Information criminality - a phenomenon met within the informatics field

The phenomenon described as “information criminality” has taken significant proportions in the last decade, fact that carried out towards an international legislative frame, by implementing judicial forms, which might stop its occurrences. As matter of fact, the information criminality represents an information technology aiming towards fraud and prejudicing the users of informational data, by various means to infringement of the law. In this way, some international organizations have dealt with performing a legislative framework, able to punish the phenomenon of information criminality and implicitly to protect the users of computers. The transnational expansions, extremely fast as concerns the computer networks, and extending the access to these networks, by means of mobile telephony, have brought the increasing of these systems’ vulnerability and the creating of opportunities of breaking the law. Considering these aspects, the world legislation is continuously changing, due to a more and more accelerated development of the information technology.

💡 Research Summary

The paper examines the rapid rise of “information criminality” over the past decade, arguing that the phenomenon demands a coordinated international legislative and judicial response. It begins by outlining how the pervasive diffusion of information technology—particularly the expansion of mobile networks, the rollout of 5G, cloud services, and the Internet of Things—has created new attack surfaces and increased system vulnerability. The authors define information criminality as any illicit activity that exploits information technology to commit fraud, unauthorized data manipulation, service disruption, or other forms of legal infringement. Four distinguishing dimensions are identified: technological mediation, transnational reach, non‑physical interaction, and accelerated execution.

The study then surveys the principal international legal instruments. The Council of Europe’s Budapest Convention is highlighted as the first comprehensive treaty, establishing common definitions, evidence‑preservation standards, and mechanisms for cross‑border cooperation. Complementary frameworks from the United Nations and INTERPOL are also reviewed, emphasizing their role in shaping a global consensus on cyber‑crime.

A comparative analysis of national statutes follows. The United States’ Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), the European Union’s Cybercrime Directive and Digital Evidence Guidelines, and South Korea’s Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection are examined in detail. While all aim to criminalize unauthorized access, data theft, and service denial, they differ markedly in scope, penalty severity, and procedural requirements, which the authors argue hampers effective international collaboration.

Technologically, the paper stresses that 5G’s ultra‑low latency and massive bandwidth enable large‑scale Distributed Denial‑of‑Service (DDoS) attacks and facilitate rapid data exfiltration from cloud environments. IoT devices, often shipped with minimal security, expand the threat landscape to include physical safety risks and supply‑chain compromises. The authors contend that existing legislation is largely “static,” crafted for legacy systems, and therefore ill‑suited to address these dynamic, multi‑vector threats.

To bridge the gap, the authors propose two regulatory reforms. First, a “technology‑neutral” drafting approach that focuses on the nature of the wrongdoing rather than the specific tools used. Second, a “dynamic regulatory framework” that incorporates sandbox testing, expert advisory panels, and alignment with international standards to allow rapid legislative updates as technology evolves.

Finally, the paper discusses practical obstacles to international cooperation, such as divergent legal definitions, complex evidence‑sharing protocols, and data‑sovereignty disputes. It recommends strengthening multilateral agreements and establishing joint cyber‑crisis response centers to enable real‑time information exchange and coordinated action. In conclusion, the authors assert that information criminality is a multi‑dimensional challenge that must be tackled through synchronized legal, technical, and policy measures, and that continuous legislative adaptation coupled with robust international collaboration is essential for effective mitigation.