanted sexual material online (AIC 2009). As child grooming is mainly performed on the Internet, it is considered a worldwide problem (AIC 2009). With the use of crime theories, the crime of child grooming will be further explained using the social learning and routine activity theory.

In 1990, a new theory was brought to the public’s eye, which is able to explain all types of crime at all times. This new theory was called the theory of low self-control otherwise known as the general theory of crime. Travis Hirschi and Michael Gottfredson were the two theorists that came together to the form general theory of crime. The theory recognized that many individuals are not always born well. These individuals are “born predisposed toward selfish, self-centered,

Chapter 13 Suler discusses the different kinds of deviant behavior in the digital world. Advances in technology have resulted in new forms of deviance as well as new forms of control. The internet is the place for deviance because of the lack of proper constraints and restraints on associations. The internet has the ability to form communities that creates and supports behaviors that are no longer a norm.

Many criminological theories have the capacity to explain street crimes and violent crimes, including strain theory and biological positivism. The two theories have contrasting views that both attempt to explain why individuals commit unlawful activity, and highlights the certain characteristics that is believed by the theorists to be the initiators of criminals engaging in deviant behaviour. Although both theories have their own strengths and weaknesses, however in this essay, a critical analysis as to why strain theory, as a social explanation of crime, endorses a more powerful effect in producing a thorough understanding of criminal activity as opposed to biological positivism. Furthermore, within this essay, official statistics and case

The internet has brought upon a new revolution of global interconnection where contacting someone on the other side of the world is just a click away, but with this international phenomenon comes an increased susceptibility with unfamiliar technology. Internet crime is compiled of all non-physical crime with the aid of a computer. Although broad in definition internet crimes are largely composed of acts such as cyber fraud, ‘phishing’ (username and password hacking), cyber stalking and hacking. Internet crime does not pose an overwhelming issue in society in terms of its

Developmental theories state that an individual's propensity to crime is an ebb and flow over the course of their lives (Bohm & Vogel, 2011). These theories, often referred to as “life theories” are based on a person’s individual development (Bohm & Vogel, 2011). Developmental theories also argue that there are other factors which influence an individual’s likelihood to commit crimes (Bohm & Vogel, 2011). These theories also assert that although there may be a significant or influential factor in an individual’s life at one point in time, that same factor may not have any significance or importance at a different stage of their life (Bohm & Vogel, 2011).

Almost 90 percent of our society now depends on complex computer based system. With the increasingly use of computer and explosive growth of the Internet has brought many good things: electronic commerce, online banking, e-mail, video conferencing etc. The improvement of systems security to prevent criminal hacker has become an important concern to society. There are many ways to protect those information systems; it seems that the Ethical Hacking is a better way. Therefore, whether to teach or not teach the "Ethical Hacking" as a course in Tertiary education has become an interesting argument. In this article will analysis the ethical, legal, and ethical implications of this issue.

The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century, slum poverty was blamed; in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millennium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.

One of the most profound indicators of future criminal behavior lies in parenting. There is no greater influence on infants and young children than the parents themselves. However, some parents are simply not equipped to be successful role models for their children. Parents who engage in extreme corporal punishment, neglect to give their children proper supervision, or encourage rather than dissuade certain antisocial attitudes and behaviors can socialize their children in an extremely negative manner (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990)(Lahey et al., 1999). Children who are predisposed to irritability or impulsiveness might elicit antisocial responses from ill-equipped parents, possibly even physically abusive. These episodes of abuse will continue to create an environment in which children will display aggressive antisocial behavior and their parents will continue to respond negatively or ignore the child entirely (Collins et al., 2000)(Maccoby & Jacklin, 1983).

There are four top social risk factors believed for the involvement of crime. Parental behavior plays a large role in a child’s risk of involvement of crime because of the parent’s influence on a child’s development (“Social Risk Factors for Involvement of Crime”). Poor parenting in supervision, maltreatment of a child, or if the parent is a

Another study carried out on twins, were twins separated at birth through adoption. The studies wanted to see if growing up in different environments with different families had any impact on whether or not the twins grew up to be deviants. (Blackburn, 1993a) Psychologists wanted to work out if there was interaction between the environment in which they grew up in and their genes. Schulsinger (1972) carried out the first adoption study in Denmark. His theory was to compare adopted adults, some adults had been diagnosed as psychopaths and others hadn’t. There was a lot of criticism regarding his theory because Schulsinger used his own criteria to diagnose particular adults with psychopathic behaviour. Another criminologist who developed a theory around adoption was Crowe, he studied those that came from families with criminal backgrounds, but had been raised with a different family through adoption. Crowe wanted to analyze the results and see if there were any connections between your parents offending and you growing up to be an offender, even if you were raised by other parents with different values. Chemical and hormonal imbalances, bran injury and brain dysfunctions are other biological explainations of crime.

The agencies employed by governments to police the web in order to protect the vulnerable have seen an increase in child pornography and online fraud. The speed at which information can be distributed and the number of people that can be reached attracts those that are intent on causing harm. The term “cybercrime” is becoming more widely used. The financial gains that can be made and the anonymity the internet can provide, make the virtual world of cyberspace a haven for criminals. Although the internet has huge benefits for information gathering and social networking, in the wrong hands it can cause harm to the vulnerable and criminals are able to vanish into the underground with the use of false identities that are hard to track online.

Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General Theory of Crime proposes that low self-control is the cause of crime. Self-control is defined as a person’s ability to control their emotions, behaviors and desires in the face of external demands. Hirschi argued that everyone is born without self-control but it is gained through familial interactions. Parents who supervise their children, recognize deviance and punish deviant acts build self-control in their children. Therefore, low self-control is the product of unsuccessful parenting, such as failing to recognize and correct children’s wrong behavior. Children with low levels of self-control end up being more prone to crime, and their criminal tendencies continue into adulthood. If a child is never told

First off, there have been ample amounts of disapproval in relation to the general theory of crime, because many scholars feel that Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) failed to include the