Identifying the Distinction and Motives: Government hackers vs. Actual Cyber Terrorists

Source: HNGN

Hacking into government information or computer systems can be broken into two distinct categories. Firstly, 'hackers' - those who use their computer knowledge and ability to crack security codes. And secondly, 'cyber terrorists' who may hack into government systems to either gain information to cause damage in public settings or to affect the system's security ability (which could cause a national security issue). While cyber activity and cyber crime is on the rise, cases do not often fit into the category of 'cyber terrorists', but are usually lone hackers operating from their home. Hackers are motivated in an entirely different way and often are glamorised by the media, which may appeal to a lone boy in his bedroom wanting to share his ability to hack into government "secure" systems.

Social learning theory (Rogers, 2001) can also help understand the behaviour of a cyber hacker. The theory argues that the behaviour is generated through reinforcement from external and internal sources. The theory of reinforcement suggests that successfully hacking may generate praise, there have been cases where high-status companies have hired hackers who were able to break into their systems (Goodell, 1996). Furthermore, many may also lead with the idea they will impress the government after proving their ability and overall cleverness. For example, a young boy in Israel was charged with hacking into US Military networks, not only was granted with a job but the Prime Minister of Israel also voiced his praise for his ability (Wired, 1998). This is where cyber hackers differentiate from cyber terrorists as they are not motivated by the reinforcement benefits or media glamorisation. However, the media's response does also help explain what motivates a cyber terrorist belonging to a terrorist group because the media may exaggerate the threat and spread fear - a constant goal of anti-Western organisations. It is clear that a terrorist such as Osama bin Laden is clearly different from the Israeli youth case because the goals and motivations are not alike Although there is no evidence that suggests bin Laden was planning any cyber attacks, just that government information had been gathered (Awan, 2014: 2).

Source: Manataka American Indian Council

Decision theory identifies the core choice and rationality in the decision making process before committing a crime (Hasnsson, 1994: 5). In the case of cyber terrorism, those who are not motivated by political or religious reasons can be identified by previously mentioned theories. However, those who may be politically or religiously motivated may rationalise the act of hacking or committing cyber terrorism by their beliefs they are doing a good cause. It is also argued by Martin (2010) that a terrorist group rationalise their behaviour with the intention to carry out their group's goal, also 'threatens the psychological well being of its members' (2010: 74). Therefore suggesting that those who engage in either physical or cyber terrorism may not be mentally stable enough to rationalise decisions in the same way as everyone else. Instead, their desire to rise to power over others (e.g. political governments) influences their decision in order to increase their groups' image and even self esteem.

Source: News

The two are not necessarily treated differently by law. Gary McKinnon successfully hacked into US security systems from his home in the UK, causing damage to security computers at the Pentagon. In 2009, McKinnon was charge for the breach of US computer laws and despite an appeal being granted, he was still treated as a cyber terrorist (Awan, 2014: 5).

Word count: 573

References:

Awan, I. (2014). DEBATING THE TERM CYBER-TERRORISM: ISSUES AND PROBLEMS. International Journal of Criminology. 2-6.

Goodell, J. (1996). The cyber thief and the samurai. New York: Dell Publishing.

Hansson, S (1994). Decision Theory: A Brief Introduction. Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology. 5-8.

Martin, G. (2010). Understanding Terrorism. 3rd ed. USA: SAGE. 74.

Rogers, M. (2001). A social learning theory and moral disengagement analysis of criminal computer behaviour: An exploratory study. Unpublished dissertation.

Wired News. (1998). Analyzer takes notoriety to the bank. Available: HTTP: www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/11534.html