Typically Refers To Groups That Use Violence

Introduction:

In the past, when any reason which could cause a threat to human life could become visible then, at some occasions precautions could be taken. Human intelligence had a significant role in avoiding of any possible foe. People were concerned about their lands which provided them with the resource to continue life. They had to raise and train entire armies to defend themselves. The advent of technology also brought with it various risks associated with it. Use of technology as an essential factor in human lives had widened the threat possibility whether by physical or psychological means. In this paper, I will debate the differences between Hacktivism and Terrorism in order to understand both of them. “The Internet is used extensively as a publication medium by hackers (including Hacktivists) and terrorists” Arquilla & Ronfeldt(2001, 251). While Hacktivism and terrorism using the internet to access their interest, but they have different impact and method. Mostly Hacktivism and terrorism aimed to gain a political interest. For example, ISIS built their agenda on radical Islam and spread their propaganda as they are fighting Islam enemy but in fact, they were fighting for political interest and expansion of territory. “In order to create a caliphate, ISIS had to increase popular support and expand its territorial control. These ambitions drove the ISIS to decide to fashion itself into a pro-government and establish different civil administration and infrastructure projects. ISIS exploited underlying political grievances and sectarian tensions to draw support away from legitimate government. Further, ISIS use of terrorist tactics to achieve these goals helped it maintain territory and sustain its perception of momentum and resolve” ، Kevin and others(2018, 334). While Hacktivism can be positive in some condition but terrorism is negative whole. (religion)

Hacktivism and Hacktivist

Hacking’ is the term used to describe unauthorized access to or use of a computer system. The term ‘Hacktivism’ is composed of the words ‘hacking’ and ‘activism’ and is the most prevalent term which is used to describe politically motivated hacking Conway (2003, 10) Based on such observations, it could be determined that the process of hacking consists of two factors, human effort and technology (computers). Experts in computers who perform Hacking for sure will have motivations. These motivations can be ideological, political, religious and ethical or even could be constituted by a desire for exacting revenge. Shinder (2011,20) mentions three types of hackers: first Recreation; those who hack into networks” just for fun” or to prove their technical powers. Second, Remuneration: people who invade the network for personal gains, such as those who attempt to transfer funds to their accounts or erase records of their debts;” these are hackers for hire” who are paid by others to break into the network ; corporate espionage is also included in this category. Third, Revenge: dissatisfied customers, disgruntled and angry former employees and others. . From a particular perspective, it could be understood that Hackers, on some occasions, could benefit the public welfare as per their perceptions about such tasks. For instance make some knowledge free for everyone. “To a first approximation a Hacktivist is someone who repurposes technology to effect social change, but there is a conflict between those who want to change the meaning of the word to denote immoral, sinister activities and those who want to defend the boarder, more inclusive understanding of Hacktivism” Ludlow (2014, 13). In accordance to Ludlow, both these efforts specify the contention regarding the perceptions of whether the terminology related to Hactivism could be determined to have either a positive or a negative

effect. In this respect, it could be understood that social networking websites and online platforms could be extensively influenced by the activities of hacker activists. They can steal information from social network platforms and sell them to concerned party. “Hacktivism is the convergence of hacking with activism, where “hacking” is used to refer to operations which exploit computers in ways which are unusual and often illegal, typically with the help of special software (“hacking tools”). Hacktivism includes electronic civil disobedience, which brings methods of civil disobedience to cyberspace” Arquilla & Ronfeldt(2001, 263). If hackers are backed by political forces or work for profits, they can spread their agenda and help them to achieve their goals. Hacktivism is the emergence of popular political action as the self-activity of groups of people, in cyberspace. It is a combination of grassroots political protest with computer hacking. Hacktivists operate within the fabric of cyberspace, struggling over what is technologically possible in virtual lives and reaches out of cyberspace utilizing virtual powers to mound offline life Jordan & Tylor (2004, 1). The first analyses of hackers identified three intersecting communities, all in some way applying the notion of the ‘good hack’ to various technological objects. First one is the ‘Original’ hackers who are the pioneering computer aficionados who emerged in the earliest days of computing. Second are the Hardware hackers who are the computer innovators who, beginning in the 1970s, played a key role in the personal computing revolution which served to widely disseminate and dramatically decentralize computing hardware. Third community consists of the Software hackers who are innovators who focus more and more on elegant means of changing or creating programs to run on the hardware which are being hacked up Jordan & Tylor (2004, 17).

