[SOLVED] Comparative Analysis of Cyber Laws

This assignment provides a comparative analysis of cyber laws in Estonia and Malaysia. The report discusses the various types of cyber-crime, such as hacking and phishing, and how different regulations are formed to combat these crimes. It also highlights the need for new investigation instruments, such as software and hardware, to collect digital evidence efficiently. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of improving national cyber laws to effectively recognize and prosecute cyber-crimes.

LEGAL AND EVIDENTIARY ASPECTS
OF DIGITAL FORENSICS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
MAIN BODY...................................................................................................................................1
1. Legal implication that can be faces by Rosokov.....................................................................1
2. Identification of geographical barrier in mitigation of cyber crime........................................3
3. Analysis of EU an ASEAN cyber law and giving recommendation......................................4
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................6
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................7

INTRODUCTION
The present case study is about a cyber-crime occurred in Malaysia, in which the victim
belongs to the same country while accused is from Europe. The report will present legal
implications on the accused for committing a wrongful act. Along with this, geographical
barriers are also found out which create problems in relocation of accused from one nation to
another country. It also includes recommendations that will be given to solve and mitigate the
case of cyber-crime involving two nations.
MAIN BODY
Case study
In this, the victim was planning a crime against a third party with the help of accused. In
between all this preparation, accused took liberty from victim’s account by installing malware in
his PC and sent false advertisements to public from his email id. The victim was trying to hack
someone's computer account and got victimized by the accused who offered to help him
(Aggarwal, Arora and Ghai, 2014). Here victim’ name is Wong who wanted to learn nuances of
hacking by attacking Malaysian blogger, Ronnie’s blogging account with the help of a European-
Estonian hacker Rosokov. In this process, Rosokov gained access of Wong's PC and hacked it
and sent misleading emails on social platform along with hacked Ronnie’s too.
1. Legal implication that can be faced by Rosokov
Cybercrime prosecution guidance
According to this guideline, hacking is an invasion in a target's computer without any
authorisation and gaining access of the same and exploiting security and vulnerability of
computer’s owner.
Hacking can be used for:
 Gathering data and personal information to commit crime
 To vandalize a website
 For launching denial of service and distribution of denial of service attack.
Disruption of computer functionality: Malware means spreading of malicious software
between computers and interfering with operations of computer. This can be destructive in nature
as this can lead to crashing of computer and sometimes, it is used to steal data.
1

Offences and legislations that shall be considered while reviewing and charging for cyber-crime
are as follows:
Computer Misuse Act,1990
As per this act, hacking is defined under different sections as:
1. Unauthorised access to computer material.
2. Access which is unauthorised and is done with an intension of committing future offence
such as to commit a fraud, forgery, theft or criminal damages.
3. An act of unauthorised access with an intention to impair operation of computer.
3ZA. Access to a computer without authority causing serious risk and damages.
3A. To make, supply or obtain any article from computer for use in offence mentioned under
section 1 to 3ZA.
In this case study, Rosokov is accused of wrongfulness and unauthorised access of
Wong's PC and sending nuisance emails to public. This was done by obtaining articles and
access to Wong's computer by installing malware in his computer (Eichensehr, 2014). Rosokov
can be held accused under Section 1 as he used Wong's email account to send email and nothing
else.
Imprecation of act on accused
Penalty imposed by this act for offences committed under different sections are:
1. Section 1- 2 years’ imprisonment and/or fine
2. Section 2- 5-year imprisonment and/or fine
3. Section 3- 10 years’ imprisonment and/or fine
4. Section 3ZA- life imprisonment and/or a fine
2

Regulation of Inventory Powers Act, 2000
In this case study, Rosokov have committed an offence under Section 1(1)(b) of RIPA by
intentionally and without authorisation that interfered in the personal space of Wong's computer.
This is considered as an offence.
It is on discretion of prosecutor to charge Rosokov under RIPA, in addition to CMA
(Computer Misuse Act). RIPA is used when material and information are intercepted unlawfully
in course of its transmission (Namazifard and et.al., 2015). Whereas, CMA is used when
material and information is acquired through unauthorised access.
Data protection Act
This act lays down offences that are committed and includes:
 Obtaining and disclosing personal information and data
 Procuring disclosure of private information
 Offer to sale or selling such personal data
Interpretation
Rosokov have committed an offence by installing a malware in Wong's PC and accessing
his personal mail id to send fake emails to public and interfering with his personal information
and data. He can be convicted for crime under CMA as well as RIPA on discretion of prosecutor.
Along with this, he has also committed a crime under Data Protection Act where he procured
personal mail id of Wong and used it to send nuisance public mails.
2. Identification of geographical barrier in mitigation of cyber crime
The main barriers in cybercrime mitigation are as follows:
1. General challenges
These are faced in mitigation and implementation of cyber law based on two different
countries that are as follows: Availability of device and access: One of the key factors is to commit a crime where
basic equipment’s are needed and hardware, software and internet access is also required.
For detection of such crime, Section 10 of Computer Crime Act 1997 states that inspector
or officer of above this rank can search and seize a property or computer if a crime is
suspected (Singh, Husain and Vishwas 2014). In this case, accused is from different
1

