One Article Review
| Source |  AlienVault Lab Blog |
|---|---|
| Identifiant | 8488070 |
| Date de publication | 2024-04-24 10:00:00 (vue: 2024-04-24 16:07:28) |
| Titre | Comprendre comment la rationalité, la théorie de la dissuasion et l'indéterminisme influencent la cybercriminalité. Understanding how Rationality, Deterrence Theory, and Indeterminism Influence Cybercrime. |
| Texte | Understanding the factors influencing cybercriminal behavior is essential for developing effective cybercrime prevention strategies. Rationality plays a significant role in shaping criminal decisions, particularly through the lens of the rational actor model and deterrence theory. This blog explores how rationality influences cybercriminal behavior, focusing on the rational actor model, the concepts of deterrence theory, their implications for understanding and preventing cybercrime activities, and how Bayesian theory can help overcome indeterministic human criminal behavior to provide risk management. Brief History of Deterrence Theory: Deterrence theory has its roots in classical criminology and the works of philosophers such as Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham, who introduced the concept of deterrence as a means of preventing crime through the application of punishment. This idea became further developed during the mid-20th century when the theory of nuclear deterrence emerged as a prominent concept in international relations. The understanding of deterrence broadened to be applied not only in preventing nuclear conflict but also in the context of criminal justice. It was John Nash through his work in game theory that contributed significantly to the understanding of strategic decision-making and the potential for deterrence in various competitive situations. His insights were crucial in shaping the modern understanding of deterrence theory, particularly when applied to criminal decision-making and cybersecurity.[1] Explanation of Deterministic, Non-Deterministic, and Indeterministic: Deterministic: In the context of decision-making, determinism refers to the philosophical concept that all events, including human actions, are the inevitable result of preceding causes. This perspective suggests that given the same initial conditions and knowledge, an individual\'s choices can be predicted with certainty. In other words, under deterministic assumptions, human behavior can be seen as fully predictable.[2] Non-Deterministic: Non-deterministic views reject the idea that every event, including human actions, can be precisely determined or predicted based on preceding causes. Instead, non-deterministic perspectives acknowledge the role of uncertainty, chance, and randomness in decision-making. From this standpoint, human behavior is seen as influenced by a combination of factors, including personal choice, external circumstances, and unpredictable elements.[3] Indeterministic: Indeterminism represents a specific form of non-determinism. In the context of decision-making, indeterministic views emphasize the idea that certain events or actions, particularly human choices, are not entirely determined by preceding causes or predictable factors. Instead, they are seen as influenced by random or unpredictable elements, such as personal spontaneity, free will, or external factors that defy precise prediction.[4] The Indeterministic Nature of Cybercriminal Behavior: The indeterministic nature of cybercriminal behavior suggests that not all cybercrimes are the result of rational choices. Some individuals may engage in cybercriminal behavior due to impulsive actions, vulnerabilities in systems, or external pressures that override rational decision-making processes. These factors highlight the limitations of solely relying on rationality as an explanatory framework for cybercriminal behavior. Rationality and the Rational Actor Model in Cybercrime: The rational actor model suggests that cybercriminals are rational decision-makers who engage in a cost-benefit analysis before committing a cybercrime.[5] According to this model, cybercriminals weigh the potential benefits and costs of engaging in cybercriminal behavior and make a rational choice based on their assessment. The rational actor model assumes that cybercriminals have the capability to accurately assess the potential outcomes of their cyber actions and aim to maximize th |
| Envoyé | Oui |
| Condensat | “quantifying “simply “that ‘patriot swift 167 169 194 1950 1960 1968 2003 2006 2010 2011 2014 2015 20th 217 21st about academy according accurately acknowledge acknowledging acquisitions act action actions activities actor actors acts adaptive additionally addressing administered adversaries advisory after against aids aim all allowing allows also analysis another anticipate apocryphal application applied approach appropriate are asked aspects assess assessment assessments asset assumes assumption assumptions at&t at&t’s attack attacker attacker’s attackers attacking attacks bank banks banks” based basic bayesian became because beccaria becker been before behavior behavior: being beliefs believe benefit benefits bentham between beyond bias blog bot boundaries brief broad broadened business but calculation cambridge can capability capacity capitalism care cartwright caught causes centrifuges century certain certainty cesare chains chance chaos cheating choice choices choose circumstances clarke classic classical classified clients collar combination commit committing companies competitive competitors complexities compliance comprehensive compromise compromised concept concepts conclusion: conditional conditions confidential conflict conform connection consequences consider considered considering consulting context contexts continuously contributed convenient cornish corruption cost costs could countermeasures create cressey crime crime: criminal criminal: criminology crucial cyber cyberattacks cybercrime cybercrime: cybercrimes cybercriminal cybercriminals cyberrisks cybersecurity dappled data decision decisions defacement defending defy delayed democracy despite destroy destroying destruction deter determined determinism deterministic deterministic: deterred deterrence deterrence: deterrent deterrents deterring developed developing development discussed disgruntled disparaging disrupting drive driven due during dynamic economic economy eds effect effective efficient efforts either elements emerged emotions emphasize emphasizes employed employees enable enforcement engage engaging enhance enhancing ensures enterprise entirely epidemiology equilibrium espionage essential even event events every evidence example examples expected experience experimental explaining explanation explanatory explores external extrinsic face facilitate facilitation fact factor factors fall final financial fines flexible focused focusing form former formulation framework free frequently from fully further game games gauge generally given government great group groups hackers’ hacking hacktivism harsh harshness has have health help highlight highlighting his history hollis how however human idea identifiable identified identifying ideological ignore impact implications importance important imposed impulsive impulsivity include: including increase indeterminism indeterministic indeterministic: individual individuals inevitable influence influenced influences influencing information inherent initial initiating insights instead intellectual interest international intrinsic intrinsically introduced introduction invaluable investigation iranian irresponsible is” issues its jeremy john journal justice key knowledge large largest law leading legal lens less leveraging libertarianism light likelihood likely limitations lindley lion’s loved make makers making making: management management: managing manner marketing maximize may means media menell messages methods mid mitigate model models modern monetized money more motivated motivating motivation motivations nagin nash nation national nature net nets new news non not note notorious nuanced nuclear nuisance/destruction offending offense offers often one only operates organization organizations organized other outcomes outweigh overcome overcoming override overview particularly penalties perceived percentage perpetrated person personal personally perspective perspectives philosophers philosophical philosophy pii plans play plays pogar |
| Tags | Tool Vulnerability Studies Legislation Prediction |
| Stories | |
| Notes | ★★★ |
| Move | 
|
L'article ne semble pas avoir été repris aprés sa publication.
L'article ne semble pas avoir été repris sur un précédent.