Case 1: Let's say a mob boss was shot but survived the shooting. That night while he was in the hospital, the assassins hacked into the hospital computer and changed his medication so that he would be given a lethal injection. He was dead a few hours later. They then changed the medication order back to its correct form, after it had been incorrectly administered, to cover their tracks so that the nurse would be blamed for the "accident". The life of the nurse was probably ruined after this, along with the reputation of the hospital and all its employees.
Case 2: A cyber group hacks into the twitter of the Associated Press. They send out a tweet that reads "Breaking: Millions dead in the United States after Nuclear Bomb dropped". The group potentially gained nothing from doing this, as they are anonymous....so why would they do it?
Case 3: A group hacks into the system of a large multinational bank and leaves an encrypted message for the senior directors, which threatens the bank by saying that if they do not pay a set amount of money, then they will use anything from logic bombs to electromagnetic pulses and high-emission radio frequency guns to destroy all of the banks files. Do you think a bank would want this to go public, and have its clients see their vulnerability?
What constitutes terrorism? Is it initiative, motive, or something else....
Sources:
http://www.viralread.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/cyber_crime.jpg
Case 2 would seem to be the only one that truly fits terrorism. The only reason to do something like that would be to spread mass panic. Case 1 seems to fall under old fashion murder and Case 3 is simple extortion. All of these have a cyber part to them. All of the cases do a good job of how technology can not only be applied to business, but to crime as well.
ReplyDeleteI agree with john Perry's analysis of the three cases. I believe that case 2 is must definitely cyberterrorism. The other two cases are different crimes but they use technology as a means to assist them in the crime.
ReplyDelete