country so there is no scope for immediate search and detention of computers and devices
used by accused in committing the specified crime.
 International dimensions: Data transfer process affects more than one country and in
case of an offence for cybercrime investigation, cooperation from law enforcement
agencies are necessary. It is needed and supported by involving authorities from all
countries.
 Location independence and crime site presence: In the present era, with internet access,
the crime can be committed from any corner of the world. Criminals need not necessarily
present at the same location as victim. The criminal can be at completely separate
locations from crime site. Sometimes, criminal deliberately chooses the targets from
different countries which have an inadequate cyber law.
 Resources availability: In this modern world, computers and laptops are easily available
and can be used to extent criminal activities. One of such offense is committed by using
Botnet.
 Speed of data exchange process: An e/mail change takes just few seconds and in this
short period of time, it is one of the major reasons of growing internet use. This fast
transfer leaves a very short tie for law enforcement agencies to collect evidence in order
to initiate investigation.
2. Legal challenges Drafting of national criminal law: Foundation of a strong investigation and prosecution
of cyber-crime is a proper legislation. The main challenge for a nation's criminal legal
system is delay in assessing potential damages by a new technology and making
necessary changes in national criminal law. New crimes and offences: With an increase in use of internet, new crimes are also
growing. These are increasing in the form of scams and frauds. The main case of fraud
is detection through misleading emails.
 Long procedures of collection of digital evidences: With presence of accused in another
country and fast digital procedures, evidences are generally destroyed and it becomes
2

difficult to collect them (Das, 2018). The dealings between two nations are too lengthy
and law enforcement agencies require fulfilment of many formalities to collate such
evidences.
3. Analysis of EU an ASEAN cyber law and giving recommendation
In the present case study, Wong, the victim belongs to Malaysia and Rosokov, the
accused is from Europe. Both victim and offender are from different continents which have
different laws and prosecutions and policies for cyber law crime.
3

In Malaysia, under cyber-crime law punishment and prosecution goes as follows:
Computer crime Act 1997:
Part III: Ancillary and general Provisions
Territorial scope of offences:
Section (9)
1. The provision of this is applicable to any person who have a Malaysian nationality or
citizenship and to a person who have committed an offence outside Malaysia. .
2. The offence committed shall be related with computer, program or data interference in
Malaysia and is able to connect/ sent or used to/by any other computer in Malaysia.
3. Any action taken against a person under this act shall put a bar on subsequent
proceedings.
Section 10
Search, seizure and arrest: When a magistrate on receiving information of
commencement of a crime can order search of a premise or a person (Greenleaf, 2018). And may
issue a warrant for arrest of a person and seize any property or thing which might be an
evidence-in case of such offences.
Section 12
A prosecution under this act may be instituted with consent of a public prosecution in
writing.
European Union Cyber Law and Regulations
Computer misuse Act 1990:
Section 4: Territorial scope of offence under this act:
1. For an offence committed under this act, under Section 1 to 3ZA, the offence is
considered when an act or event is occurred in the home country and accused was in
home country at time of commission of such offence.
2. At least one link with domestic jurisdiction must exist for an offence under Subsection 3
of this Section 4.
3. For section 1 above, there is no such need of link.
1

Recommendations
 Improvement of national criminal law: For proper and timely mitigation of cyber-
crime between two nations, adjustment of national law with identifying ambiguities in
penal code for prosecution is required (Understanding cybercrime, 2018). This will help
in speeding the procedure related with cyber-crime in readdressing and prosecuting
accused from another nation.
 Strengthen the cyber law: For this, it is essential to have modified and updated laws and
regulations related with cyber-crime. There are different types of cyber-crime such as
hacking, phishing etc. For all these different crime various regulations are formed and
these are needed to be strengthen to present a strong national law system.
 Narrow down legal formalities: The law enforcement agencies are required to limit the
legal formalities and requirement to be followed for a cyber-crime between two nations.
 Need of new investigation instruments: Digital evidences are crucial in investigation
for cyber-crime. One of the major drawbacks related with this is integrity. For this,
proper procedures shall be laid down along with development of certain software and
hardware for early detection to collect evidences.
CONCLUSION
From the above report, it can be concluded that both Estonia and Malaysia have cyber
laws with many similarities, but have different system of their implications and
prosecutions. For the cyber-crime committed by Rosokov from Europe can be understood
that for recognition of cyber-crime, it involves a very long and lengthy procedure as
collection of digital evidences from a different nation requires many formalities and this
will delay the justification and legal proceedings. There has been recommendation that
are made as to improve and remove loopholes from national cyber law. Also, law
enforcement agencies are also required to limit down legal formalities.
1

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Aggarwal, P., Arora, P. and Ghai, R., 2014. Review on cybercrime and security. International
Journal of Research in Engineering and Applied Sciences. 2(1). pp.48-51.
Das, M., 2018. International Regulation of Fantasy Sports: Comparative Legal Analysis of
United States, Austrailian, and Asian Laws. UNLV Gaming Law Journal. 8(2).
pp.3.Shah, P., 2016. Expert opinions on South Asian laws in immigration cases. In Legal
Pluralism in Conflict (pp. 153-160). Routledge-Cavendish.
Eichensehr, K. E., 2014. The cyber-law of nations. Geo. LJ. 103. pp.317.
Greenleaf, G., 2018. The Legal and Business Risks of Inconsistencies and Gaps in Coverage in
Asian Data Protection Laws.
Namazifard, A.,and et.al, 2015, April. Literature review of different contention of E-commerce
security and the purview of cyber law factors. In e-Commerce in Developing Countries:
With focus on e-Business (ECDC), 2015 9th International Conference on (pp. 1-14).
IEEE.
Singh, M., Husain, J. A. and Vishwas, N. K., 2014. A Comprehensive Study of Cyber Law and
Cyber Crimes. International Journal of IT, Engineering and Applied Sciences Research
(IJIEASR). 3(2). pp.20-24.
Online
Understanding cybercrime. 2018. [Pdf]. Available
through:<https://www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/cybersecurity-capacity/system/files/CybcrimeE.pdf>.
2