How To Deter Cybercrimes Thesis Statement ✓ Solved

Topic: How to deter Cybercrimes Thesis Statement: In 2020, s

Topic: How to deter Cybercrimes Thesis Statement: In 2020, several cybercrimes including phishing scams, website spoofing, ransomware, malware, and IoT hacking permeate the internet; hence laws, regulations, and compliance are necessary to control and deter cybercrimes.

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction

The year 2020 exposed cybercrime as a persistent and evolving threat that touches individuals, organizations, and governments worldwide. Phishing scams, website spoofing, ransomware, malware, and IoT hacking collectively undermine trust in digital systems and threaten data integrity, financial stability, and national security. Addressing this complex risk requires a dual approach: strengthen regulatory and compliance frameworks while deploying robust technical controls and organizational governance. Grounded in contemporary literature and risk-management principles, this paper argues that deterrence of cybercrime hinges on an integrated strategy that combines law, policy, and security engineering. Such an approach must address both societal factors that drive offenders and the technical vulnerabilities that criminals exploit (ENISA, 2020; Verizon, 2020). (Capecci et al., 2020) provide empirical support for the role of user behavior in phishing susceptibility, underscoring the importance of person-centered security awareness and training as part of deterrence. (NIST, 2018) and (ENISA, 2020) offer foundational regulatory and risk-management guidance that inform effective controls and governance.

Threat Landscape in 2020

Phishing and website spoofing continue to be foundational attack vectors, with attackers leveraging social engineering and domain impersonation to harvest credentials and credentials-based access. The literature highlights that attacker success often depends on user susceptibility and perceived legitimacy of communications. Capabilities to detect and deter these attacks have advanced, but gaps remain in user awareness and rapid incident response. For example, spear-phishing susceptibility is influenced by demographic factors and email content complexity, indicating that defense must combine user education with targeted technical controls (Capecci et al., 2020; Shankar et al., 2019).)

Ransomware emerged as a powerful economic driver for cybercriminals, encrypting corporate data and demanding payment for decryption or data resale. This threat disrupts operations, erodes trust, and imposes legal and financial costs. Effective deterrence requires not only technical backups and least-privilege access controls but also robust legal frameworks that facilitate prosecuting and deterring ransom-related activities and data-theft schemes (Sophos, 2020; Verizon, 2020). (Sophos, 2020) provides a comprehensive view of ransomware trends and mitigation strategies, emphasizing organizational resilience and coordinated response planning.

Malware remains a persistent threat vector, exploiting software vulnerabilities and user behavior to achieve unauthorized access, exfiltration, or disruption. Trends in malware attacks underscore the need for continuous threat intelligence, rapid patching, secure software development practices, and user education to reduce risk, with practical mitigation strategies highlighted across contemporary literature (Pandey et al., 2020). (Pandey et al., 2020).

IoT devices introduce unique risk due to heterogeneity, scale, and often limited computing resources for strong security controls. A layered risk-management approach that encompasses device-level hardening, secure firmware updates, network segmentation, and continuous monitoring is essential to deter IoT-based intrusions. Foundational IoT security scholarship describes architectures and risk management frameworks that guide practitioners toward an integrated defense in depth (Lee, 2020; Al-Fuqaha et al., 2015). (Lee, 2020; Al-Fuqaha et al., 2015).

Regulatory and Compliance Frameworks

Deterrence of cybercrime is facilitated by comprehensive regulatory regimes that define obligations for organizations, establish accountability, and enable cross-border cooperation. Foundational governance frameworks, such as the NIST Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity, provide a structure for identifying, protecting, detecting, responding to, and recovering from cyber incidents. (NIST, 2018). In addition, sector-specific and cross-market guidance from ENISA and other national bodies helps organizations align security controls with evolving threat landscapes, shaping compliance requirements that deter cybercrime (ENISA, 2020). (NIST, 2018; ENISA, 2020).

Technical and Organizational Deterrence Measures

Technical controls to deter cybercrime should be implemented across the attack kill chain. For phishing and website spoofing, email authentication (SPF, DKIM, DMARC) and robust anti-phishing tooling reduce credential theft and account takeover. Regular security awareness training, simulated phishing exercises, and clear incident reporting channels can mitigate human factors that enable attacks (Capecci et al., 2020; Shankar et al., 2019). (Capecci et al., 2020; Shankar et al., 2019).

