Cybercrime. Critical issues and legal regulations in the EU and in a transnational scenario

The rise of cybercrimes is influenced in a significant way by self-reinforcing feedback system. They are related to economic, socio-political and cognitive systems. As it is mentioned before, a low probability of cybercriminals being caught and prosecuted both with a lower severity of being punished give them a high positive economic feedback, such as various inefficiencies associated with electronic channels like anonymity and a lack of product and process transparency. In order to avoid market failure, there have been attempts to make universal availability of market information through mechanism such as online auction reputation systems, which consist of feedback related to prior transactions (just think about the well-known eBay phenomenon).
However, in most cases, this reputation system is not incisive enough: there are, for instance, reports that eBay accounts with pre-existing positive feedback can be bought in the electronic underground. Moreover, the entry requirements for ecommerce are low, which allow the participation of buyers and sellers of all sizes and reputation.
Socio-political feedback is related to institutions. And what is an institution, if not the government’s efforts to minimize the social loss from illegal activities? In these circumstances, it is quite obvious that, from a government’s standpoint, there is no social loss if the victim is from another country. For example, observes have noted that some countries such as China and Russia ignore cybercrimes unless such crimes are against their national interests. So, it turns out that cybercriminals in such countries receive positive political feedback.
Cognitive feedback loops are associated with cognitive programs that are built on mental maps of individual hackers. It always strongly depends on the nature and motivation of the actor. Just take into consideration the hackers: they include enjoyment from cybercrimes and less guilt in such crimes. It is like that cognitive system influence the lens through which existing and potential criminals view cybercrimes. Let me give you an example: many Indonesian hackers feel that cyber-fraud is wrong but acceptable, especially if the credit card owner is rich and not Indonesian.