header-logo header-logo

01 February 2007 / Stefan Fafinski
Issue: 7258 / Categories: Features , Technology
printer mail-detail

Cyber crime

Can legislation keep pace with technological developments? asks Stefan Fafinski

DPP v Lennon [2006] EWHC 1201 (Admin), [2006] All ER (D) 147 (May) neatly illustrates the shortcomings of the Computer Misuse Act 1990 (CMA 1990) and its seeming inability to keep pace with technological development (see 156 NLJ 7248, p 1712). Lennon concerned so-called ‘denial-of-service’ attacks in which information technology systems are overwhelmed with data, leaving them running slowly or utterly disabled.

Fortune teller’s view

CMA 1990 came about as a result of difficulties with the pre-existing law as it was stretched to encompass previously un-encountered mischief resulting from technological advances. Ironically, and perhaps unsurprisingly, 16 years on it suffered similar problems of scope. CMA 1990 was originally drafted with a fortune teller’s view of how computers might be attacked, with no possible foresight concerning technology’s evolution and potential application to cause harm. There have been three attempts to introduce amendment Bills to update CMA 1990 in response to public and industry concern about denial-of-service attacks. These Bills generally failed for lack of Parliamentary time. However, legislative change has finally been achieved via the Police

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll