I investigated the case study of Queensland law firms. The lawyers of the law firm fell into the trick. They cybercriminals play a trick, and the lawyers fell into the track. The criminals at first called the lawyers and explained their problems. They send emails to the lawyers and send them ‘important files’ associated with the cases. The lawyers found some links, and by clicking those links, they got directed to the file-sharing site. The sites were requested to share the email id and the password. The lawyers enter all the necessary information and fell into the trap. The cybercriminals monitor the firm’s email traffic and send invoices requesting payment. When they saw any large invoices in the inbox of the firm, they sent a bogus message with all the bank account details, so that the whole payment went to their bank accounting rather than the law firm.
What role did law enforcement play in the case
How did this vary from "traditional" law enforcement
The lawyers are not expert in the social engineering, and they do not have the desired knowledge about the network security. They have no detailed idea about the phishing and hacking. They also do not have the knowledge to safeguard themselves. The cybercriminals took the advantage and trapped them.
Cybercrime is a relatively new way of crime. The agents must have the expertise in analysing the online crime occurring. The law enforcement requires new kinds of specialists who are trained in network security, and it is constantly updating themselves with the growing network networking technologies and the trends.
Did the "cyber world" make their job easier or harder?
The network technology is evolving day by day; the network experts are also advancing. The cybercriminals are finding new ways of crime. Thus it is difficult for the law enforcement to handle all these crimes. However, this is not an impossible task. The criminals can be tracked by some means. Eventually, they get caught. In this case the cyber criminals they were caught and imprisoned.
What challenges did law enforcement face in the case
It is relatively a new form of cybercrime. The cybercriminals target the people as that people are the weakest chain the security chain. The people are not machines, and they took decisions based on the emotional responses and social cues. Generally, the people store bank account details and passwords in their brains. Therefore, the cybercriminals can play tricks, and the innocent people can fall into the trap. The law enforcement cannot control the innocent customers. Thus it is very challenging for the law enforcement to handle this issue.
What resources could have assisted law enforcement in this case
The law enforcement must develop policies regarding cyber laws. They must create rules, and all the people must follow those rules. In this way, they can safeguard themselves from the frauds. The Queensland law firms have learnt the lessons. The lawyers get concerned when someone asks for email and password.
Arief, Budi, Mohd Azeem Bin Adzmi, and Thomas Gross. "Understanding cybercrime from its stakeholders' perspectives: Part 1--attackers." IEEE Security & Privacy 13, no. 1 (2015): 71-76.
Johnson, Mark. Cyber Crime, Security and Digital Intelligence. Routledge, 2016.
Lagazio, Monica, Nazneen Sherif, and Mike Cushman. "A multi-level approach to understanding the impact of cyber crime on the financial sector." Computers & Security 45 (2014): 58-74.
Mazurczyk, Wojciech, Thomas Holt, and Krzysztof Szczypiorski. "Guest Editors’ Introduction: Special Issue on Cyber Crime." IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing 13, no. 2 (2016): 146-147.
McMahon, Richard, Darlene Serrato, Linda Bressler, and Martin Bressler. "Fighting cybercrime calls for developing effective strategy management." Journal of Technology Research 6 (2015): 1.
Taylor, Robert W., Eric J. Fritsch, and John Liederbach. Digital crime and digital terrorism. Prentice Hall Press, 2014.