阻止网络犯罪:关注中介机构

Aniket Kesari, C. Hoofnagle, Damon McCoy
{"title":"阻止网络犯罪:关注中介机构","authors":"Aniket Kesari, C. Hoofnagle, Damon McCoy","doi":"10.15779/Z387M04086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Article discusses how governments, intellectual property owners, and technology companies use the law to disrupt access to intermediaries used by financially-motivated cybercriminals. Just like licit businesses, illicit firms rely on intermediaries to advertise, sell and deliver products, collect payments, and maintain a reputation. Recognizing these needs, law enforcers use the courts, administrative procedures, and self-regulatory frameworks to execute a deterrence by denial strategy. Enforcers of the law seize the financial rewards and infrastructures necessary for the operation of illicit firms to deter their presence. \nPolicing illicit actors through their intermediaries raises due process and fairness concerns because service-providing companies may not be aware of the criminal activity, and because enforcement actions have consequences for consumers and other, licit firms. Yet, achieving direct deterrence by punishment suffers from jurisdictional and resource constraints, leaving enforcers with few other options for remedy. This Article integrates literature from the computer science and legal fields to explain enforcers' interventions, explore their efficacy, and evaluate the merits and demerits of enforcement efforts focused on the intermediaries used by financially-motivated cybercriminals.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deterring Cybercrime: Focus on Intermediaries\",\"authors\":\"Aniket Kesari, C. Hoofnagle, Damon McCoy\",\"doi\":\"10.15779/Z387M04086\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This Article discusses how governments, intellectual property owners, and technology companies use the law to disrupt access to intermediaries used by financially-motivated cybercriminals. Just like licit businesses, illicit firms rely on intermediaries to advertise, sell and deliver products, collect payments, and maintain a reputation. Recognizing these needs, law enforcers use the courts, administrative procedures, and self-regulatory frameworks to execute a deterrence by denial strategy. Enforcers of the law seize the financial rewards and infrastructures necessary for the operation of illicit firms to deter their presence. \\nPolicing illicit actors through their intermediaries raises due process and fairness concerns because service-providing companies may not be aware of the criminal activity, and because enforcement actions have consequences for consumers and other, licit firms. Yet, achieving direct deterrence by punishment suffers from jurisdictional and resource constraints, leaving enforcers with few other options for remedy. This Article integrates literature from the computer science and legal fields to explain enforcers' interventions, explore their efficacy, and evaluate the merits and demerits of enforcement efforts focused on the intermediaries used by financially-motivated cybercriminals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":179517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Information Privacy Law eJournal\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Information Privacy Law eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z387M04086\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z387M04086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

本文讨论了政府、知识产权所有者和技术公司如何利用法律来破坏出于经济动机的网络犯罪分子使用的中介机构。就像合法企业一样,非法企业依靠中介机构来做广告、销售和交付产品、收款和维护声誉。认识到这些需求,执法人员使用法院、行政程序和自我监管框架来执行拒绝战略的威慑。执法人员夺取非法公司运作所必需的财政奖励和基础设施,以阻止它们的存在。通过中间人对非法行为者进行监管引发了正当程序和公平问题,因为提供服务的公司可能不知道犯罪活动,而且执法行动会对消费者和其他合法公司产生影响。然而,通过惩罚实现直接威慑受到管辖权和资源限制,使执法者几乎没有其他补救办法。本文整合了来自计算机科学和法律领域的文献,以解释执法者的干预措施,探讨其有效性,并评估专注于经济动机网络罪犯使用的中介机构的执法工作的优点和缺点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Deterring Cybercrime: Focus on Intermediaries
This Article discusses how governments, intellectual property owners, and technology companies use the law to disrupt access to intermediaries used by financially-motivated cybercriminals. Just like licit businesses, illicit firms rely on intermediaries to advertise, sell and deliver products, collect payments, and maintain a reputation. Recognizing these needs, law enforcers use the courts, administrative procedures, and self-regulatory frameworks to execute a deterrence by denial strategy. Enforcers of the law seize the financial rewards and infrastructures necessary for the operation of illicit firms to deter their presence. Policing illicit actors through their intermediaries raises due process and fairness concerns because service-providing companies may not be aware of the criminal activity, and because enforcement actions have consequences for consumers and other, licit firms. Yet, achieving direct deterrence by punishment suffers from jurisdictional and resource constraints, leaving enforcers with few other options for remedy. This Article integrates literature from the computer science and legal fields to explain enforcers' interventions, explore their efficacy, and evaluate the merits and demerits of enforcement efforts focused on the intermediaries used by financially-motivated cybercriminals.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信