Hacktivists have found two uses for the Internet: Mass Virtual Direct Action (MVDA) and Individual Virtual Direct Action (IVDA). MVDA Mass Virtual Direct Action involves the simultaneous use, by many people, of the Internet to create electronic civil disobedience. It is named partly in homage to the dominant form of offline protest during the 1990s, Non-violent Direct Action or NVDA. IVDA Individual Virtual Direct Action takes up classic hacker/cracker techniques and actions for attacking networks, but uses them for explicitly political purposes. One initial point, is that the name IVDA does not mean that the actions are taken alone by Hacktivists, but rather that the nature of each action means it could be taken by an individual and in no way relies on a mass protest Jordan(2001, 8)” “Another type of attack that may be typified as an IT crime is “Hacktivism” which is an attack carried out in order to advocate for political or social change” Jenks & Fuller (2017,181). Jenks and Fuller provide many form of Hacktivism and gave some evident that Hacktivism effect to politics. In order to show how Hactivism effect to regional and international affairs. I would give an example of how it affects to international relations and can make big influence. On 15 August 2012 Saudi Aramco, one of the biggest petroleum companies was hit with a massive cyber-attack. The "Shamoon" virus did massive damage to more than 30000 computers. The virus deleted all information and all screens had shown half burnt flag of the United States. Following the declaration of information, Aramco had taken two weeks to recover the computers and systems. Even though the virus did not reach the main oil production fields, but oil prices have been affected. But the attack on Aramco came against a backdrop of frequent digital assaults by Iran against Saudi Arabia as a component of the two countries’ regional rivalry, which has intensified as Iranian proxy forces have gained influence in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. Hackers

thought to be working on behalf of Iran attacked Aramco in 2012, succeeding in wiping 30,000 computers at the sprawling company and grinding operations to a halt. Security experts have linked subsequent cyberattacks on Saudi Arabia to Iran as well. All investigation results pointed to Iran as a direct reaction by Iran to the execution of the Shia cleric by the Saudi Government. This attack caused escalated tension between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Furthermore, by reviewing oil crude historical prices, I found that the virus caused an increase in oil prices which were fluctuating between 113 to 114 but when the virus had hit Aramco, the prices peaked to 116,90 and it took 2 full days . Crime or not – motivation politically or socially or profit- loan wolf- mentality ill person- not direct war between two countries – funding the terrorism – not from government against own people -

Terrorism and terrorist

When I started searching for the definition of terrorism, I found many books which provided complicated definitions and many scholars had undertaken extensive discussions about the meaning of terrorism. The word “terror” derives from the Latin verb terrer, which means to bring someone to tremble through great fear. It refers to an individual psychological state of mind and has been around for centuries Schmid, (2011, 41). The terrorist groups are using violence to achieve their goals, but there are some groups or organizations which are classified as terrorist groups who use different ways than direct harm. “Alternatively, in some time the groups start as non-violent but when they could not get their goals the plans get changed and the tactics become more inclined towards violent means. A movement like the African National Congress, led by Nelson Mandela, engaged in non-violent action, sabotage, guerrilla warfare and terrorism” Schmid (2011,367). On the other hand ISIS uses violence to achieve its goals. The combined use of violence and information tools help ISIS to build support and consolidate power in Iraq and Syria Kevin and others (2018).

The ITERATE (International Terrorism: Attributes of Terrorist Events) project defines international/ transnational terrorism as “ the use, or threat of use, of anxiety-inducing, extra-normal violence for political purposes by any individual or group, whether acting for or in opposition to established governmental authority, when such action is intended to influence the attitudes and behaviour of a target group wider than the immediate victims and when, through the nationality or foreign ties of its perpetrators, its location, the nature of its institutional or human victims or the mechanics of its resolution, its ramifications transcend national boundaries (P. Schmid& others,2011,305)”

