write one-page response for each of these two discussions
Cybercrimes against person and privacy
The most vulnerable persons in the cyberspace are children, and currently, sexual exploitation of children trade online. Most offenders chat online with children and wrongly depict their age and lure the minors to sex. Youngsters are at risk of online exploitation because they heavily depend on networking and social interactions. Children unknowingly or deliberately give personal data without the realization that they can be victims of penal charges by sharing information related to cybercrimes (Strachan, 2015,p.391). The essay paper, therefore, discusses online child pornography, child grooming, cyberstalking, voyeurism and online harassment.
Online Child Pornography
Child pornography is a sexual exploitation form which can be visually depicted to portray explicit conduct that involves a minor. It is illegal to produce, distribute, import, receive and possess an image of child pornography. Victims of child pornography do not only suffer from the sexual abuse infliction, but also the knowledge that their images can undergo a worldwide trade. Most child pornography victims may feel helpless, afraid, humiliated and lack self-control provided that their pictures can be viewed in timelessness. Emerging trends show that there is an increasing number of child pornography as well as violent sexual abuses portraying young children, infants, and toddlers (Avery, 2015,p.51).
Online Child Grooming
Child grooming is an emotional manipulation process whereby pedophiles make children ready for sexual exploitation. The child grooming process includes adult making friendship to a young individual and wins her trust through flattery, gifts, modeling jobs and sympathy. They groomer my attempt to sexualize the friendship an seek control of the child as well as continue to abuse the youngster. Child grooming becomes a cybercrime when pedophiles visit social network sites, chat rooms, online games or contact children through text messages and emails (Jalil, 2015,p.23). Pedophiles can utilize data that children show themselves in online platforms and target individuals with family problems, financial constraints, and low self-esteem.
Cyberstalking, Online Harassment, and Voyeurism
Online harassment is unwanted physical, verbal and visual behavior which affect the life, work and education of the survivor. In a context of a job, the bullying has effects on the employment, performance of the person and create a hostile, intimidating and offensive environment (Frangež and Lewin, 2015,p.294). Voyeurism takes place when a perpetrator gets sexual pleasure by viewing a sexual object or actions, especially individuals that are naked. Some voyeuristic engagements include spying people that are bathing, and looking at individuals who are undressing. Lastly, cyberstalking is a cybercrime where persons systematically harass or threaten an individual using e-mail, chat room, social media and instant messaging (Koonce, 2017,p.2).
In summary, a child grooming process includes adult making friendship to a young individual and wins her trust through flattery, gifts, modeling jobs and sympathy. Similarly, victims of child pornography do not only suffer from the sexual abuse infliction, but also the knowledge that their images can undergo a worldwide trade. The harassment has effects on the employment, performance of the person and creates hostile, intimidating and offensive environment It is also worth noting that it is difficult to arrest an offender because they can commit the crime from any part of the world. Therefore, parents and elders show come up with the best strategies of protecting children from online threats.
One of the most challenging aspects of cybercrime is that the perpetrator no longer has to be at the scene of the crime. They can be a few hundred meters away, a different city away, a different State or Territory away, and even in an entirely different country. Each one of these shifts creates an additional layer of complexity, as they shift jurisdictions and agencies when dealing across States, as well as some legislative differences; more significantly, the major issues when the crime is committed from a different country, where not only is it out of the original jurisdiction entirely, it is potentially not even illegal for the actors to do what they have done, nor can cooperation from local law enforcement be guaranteed (McDougall 2016 pp.7-8).
A number of cross-national policing agreements have been made, including extradition treaties, and intelligence sharing. In 2011, a Cybercrime action plan was agree to by the 5-Eyes nations, (US, UK, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia) which included increased cooperation amongst the member states (Commonwealth of Australia 2013). However, the single most powerful international agreement is the Council of Europe’s Convention on Cybercrime. Chapter III is the specific section that deals with the legal framework for international co-operation in Europe, and is one of the key documents in Europe, and widely utilised by many non-European nations as well (Project on Cybercrime 2009).
However, the Conventions aren’t perfect, with various issues being identified. Whilst it establishes a framework for policing, it has flaws; such as the lack of involvement of non-government entities such as business, or the wider security community (Soukieh 2011 pp.221-223); Key stakeholders who are vital to not only combating cybercrime, but are also the primary victims. Despite increasing international cooperation there has been a steady rise in cybercrime that law enforcement is simply failing to keep up with, both in the resources put to combating the issues and the expertise being built.
Whats even more problematic, specific to Australia, is the Australian Cyber Security Strategy; which discusses addressing shortages of professionals by targeted action in education and the workforce. Increasing innovation and funding to Science Technology Engineering Mathematics (STEM) fields, and increasing international cooperation. However, the Commonwealth has since defunded education on several occasions, reduced funding to key organisations in the STEM disciplines, and stifled international cooperation with major reductions in funding (Commonwealth of Australia 2016).