IoT security benefits from a defense-in-depth posture: strong identity management, regular firmware updates, secure boot, network segmentation, and anomaly-based monitoring. A well-designed IoT risk-management framework helps organizations anticipate and mitigate device-level vulnerabilities and supply-chain risks (Lee, 2020; Al-Fuqaha et al., 2015). (Lee, 2020; Al-Fuqaha et al., 2015).

Malware and ransomware deterrence require proactive threat-hunting, rapid patch cycles, endpoint detection and response (EDR), and robust backups. In practice, organizations should implement least-privilege access, application whitelisting, regular vulnerability scanning, and incident-response playbooks to minimize breach impact and improve recovery times (Pandey et al., 2020; Sophos, 2020; Verizon, 2020). (Pandey et al., 2020; Sophos, 2020; Verizon, 2020).

From a policy perspective, deterrence is enhanced when legal frameworks enable proactive enforcement, international cooperation, and clear penalties for cybercrimes while supporting legitimate security research and incident response. A combination of regulatory compliance, industry standards (e.g., ISO/IEC 27001), and best-practice frameworks fosters an ecosystem in which organizations invest in robust defenses and resilience (NIST, 2018; ENISA, 2020). (NIST, 2018; ENISA, 2020).

Policy Implications and Recommendations

To deter cybercrime effectively, policymakers should pursue a multi-layered strategy that aligns legal regimes with technical capabilities. Key recommendations include: (1) codifying clear obligations for data protection, breach notification, and cybercrime prosecution; (2) promoting cross-border information sharing and joint investigations; (3) incentivizing secure-by-design practices in software, devices, and services; (4) supporting continuous security education and awareness programs; and (5) investing in threat intelligence, rapid patching, and incident-response capabilities. By integrating governance with security engineering, societies can reduce the incentives for criminals and raise the costs of wrongdoing while accelerating the adoption of safer digital ecosystems (NIST, 2018; ENISA, 2020; Verizon, 2020; Cap ecci et al., 2020). (NIST, 2018; ENISA, 2020; Verizon, 2020; Capecci et al., 2020).

Conclusion

Deterring cybercrime in 2020 and beyond requires an integrated approach that couples robust regulatory frameworks with practical security controls and organizational resilience. The literature reviewed indicates that understanding attacker methods—phishing and spoofing tactics, ransomware economics, malware propagation, and IoT-specific risks—helps define targeted deterrence measures. By implementing evidence-based policies, security architectures, and user education, we can reduce susceptibility, shorten incident lifecycles, and safeguard digital infrastructure. Ongoing collaboration among policymakers, researchers, industry, and the public remains essential to adapt deterrence strategies to evolving threats and new technologies (NIST, 2018; ENISA, 2020; Verizon, 2020; Capecci et al., 2020; Shankar et al., 2019; Lee, 2020; Pandey et al., 2020; Al-Fuqaha et al., 2015; Sophos, 2020; Witty, 2019).).

References

  • Capecci, D.; Ellis, D.; Rocha, H.; Dammaraju, S.; Oliveira, D.; Ebner, N. (2020). Susceptibility to Spear-Phishing Emails: Effects of Internet User Demographics and Email Content. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction.
  • Lee, I. (2020). Internet of Things (IoT) Cybersecurity: Literature Review and IoT Cyber Risk Management. Future Internet, 12(157).
  • Pandey, A.; Tripathi, A.; Kapil, G.; Singh, V.; Khan, M.; Agrawal, A.; Kumar, R.; Khan, A. (2020). Trends in Malware Attacks: Identification and Mitigation Strategies. IGI Global.
  • Shankar, A.; Shetty, R.; Nath, B. (2019). A Review on Phishing Attacks. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research.
  • Witty, M. (2019). Predicting Susceptibility to Cyber-Fraud Victimhood. Journal of Financial Crime.
  • Al-Fuqaha, A.; Guizani, M.; Mohammadi, M.; et al. (2015). Internet of Things: A Survey. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials.
  • NIST. (2018). Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity. Version 1.1. National Institute of Standards and Technology.
  • ENISA. (2020). Threat Landscape 2020. European Union Agency for Cybersecurity.
  • Verizon. (2020). Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR) 2020.
  • Sophos. (2020). The State of Ransomware 2020.

Related Assignments