Online Library

Terrorism, crime, and war are all familiar notions; however, the way in which these have been altered through cyberspace is not yet fully, nor unanimously, understood through definitions, theories, and approaches. Although the threat level of terrorism in the UK has lowered to moderate, the threat posed by cyber terrorism has nonetheless heightened throughout the COVID pandemic due to the greater necessity and presence of technology in our lives. This research aimed to highlight the necessity for a unanimous cyber terrorism definition and framework and further aimed to determine what perceptions are held by the general public regarding cyber terrorism through a mixed methods approach. The literature review confirms that there is an absence of a unanimously agreed upon definition of cyber terrorism, and furthermore that the existing academic definitions are not compatible with UK legislation. In addition, the literature review highlights an absence of a cyber terrorism framework that classifies what kind of terrorist activity is cyber enabled or cyber dependent. Quantitative data from the online survey find a couple of significant effects implying the necessity for greater diversity amongst stakeholders which could potentially enhance the detection and prevention of terrorism in the UK. The qualitative data find that although there is some agreement amongst the sample population in views held towards cyber terrorism, some misconceptions are nonetheless present which could have implications on the general public’s ability to identify and report cyber terrorist activity. Overall, the findings from the literature review and the primary data collection aid in developing a cyber terrorism definition that is compatible with UK legislative definitions, and further aids in developing a terrorist activity framework that succinctly highlights the inextricable links between traditional, cyber enabled, and cyber-dependent terrorism.

There is an increasing threat posed by terrorism in modern day, and with the internet enabling new ways of disseminating online terrorist propaganda, audiences and support for terrorist groups are growing. The complex linkage between society and technology is become ever more critical as the world continues to shift more day-to-day life online, and this notion has increased greatly during the coronavirus global pandemic where online platforms have become an essential aspect for communicating. The spread of online terrorist propaganda has sparked concerns about the governance of Internet. However, Internet governance is multifaceted, complex and can be examined through various lenses. This paper argues that there is a need for a socio-technical perspective, exploring the inextricable linkages between societies and technology, on Internet governance. Focusing on the UK’s approach to governing terrorist propaganda, the paper highlights the strengths and limitations of the model of national law and regulation.

This article aims for revisiting the terrorism studies from different perspective. The terror attacks itself cannot be hundred percent zero but it just fluctuated trend. More specifically, terrorism always adaptive in following trends. While terror attacks still to target innocent civilians, the perpetrators could be closest relatives and neighbors. The way terror attack to reach out that group of people basically shows the silent role of returning foreign fighters (RFF)/returnees nurturing dan breeding terror ideologies. By using critical literature review especially historical narrative analysis, this study wants to examine the current terror trend that utilizes social media. It can spread terror narration and also affecting people to join. The way to analyze data is making clear connection from each literature. The findings of this study are: the RFF is adept at social media in nurturing terror ideologies and then making their home country and new terrorist cells to be breeding grounds.

Young people – politicised, active and highly connected – are no longer just passive consumers of online terrorist content by adult groomers but are themselves propaganda creators, group organisers, peer recruiters, extremist financers and terrorist convicts. This process, called “youth‑on‑youth radicalisation”, emphasises the agency that young people have in a digital era in which the information hierarchy is increasingly flattened. Noting the formation of several new young extreme‑right groups and a series of terrorist convictions across Western Europe, this paper takes first steps to investigate the specific nature of this emerging threat.

The permanent transition to online activity has brought with it a surge in hate speech discourse. This has prompted increased calls for automatic detection methods, most of which currently rely on a dictionary of hate speech words, and supervised classification. This approach often falls short when dealing with newer words and phrases produced by online extremist communities. These code words are used with the aim of evading automatic detection by systems. Code words are frequently used and have benign meanings in regular discourse, for instance, “skypes, googles, bing, yahoos” are all examples of words that have a hidden hate speech meaning. Such overlap presents a challenge to the traditional keyword approach of collecting data that is specific to hate speech. In this work, we first introduced a word embedding model that learns the hidden hate speech meaning of words. With this insight on code words, we developed a classifier that leverages linguistic patterns to reduce the impact of individual words. The proposed method was evaluated across three different datasets to test its generalizability. The empirical results show that the linguistic patterns approach outperforms the baselines and enables further analysis on hate speech expressions.

This report analyses memes propagated among three online socio‐political groups drawn from sample datasets pulled from social media sites often used by adherents of each group. These groups include those connected to the India‐based Hindutva, US‐based neo‐Nazis and those engaging in pro‐Rittenhouse communications in late 2020. The authors chose the groups based on similarities in their ideological goals, race‐based nationalism and their close association with political violence in their respective countries.