Impediments to the Successful Investigation of Transnational High Tech Crime
Russell Smith · Trends and issues in crime and criminal justice · 2005
Technology has both facilitated and impeded the investigation of crime, particularly high tech crime involving computing and communications technologies. On the one hand, computers have enabled vast amounts of data to be searched and analysed quickly, and have permitted documents and files to be scanned and transmitted across the globe in seconds. On the other hand, the sheer quantity of information creates considerable problems for investigators who sometimes have to examine gigabytes of data and break encryption codes before the material they are interested in can be discovered. This paper identifies a number of barriers to the effective investigation of high tech crime across borders, and offers some solutions that could be used to streamline future investigations in cyberspace. Toni Makkai Director Throughout the world more and more instances of high tech crime are being investigated by law enforcement agencies, often by specialist high tech crime units such as exist in the United Kingdom, the United States and Australia. Along with this increase in workload has come the realisation that crimes involving computers-either as the target of offending, or as one of a range of tools, or the principal tool used in the commission of offences-are technically difficult to investigate and raise many unresolved legal and practical problems (Smith, Grabosky & Urbas 2004; Sussmann 1999). Concerns often arise because of the transnational nature of the conduct involved. This necessitates a degree of cooperation rarely required of investigators in the past. This paper reviews seven barriers to the successful investigation of cross-border high tech crimes, and identifies policy responses that may be appropriate to deal effectively with these emerging global crime problems. Identifying suspects One of the first impediments that investigators face is identifying suspects. Occasionally, this can lead to considerable problems when the wrong person is arrested (see Box 1 ). In cyberspace, identification problems are amplified. Digital technologies enable people to disguise their identity in a wide range of ways making it difficult to know for certain who was using the terminal from which an illegal communication came. This problem is more prevalent in business environments where multiple users may have access to a work station and where passwords are known or shared, than in private homes where circumstantial evidence can often be used to determine who was using the computer at a given time. Online technologies make it relatively simple to disguise one's true identity, to misrepresent one's identity, or to make use of someone else's identity. For example 'remailing' services can be used to disguise one's identity when sending email. This is done by stripping messages of identifying information and allocating an anonymous identifier, or encrypting messages for added security. By using several remalllng services, users can make their communications almost impossible to follow. Anonymity can also be achieved in cyberspace using less technologically complex means. For example: * using a false name when purchasing pre-paid internet access from an Internet service provider and when renting a telephone line from a carrier; * registering for a free email service using a false name and address; and * using Internet kiosks to send messages without disclosing one's true Identity. Even e-commerce technologies that make use of public key infrastructures and digital signatures can be easily manipulated by individuals presenting fabricated documents to support a false identity when obtaining a key pair from a registration authority for use in secure transactions. Although the subsequent transaction may be secure from hackers, the identity of the person holding the key may nonetheless be fictitious. In a recent study of online anonymity, Forde and Armstrong (2002) argue that those internet services that provide the highest levels of anonymity are most likely to be used for criminal purposes. …