In the crisis aspect of the situation, hackers` actions are outlined in the following possible expressions:
- Obtaining material resources: Such as violation of bank accounts. The company “Kaspersky Lab” gives the example that in 2013 one hacker group has managed to misappropriate more than one billion US dollars (Хакери откраднали близо 1 млрд. долара от банки по целия свят (Hackers stole more than one billion US dollars worldwide). 2015. );
- Pulverisation or change in the organisational management: by damaging the corporate site, the e-mail, or the social online platform profile, hackers manage to hamper the communication both with the stakeholders and between the different sectors of the organisation. Increased is the ambiguity at times of making a decision. Often these actions are an intermedia to trolling;
- Change of property of the organisation: utilised by alteration of the electronic data bases;
- Expression of their dissatisfaction as citizens: usually hackers take control of the corporate site, which is the company`s (the institution`s) main communication channel. Such hacks lead to minor mistakes and unreasonable demands, both of which reach an impressive number of users. Distinguishing the
PLACE AND ROLE OF HACKERS AND TROLLS IN THE INDUCTION OF CRISES IN THE WEB
the circumstances in which decisions are taken and the organisation management is realised. In the dimension of the hackers’ and trolls’ actions in the web correlations, are evaluated the specific potential threat on the institutions and the big public companies and the effect of the quick multiplication of the crisis demonstration.
The reached result allows for the precise outlining of the mechanism of the crisis actions of the presented type allows for an effective approach to both prevention and management of extreme situations induced by crashes in the web.
Keywords: trolls, hackers, web, crisis.
Introduction
The obstructed ability to emit messages blocks, hampers or changes the public perception and expectations regarding the image of companies, institutions and people. This way the existence of organisations is endangered, due to the severe hit their reputations experience. A crisis develops. Today Internet is an important factor in a wide range of social planes and a great part of the communication occurs in the web space. In these circumstances the realisation of such crises becomes increasingly easier and is present more and more often, and the main inductors are hackers and trolls. Their actions distort the public opinion which is dependent on the shared communal perception of the information in sites, social online platforms and blogs. A matter of such public negotiation is the reputation of the organisations which is a feature of the anticipated image, i.e. behaviour, identity, mission and future vision of companies, institutions and people.
1. Definition of hackers and trolls
According to John Arquilla and David Ronfeld (Arquilla, John and David Ronfeldt.1996, 51-52), the network in the modern society is divided in four levels: organisational, technological (which defines the infrastructure), doctrinal and social. A disruption in each levels compromises the social interaction. A critical view on the current situation in Internet shows that by violating the technological level of the public interactions, hackers are both intruders in the communication process and information thieves. The induced conflict quickly turns into a crisis which can be overcome by rebuilding the infrastructure or recovering the missing data. The damage done by trolls, however, is much greater. Trolls execute someone else`s orders and change the idea around which the network is built, i.e. they distort or at least alter the digital level of the network. The attacked
organisation is presented as publicly uncalled-for. The activity of the organisation is either discontinued or altered, depending on the public opinion and expectations, both of which are driven according to the endorser’s intentions. As far as the structure of the network is concerned, hackers discontinue or hamper the communication in the particular segment of the network, while trolls deliberately alter the role of the same segment. The differences define the following definitions:
Hackers: Hackers block, hamper the functioning of a segment of the network, without changing its role. Hackers do not propose a solution to the problem in the network structure, their actions mainly concern the organisational management.
Trolls: Trolls are quasi-present participants in the web communication who alter major segments of the network. Contrary to hackers, trolls are “armed” with a pre-prepared- most often by the endorser- “solution” which does not induce destabilisation in the system when exchanged with the unwanted network segment. Trolls aim for a general ideological change of the whole network.
2. Specifics of the hackers` actions
In the crisis aspect of the situation, hackers` actions are outlined in the following possible expressions:
- Obtaining material resources: Such as violation of bank accounts. The company “Kaspersky Lab” gives the example that in 2013 one hacker group has managed to misappropriate more than one billion US dollars (Хакери откраднали близо 1 млрд. долара от банки по целия свят (Hackers stole more than one billion US dollars worldwide). 2015. );
- Pulverisation or change in the organisational management: by damaging the corporate site, the e-mail, or the social online platform profile, hackers manage to hamper the communication both with the stakeholders and between the different sectors of the organisation. Increased is the ambiguity at times of making a decision. Often these actions are an intermedia to trolling;
- Change of property of the organisation: utilised by alteration of the electronic data bases;
- Expression of their dissatisfaction as citizens: usually hackers take control of the corporate site, which is the company`s (the institution`s) main communication channel. Such hacks lead to minor mistakes and unreasonable demands, both of which reach an impressive number of users. Distinguishing the
158
meaningful exhortations from the disinformation, the insinuations and the slander is anything but easy;
- Hacking to promote democratic moral values and against destructive terrorist groupings: such example is the group New World Hacking which on 31 December 2015 hacked BBC`s site so as to showcase their skills (Хакери борещи се срещу ИДИЛ в мрежата, атакували сайта на Би Би Си. (Hackers fighting against ISIS in the web attacked BBC`s site) 2016 ); another example is the Anonymous group which took offline more than 5000 Twitter accounts which were popularising radical Islam (Хакери свалиха 5000 акаунта с радикален. ислям в Туитър. (Hackers took offline more than 5000 Twitter accounts popularising radical Islam) 2015), etc. so long as the matter concerns blocking communication channels, i.e. disruption of e technological level of the net, and not the doctrinal, the actions are considered hackers`.
The list is open, as the anticipated dynamic development of Internet allows for new displays of hacker intervention. In all of the discussed examples, such actions induce conflicts, endanger the reputation and the management of the organisation and have a great potential to turn into a crisis. Specific for the hackers` intervention is that the subject to attacks are usually big companies and institutions. Institutions are meant to execute socially useful tasks (Джери, Д., Д. Джери (Jary, D., J. Jary). 1999). Blocking their corporate sites or the web-portals discontinues the services for citizens and enterprises. Sometimes, it even ceases totally the activity of the companies dependent on the functioning of the institutions: obtaining information, registering deals, regular submission of declarations within the set deadlines, etc. Hacking the institutional portal- for example via distributed denial of service (DDoS)- facilitates the transition from conflict to crisis. Sometimes endangered of discontinuing functionality are whole sectors of the business.