Computer Crime Research Center


Anonymity in Cyberspace: Finding the Balance

Date: July 09, 2006
Source: Computer Crime Research Center
By: Mohamed CHAWKI

... or not. It shows that limitations on anonymity could be said to reflect the legislator’s recognition on various interests in making a person’s identity known. Accordingly, one of the digital applications that could bring potential for balancing anonymity and the quest of governments and businesses to have identification data available is the facility of Trusted Third Parties; such as the Certification Authorities or anonymity software. These could play an intermediate role in keeping a true identity secret and also in providing identity and tracing information once certain conditions are satisfied. There will be always be a continued debate, such as in France, whether they must retain in escrow identifying information in the event that governments require to decrypt messages for state security reasons. In line with the present developments in the U.S.A. where Internet Service Providers have to reveal the identity of people posting information through their facilities, case law, self regulatory initiatives and maybe even legislation may set the conditions under which identifying information must be revealed by intermediaries.


- English Books and Articles:

1. A. ALDESCO, The Demise of Anonymity, A Constitutional Challenge to the
Convention on Cybercrime (Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review), [vol.
2. A. MICHAEL, The Death of Privacy? (52 STAN. L. REV. 1461), [2000].
3. A. STILES, Everyone’s a Critic: Defamation and Anonymity on the Internet (Duke L.
&Tech. Rev. 0004.), [2002].
4. C. NICOLL, Digital Anonymity and Law: Tensions and Dimensions (The Hague, The
Netherlands), [2003].
5. D. BLUNKETT, Democracy Must Be Vigorously Defended (Tribune), [26 oct., 2001].
6. D. PARKER, Fighting Computer Crime (N.Y., Wiley), [1998].
7. E.BERNARD, The Collapse of the Harm Principle, 90 (J. CRIM. L. &Criminology)
109, 120-39 [1999].
8. E. HENSEN and J. BORLAND, New Assault Weapons Pose Threat to Web. Available
at: (visited 03/01/2006).
9. E. OGILEIV, The Internet and Cyberstalking, available at:
(visited 15/02/2006).
10. G. NEWMAN, Identity theft (U.S. Department of Justice, COPS), [June 2004].
11. G. PONT, The Criminalization of True Anonymity in Cyberspace, (7 Mich, Telecomm
Tech. L. Rev. 191), [2001].
12. H. BERMAN, The Truth About the Peer to Peer Piracy Prevention Act: Why
Copyright Owner Self-help Must Be Part of the P2P Piracy Solution, available at:
(visited 15/02/2006).
13. J. ABBOTT, Director General, National Criminal Intelligence Service (Guardian),
[June 15, 2000].
14. J. COLLINS, Preventing Identity Theft Into Your Business (New Jersey, John Wiley),
15. J. KANG, Information Privacy in Cyberspace Transactions, (50 STAN. L. REV.
1193, 1195-99), [1998].
16. J. LIPSCHULTZ, Free Expression in the Age of the Internet: Social and Legal
Boundaries (Oxford, West View Press), [2000].
17. J. MAY, Preventing Identity Theft (N.Y., Security Resources Unlimited), [2004].
18. J. PALME and M. BERGLUND, Anonymity on the Internet, available at:
(visited 03/02/2006).
19. J. WALLACE, Nameless in Cyberspace: Anonymity on the Internet (Cato Institute),
20. K . D E A N , Copyright Proposal Induces Worry, Wired News [Sept.11, 2004],
available at: (visited 15/02/2006).
21. K. RIGBY, Anonymity on the Internet Must be Protected (Ethics and Law on the
Electronic Frontier, [Fall 1995].
22. M. BARKARDJIEVA, Internet Society: The Internet in Everyday Life (Sage
Publishers), [2005].
23. M. DODGE, Mapping Cyberspace (N.Y, Routeldge), [2001].
24. M. ERBSCHLOE, Trojans, Worms and Spyware (Oxford, Heinmann), [2005].
25. M. GODWIN, International Treaty on Cybercrime Poses Burden on High-Tech
Companies. Available at: (visited 05/04/2001).
26. M. GOODMAN and S. BRENNER, The Emerging Consensus on Criminal Conduct in
Cyberspace (U.C.L.A J. L. &Tech.), [2002], 3.
27. M. HOMSI and A. KAPLAN – MYRTH, Online Anonymity and John Doe Lawsuits?
[19 Jan 2005] University of Ottawa, Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest
Clinic. Available at: (visited, 14 August 2005).
28. M. WASIK, Crime and the Computer (Oxford, Rendon Press Oxford), [1998].
29. N. FERQUSON, Practical Cryptography (N.Y., John Wiley), [2003].
30. P. SCHWARTZ, Privacy and Democracy in Cyberspace (52 VAND. L. REV 1609),
31. R. GELMAN, Protecting Yourself Online, The Definitive Resource on Safety,
Freedom and Privacy in Cyberspace (Harpcollins Publishers), [1998].
32. R. N’OEIL, The First Amendment and Civil Liability, (Indiana, Indiana University
Press), [2001].
33. R. SPINELLO, Regulating Cyberspace: The Policies and Technologies of Control
(U.S.A, Spinello), [2002].
34. S. BRENNER, Cybercrime Metrics: Old Wine, New Bottles (Virginia, Virginia
Journal of Law and Technology), [2004].
35. S. HOPKINS, Cybercrime Convention: A Positive Beginning to a Long Road Ahead
(Journal of High Technology Law), [2004].
36. S. KAKYTL, Privacy vs. Privacy, Yale Journal of Law and Technology, [Winter
37. S. LEVY, Grand Theft Identity (N.Y., Newsweek), [September 5, 2005].
38. Y. AKDENIZ, Anonymity, Democracy and Cyberspace (Social Research), vol. 69, n°1
[Spring 2002].
39. W. GIBSON, Neuromancer (N. Y., Grafton), [1984].

- French Books and Articles:

1. A.-C. DANA, Essai Sur la Notion d’Infraction Pénale (Paris, L.G.D.J.), [1982].
2. A. BERTRAND, Droit à la Vie Privée et Droit à l’Image (Paris, Litec), [1999].
3. A. LEPAGE, Libertés et Droits Fondamentaux à l’Epreuve de l’Internent (Paris, Litec
– édit du Juris Classeur), [2002].
4. A. LUCAS, J. DEVEZE and J. FRAYSSINET, Droit de l’Informatique et de
l’Internet (Paris, PUF), [2001].
5. B. LAMY, La Liberté d’Opinion et le Droit Pénal (Paris, L.G.D.J), [2000].
6. C. MASCALA, Droit Pénal Général (Paris, Montchrestien), [2003].
7. C. VIER, L’Internet et le Droit (Paris, Victoires), [2001].
8. E. GARCON, Code Pénal Annoté (Paris, Sirey), [1956].
9. F. SEMUR, La Fraude Télématique (Paris, Expertise), [novembre 1991].
10. G. ROMAIN, La Délinquance Informatique : Où en Est-on ? (Sécurité Informatique),
[Juin 1998].
11. G. THERY, Les Autoroutes de l’Information (Report: La Documentation Française),
[Octobre 1994].
12. J. HUET, Quelle Culture dans le Cyber-Espace et quel Droits Intellectuel pour cette
Cyber-Culture (Paris, Chron.), [1998].
13. J. LARGUIER, Droit Pénal des Affaires (8e éd. Colin.), [1992].
14. V. SQUARCIALUPI, Lutte de l’Europe contre la Criminalité Economique et le Crime
Organisé Transnational, Progrès ou Recul ? (Conseil de l’Europe), [6 avril 2001].
- Arabic Books and Articles:
1. A. AMIN, Criminal Law (Cairo, Lagna’at al Targama), [1923].
2. H. Al-MARSAFAWI, Criminal Law (Alexandria, Al Ma’aref), [1991].
3. M. HOSSNI, Special Criminal Law (Cairo, Dar Al Naha Al Arabia), [1986].
4. M. MOUSTAFA, Special Criminal Law (Cairo, Dar Al-Nahda Al-Arabia), [1984].

1 Anonymity is derived from the greek word ανωνυμία, meaning without a name or name-less. In colloquial use, the term
typically refers to a person, and often means that the personal identity, or personally identifiable information of that person is
not known. More strictly, and in reference to an arbitrary element (e.g. a human, an object, a computer), within a well-defined
set (called the “anonymity set”), “anonymity” of that element refers to the property of that element of not being identifiable
within this set. If it is not identifiable, then the element is said to be “anonymous”.
2 See G. du PONT, The Criminalization of True Anonymity in Cyberspace, (7 MICH, TELECOMM TECH. L. REV. 191),
3 In fact, the term cyberspace literally means ‘navigable space’ and is derived from the Greek word kyber (to navigate). In
William Gibson’s 1984 novel, the original source of the term, cyberspace refers to, a navigable, digital space of networked
computers accessible from computer consoles, a visual, colourful, electronic, Cartesian datascape known as ‘The Matrix’
where companies and individuals interact with, and trade in, information. Since the publication of this novel, the term
cyberspace has been re-appropriated, adapted and used in a variety of ways, by many different constituencies, all of which
refer in some way to emerging computer-mediated communication and virtual reality technologies. Here, we refocus the
definition back to the envisaged by Gibson, so that cyberspace refers to the conceptual space within ICTs, rather than the
technology itself. See W. GIBSON, Neuromancer (New York, Grafton), [1984]; M. DODGE, Mapping Cyberspace (N.Y,
Routeldge), [2001] p. 1; D. PARKER, Fighting Computer Crime (N.Y., Wiley), [1998].
4 See G. du PONT, op. cit.
5 See (visited 03/01/2006).
6 The term...

Add comment  Email to a Friend

Discussion is closed - view comments archieve
2008-06-09 11:47:32 - Sorry for the multiple messages, I pressed... Albert Nonymus
2008-06-09 11:46:24 - Interesting read, for the... Albert Nonymus
2008-06-09 11:45:53 - Interesting read, for the... Albert Nonymus
2008-06-09 11:45:37 - Interesting read, for the... Albert Nonymus
2007-02-26 07:36:24 - The information I found here was rather... uomo
2007-02-22 15:53:41 - Nice site you have!... dizionario
2007-02-13 00:56:19 - wznemyihj enbd zuqbsdl cgplohjfy khzywrcla... lzfmw hpsftx
2007-02-13 00:56:09 - wqfiuy lomu krbpvt thrbuz naos awyhrn... wjpe jxglq
2007-02-13 00:56:01 - inofjtqkm tdzvfobj qjalsrp bhqdgafn... vhwtgeqri wacxy
2006-08-10 22:16:48 - I agree with you that anonymity should not... Marianna
Total 12 comments
Copyright © 2001-2013 Computer Crime Research Center
CCRC logo