At the beginning, it’s necessary to find out which one of the Hacktivism and that of Terrorism is related to violence. It’s a very extensive discussion involving the definition of violence. Multiplicity of factors could influence the constitution of understanding regarding the difference between Terrorism and Hacktivism. Some of these could be understood as the location, type and motivations of the violent activities which could be perpetrated by personnel belonging to either of the two groups. “Direct violence involves the threat to use force and the actual use of physical force, such as killing, torture, rape and beating Zhang & Wright” (2018, 88) ”. Many authors argued whether Hacktivism caused violence or not. Most of them concluded that Hacktivism does not cause violent or harm, but terrorists perform all the appropriate processes of violent planning, tactics and then launch the attacks which are further intended to harm the general and common people. Himma (2007,66) said “Under U.S law, terrorism is an act of violence for the purpose of intimidating or coercing a government or civilian population. Hacktivism clearly does not fall into this category; it is fundamentally nonviolent.”

Hacktivism processes are mostly indicative of the assistance of various hacking organisations and this is a factor regardless of the fact whether the hacker or the hackers could be working for money or could they be members of any specific organisation or political entities. On the other hand, Terrorism could be observed to be reflective of extremely low ability of any centrality of administration. The terrorist groups are mostly comprised of militants who could be enthusiastic believers of any particular political, religious or social ideology and are committed towards the utilisation of violence for the achievement of the particular objectives.

Both Hacktivism and terrorism aim to advance their ideology, but Hacktivism uses computer science which cannot harm physically, for example, spread rumours in order to tarnish the target reputation. In contrast, the terrorism uses physical harm to achieve its goals, for example, committing an explosion among the civilian crowd.

Terrorists can be taken to court easily when find. Terrorist can fight easily.

Hackers may work for terrorist groups for payment which could be called as (Hackers-for-Hire). “These analysts presume that terrorist groups will be able to easily contact hackers-for-hire while keeping their direct involvement hidden through the use of cut-outs and proxies. The hackers could then be employed to inspect enemy information systems to identify targets and methods of access” Conway (2003). But a terrorist cannot work for Hackers, because the terrorists work for their ideology and beliefs. Apart from this, the activities of the terrorists are always necessitated to involve dedicated terrorists who could be persuaded through the indoctrination of group ideology .

A terrorist can kill people, but hackers cannot harm. We can consider them as logistic support. For example, hackers can help the terrorists to locate the victim, however, the crime of terror is perpetrated by the terrorists only and the hackers do not have to do anything with it.

From the historical perspective, the advent of terrorism could be determined to be an ancient phenomenon. The earliest historical instances could be determined to be reflective of the violent groups such as the Sicari of the Roman Judia during the late antiquities. The terminology of terror was fist utilized by the French philosopher Francois-Noel Babeuf to signify the violent methods utilized by the French Jacobin revolutionaries led by Maximilien Robespierre during the year of 1794. On the contrary, the relatively recent phenomenon of Hacktivism generally has been updating itself at a considerable pace through the inculcation of various different prospects of protest and invasive information gathering techniques and disciplines. As a form of political activism, Hacktivism has gained prominence through the measures such as peer to peer communication based platforms which could be utilized to avoid the modes of communication which could be under the censorship control. Such communication modes utilized by the hacking activists are mostly resistant to the censorship or surveillance effects. The most prominent examples of these are WiliLeaks and Anonymous. Furthermore, singular activists could as well perform such roles through the assistance provided through any organisation.

Finally, it could be observed that the criticality associated with that of the terminology of Hacktivism could lead to the realisation that several interpretations of meanings are directly associated with overall concept of such a notion. This signifies a method of direct approach involving the electronic domain of the Internet to undertake specific actions through which perceived social objectives could be fulfilled such as particular social agenda implementation. The combination of software programming skills and critical and in-depth thinking is fundamental in this regard. However, this is not generally associated with undermining of security of any particular tangible object such as that of any nation and is mostly not destructive in the implications of the hackings which get performed through such activism.

