|
Showing 1 - 2 of
2 matches in All Departments
The Internet is used by international insurgents, jihadists, and
terrorist organizations as a tool for radicalization and
recruitment, a method of propaganda distribution, a means of
communication, and ground for training. Although there are no known
reported incidents of cyberattacks on critical infrastructure as
acts of terror, this could potentially become a tactic in the
future. There are several methods for countering terrorist and
insurgent information operations on the Internet. The federal
government has organizations that conduct strategic communications,
counterpropaganda, and public diplomacy activities. The National
Framework for Strategic Communication guides how interagency
components are to integrate their activities. However, these
organizations may be stovepiped within agencies, and competing
agendas may be at stake. This report does not discuss technical and
Internet architecture design solutions. Some may interpret the law
to prevent federal agencies from conducting "propaganda" activities
that may potentially reach domestic audiences. Others may wish to
dismantle all websites that are seen to have malicious content or
to facilitate acts of terror, while some may have a competing
interest in keeping a site running and monitoring it for
intelligence value. Key issues for Congress: Although the
Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative addresses a federal
cybersecurity strategy and departmental ...
Twenty-first century criminals increasingly rely on the Internet
and advanced technologies to further their criminal operations.
These criminals can easily leverage the Internet to carry out
traditional crimes such as distributing illicit drugs and sex
trafficking. In addition, they exploit the digital world to
facilitate crimes that are often technology driven, including
identity theft, payment card fraud, and intellectual property
theft. Cybercrimes have economic, public health, and national
security implications, among others. For over three decades,
Congress has been concerned about cybercrime and its related
threats. Today, these concerns often arise among a larger
discussion surrounding the federal government's role in ensuring
U.S. cyber security. Conceptualizing cybercrime involves a number
of key elements and questions that include where do the criminal
acts exist in the real and digital worlds (and what technologies
are involved in carrying out the crimes), why are malicious
activities initiated, and who is involved in carrying out the
malicious acts? The U.S. government does not appear to have an
official definition of cybercrime that distinguishes it from crimes
committed in what is considered the real world. Similarly, there is
not a definition of cybercrime that distinguishes it from other
forms of cyber threats, and the term is often used interchangeably
with other Internet- or technology-linked malicious acts. Federal
law enforcement agencies often define cybercrime based on their
jurisdiction and the crimes they are charged with investigating.
And, just as there is no overarching definition for cybercrime,
there is no single agency that has been designated as the lead
investigative agency for combating cybercrime. The United States
does not have a national strategy exclusively focused on combating
cybercrime. Rather, there are other, broader strategies that have
cybercrime components. Policymakers may question whether there
should be a distinct strategy for combating cybercrime or whether
efforts to control these crimes are best addressed through more
wide-ranging strategies such as those targeting cyber security or
transnational organized crime. Congress may also question whether
these broader strategies provide specific cybercrime-related
objectives and clear means to achieve these goals. Comprehensive
data on cybercrime incidents and their impact are not available,
and without exact numbers on the current scope and prevalence of
cybercrime, it is difficult to evaluate the magnitude of the
threats posed by cyber criminals. There are a number of issues that
have prevented the accurate measurement and tracking of cybercrime.
For one, the lack of a clear sense of what constitutes cybercrime
presents a barrier to tracking inclusive cybercrime data.
Additionally, much of the available data on cybercrime is
self-reported, and individuals or organizations may not realize a
cybercrime has taken place or may elect-for a host of reasons-not
to report it. Policymakers may debate whether to direct a thorough
evaluation of the threats posed by cyber criminals.
|
You may like...
Hampstead
Diane Keaton, Brendan Gleeson, …
DVD
R66
Discovery Miles 660
|