Digital systems enable both crimes that could not exist without networked computers and existing offences carried out more efficiently or at greater scale. In IB Digital Society, these are best understood as cyber-dependent crime and cyber-enabled crime, within the political context of laws, regulations and policies.
| Type | Mechanism and examples |
|---|---|
| Cyber-dependent crime | Targets digital systems directly. Examples include unauthorized access or hacking, distributing malware, ransomware attacks, denial-of-service attacks, and disrupting networks or digital infrastructure. |
| Cyber-enabled crime | Uses digital systems to extend traditional offences. Examples include phishing, identity theft, online financial fraud, cyberstalking, illegal online markets, copyright infringement, and distributing prohibited content. |
The distinction depends on the role of the digital system. In a ransomware attack, malicious software encrypts data or blocks access to a computer system and demands payment. The offence depends on computers, software and networks, so it is cyber-dependent. In online fraud, deception already exists as a crime, but messaging platforms, websites and stolen data allow offenders to target more people across borders, so it is cyber-enabled.
These offences create political challenges because internet activity can cross national jurisdictions. An offender, victim, platform and server may each be located in a different country. Governments must therefore coordinate law enforcement while balancing security measures against privacy, freedom of expression and due process.
A common misconception is that all harmful online behaviour is automatically illegal. Harmful, unethical and illegal are not identical categories. Whether conduct constitutes lawbreaking depends on the applicable law and jurisdiction, although the same conduct can still create serious impacts and implications for people and communities.
For both SL and HL exams, classify the offence, explain how the digital system enables it, and identify affected stakeholders. In an AO3 response, evaluate competing priorities and support the argument with a specific, explained real-world example rather than merely naming “cybercrime.”
