When we talk about cyber security, this includes protection in the social structures of the Internet.  

It is about protecting people from the violation of physical or mental integrity. Accordingly, security is a broader view than crime. Cybersecurity encompasses more than cybercrime. 

“The absence of security begins where an individual suffers harm or is likely to suffer harm.” 

Violation of physical or mental integrity 

The interpretation of the violation of physical or mental integrity of individuals requires a more flexible approach.  

If we focus exclusively on individuals,  we miss out on those behaviours that are directed against organizations, companies, or society.  

My clients are, of course, individuals and usually part of an organization or company. Always also a member of society. 

Examples of these are  

These are the so-called victimless offences.  

Which is indirectly not true as the price and impact of money laundering is high – for the entire world and that is going to be another story and episode of the future.  

I also recognise that the terms cyber security and cyber crime needs more focus when it comes to the terms and definitions. 

 Cyber security versus cyber crime 

Although cyber security encompasses more than cybercrime,  the latter plays an important role in cyber security.  

There are various definitions of cybercrime in circulation, but no single one which all agree on. Nor is there an official conceptual framework for this type of crime.  

Because the pattern of cyber crime are key to be understood like we do with the patterns of other fraud cases.    

Terminologies and categorizations 

We also work with different terminologies and categorizations, with the following features becoming apparent:  

There are offences with which ICT (Information and Communication Technology) 

a) constitutes the end and tools (hacking, spreading viruses) 

b) is executive but not the aim (e-fraud, distribution of forbidden content) 

In conclusion, cybercrime can be understood as an overarching concept for offences in which ICT plays an essential role

The two subcategories to be derived are cybercrime in the 

in the narrower sense, using ICT as an end and means 

other senses, with which ICT is responsible for the execution but is not the goal 

What is the difference between the responsibility of ICT in the execution or the use of ICT as a tool?  

When ICT is used exclusively as a tool, we are not usually talking about cybercrime. 

For example, when a criminal uses Google Map (or other electronical provider of maps) to find the petrol station for his next robbery.  

The term cybercrime is used for those crimes that use ICT as a target and a means. 

Cybercrime in the broader sense will disappear to exist over time, as it is only the modus operandi of how an offence has been committed. The term cybercrime is neither used to explain a criminological classification of the field of study nor to define the technical procedures for committing the offence. 

Even criminal prosecution does not need this term for the punishment of the offences, despite the Internet age.  In this respect, the term “cybercrime” does not clarify anything – officially.  

Offences should not be named according to the territory used (in our case here: cyber).  

This would otherwise mean that with every new technology or the use of tools to commit a crime, the taxonomy of crime would change. 

This means that we should understand the social relevance of information technology not from the technology itself, but from the social processes on which the technology is based on. 

Even if computers are used – an (economic) crime is an (economic) crime.  The focus from the means and tools used to the offence is relevant for the successful processing of (cyber-)crime. 

“The excessive focus on technology blocks the view of social reality.”


Treating the territories as what they are is needed.  

We must ask ourselves whether we are prepared to it or not. No matter if we are already traveling to this territory for a while.  Some of us do it for more than two or three decades.  


I would like to invite you to the following take-home reflection in the form of a few questions: 

  1. How does the territory I travel to look like? 
  2. What are the requirements to have a safe experience? 
  3. Which on these requirements are in place and which not? 

It might sound easy but do not underestimate the impact of these answers.  

Having involved the decision-makers which means the board, the management and the experts will complete the picture of the actual planned strategy and journey. 

The implementation will be an ongoing process as the territory will evolves and therefore the last question is the one to secure your business


Thank you for joining me on this episode of THE HUMAN FACTOR – Corporate Integrity Matters.

If you enjoyed this episode, please share, subscribe and review on Apple Podcasts or Google Play Music so more people can enjoy the upcoming episodes.

Don’t forget to follow and connect with me on Linkedin, Twitter and Instagram. I am looking forward meeting you there.


Let me know what topic you would like to have on spot – via contact@structuul.ch

Further information about Corporate Integrity can be found on www.coporateintegrityconcepts.com

And if you are interested in becoming part of the amazing movement, join us on www.corporateintegrityacademy.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *