Online Library

The Handbook is divided into seven self-contained chapters, which build on each other but also allow the reader to jump in at any point, depending on their interests. Specific content may also be found using the keyword index. The seven chapters are distributed between the Handbook’s two main parts, each of which has a specific focus. A third, supplementary section consists of a selection of additional articles on relevant topics. Part 1, consisting of Chapters 1 to 4, deals with the theoretical foundations of violent extremism prevention under the key topics of ‘theoretical references’, ‘phenomenology’, ‘radicalisation processes’ and ‘evaluation’. Part 2 comprises Chapters 5 to 7 and places the focus on violent extremism prevention practice in Germany. This section deals with the approaches practised here, existing prevention programmes and the current prevention landscape. Chapters 1 to 7, which cover what we could call the main body of violent extremism prevention, are supplemented by a third section comprising excurses into complementary questions and areas of society which, although not explicitly considered part of the field of violent extremism prevention itself, nevertheless influence the occurrence of radicalisation and the diverse manifestations of politically and/or religiously motivated extremisms. The topics touched upon there include conflict transformation, the media, criminal law, mobile counselling, civic education, football culture, Islamic associations, victim counselling and ethics.

VOX-Pol Blog Post.

VOX-Pol Blog Post.

Terrorists use cyberspace and social media technology to create fear and spread violent ideologies, which pose a significant threat to public security. Researchers have documented the importance of the application of law and regulation in dealing with the criminal activities in cyberspace. Using routine activity theory, this article assessed the effectiveness of technological approaches to mitigating the expansion and organization of terrorism in cyberspace. Data collection included open-source documents, government threat assessments, legislation, policy papers, and peer-reviewed academic literature and semistructured interviews with fifteen security experts in Nigeria. The key findings were that the new generation of terrorists who are more technological savvy are growing, cybersecurity technologies are effective, and bilateral/multilateral cooperation is essential to combat the expansion of terrorism in cyberspace. The data provided may be useful to stakeholders responsible for national security, counterterrorism, law enforcement on the choice of cybersecurity technologies to confront terrorist expansion in cyberspace.

Anonymous, LulzSec, and the AntiSec movement are Internet-based organizations seeking to obtain and disseminate confidential data. Governments worldwide have made an attempt to crack down on these groups in response to the actions taken by them. Several countries, including the United States (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2011a; 2011b; Department of Justice, 2011), the United Kingdom (Halliday, Arthur, & Ball, 2011; Halliday, 2011b), Spain (Tremlett, 2011), France (Manach, 2012), the Netherlands (Associated Press, 2011), Italy, Switzerland, Turkey (Harris, 2011), Argentina, Chile, and Colombia (Associated Press, 2012) have made arrests and have raided residences belonging to Anonymous and LulzSec members. It is believed that hacktivist groups were responsible for more stolen data than cybercriminals during 2011 (Verizon, 2012), the first year that cybercriminals’ participation in hacking was surpassed by another type of cyber actor. The infamy and notoriety gained by these organizations makes it clear; disseminated confidential information is a threatening phenomenon on the rise in the 21st century affecting governmental security worldwide. The Internet, the most crucial element for the facilitation of these groups’ actions, is responsible for bringing them together.

The bulk of this article is concerned with showing why computer hackers and terrorists are unlikely to form an unholy alliance to engage in so-called
cyberterrorism. The remainder of the paper examines why neither hacktivists nor crackers fall easily into the cyberterrorist category either.