From a definitive perspective, it could be understood that the core component of Hacktivism is directly related to activism which is performed through the Internet based differential activities and information platforms. This is primarily a portmanteau between activism and the digital information gathering process of hacking into various computer systems. The fundamental reliance on technological utilisation for the promotion of any particular political agenda or social ideology is the basic tenet of Hacktivism based initiatives. In this respect, two distinct elements have to be taken into consideration to outline the validation of the observation that Hacktivism does not impart any damage which could be measured in terms of tangibility based parameters or which could cause loss of life or property to any measurable extent. These two elements could be outlined in the form of Hacker culture as well as the ethical hacking principles. The orientation is always towards the promotion of human rights related policies, the unhindered right of free speech and above all, the freedom of the ability to acquire any form of information without any prohibition. In terms of the differences between the damage caused by terrorist activities such as sabotage, arson, explosions and fire arms strikes and the impact of the activities undertaken by the hacktivists, the most prominent of the observed impacts could be understood to be the influence of psychological and social dimensions and these are markedly different from tangible and explicit damage perspectives which could be observed as the outcomes of terrorist activities. It could be further observed that Hacktivists are more inclined towards working in an anonymous manner. There are two distinct modes of work which the Hacktivists could be observed to operate through. The first one has been the group based modes where multiple Hacktivists formulate a group or online hacking community through which they perform their activities. The second one could be understood to be the single activist based operations where multiple cyber-operative identities are formulated which could correspond completely to only one Hacktivist. The overall umbrella of cybernetic world based activity through hacking has been obtaining consistent expansion within the greater public domain throughout the years since the advent of the Internet and further, since the formulation and development of the social networking sites. One distinct element of Hacktivism could be understood to be the anonymous representation of public interest or what such activists could suppose as the actual form of public interest. Furthermore, the impact of Hacktivism could be outlined in the forms of expressions of primarily prohibited or inhibited ideas in an explicit manner so that general scrutiny could be avoided altogether.

In this respect, the intangibility of the effects of activities perpetrated by the Hacktivists could be ascertained in the manner of formulation of multiplicity of new cybernetic tools so that representation of their specific agenda could be performed under the most discreet or completely anonymous online identity. This primarily provides the coveted sense of control, power and authority to the hacker activists.

To this effect, the integration and utilisation of various software based tools which could be instantaneously available through the Internet, are common practices on part of the Hacking activists. One specific aspect in this regard could be analysed as the committed effort on part of hacking activists to increase the possibilities of others to engage in the activities which could be motivated politically throughout the online digital domains.

The activities of hacking activists generally involve utilisation of encryption system applications to deny the related governments from accessing communication contents such as data, voice and online mail based communication contents. The purpose is to enable the websites and the associated software to assist in the achievement of political objectives. The example of Wikileaks could be outlined in the manner of providing an instance of a politically motivated web based sequence of operations. Dig deeper into Debating the Treatment of Returning Foreign Fighters with our selection of articles.

Furthermore, Hackitivists utilize the action of website mirroring. This is a specific method to circumvent the censorship prohibitions and blocks which could afflict websites. This tool is generally utilized to copy the existing contents of any website which could be censored. This copied content is then posted on to the various other online domains as well as subdomains which could be devoid of any censorship.

Furthermore, the hacking activists as well as other netizens could utilize a specific technique through which geo-tags could be added to various online audio, text and video files under the purview of the process of geo-bombing and this leads to the display of such online content files in the location finding applications such as Google Earth.

The hacking activists further utilize various tools such as disposable or expendable email accounts, masking the IP addresses and cryptographic software to formulate anonymous blogs so that their dissemination of information could be protected from any government supervision or from online surveillance conducted by the governmental authorities. Distribution of different documents and archived material on the online domains is generally protected by the hacking activists through the application of such software tools.

However, by far, the most extensive ramification of the activities of Hacktivists could be understood to be generated through the process of leaking of information. This could be put into perspective as the most significant activity of hacking activists which could be compared and contrasted to the cyber terror attacks on differential targets on critical infrastructures which have been delineated earlier in this research study. This is necessary to outline the research perspective that, on the contrary to the tangibility of damages which could be observed to be the outcomes of online cyber terrorist such as denial of services attacks and sabotaging of critical production facilities, the leaking of targeted and critical information by hackers to the public domains could have little to no tangibility of impacts. This is also considered to be a public interest based activity where sensitive and protected information regarding any particular individual or organisation or even about any national government could be leaked to the public domain and the objective is to raise awareness regarding any malicious activity or practice which could be under continuation by such organisations or individuals or even by such governments.