Like terrorism, cybercrime is a gift to security companies selling a variety of products. There is a danger that the nature of the phenomenon is being defined by actors who have an interest in exaggerating and distorting the nature of the phenomenon. This paper seeks to identify common myths that are defining future research strategies and to distinguish between established crimes like theft that take advantage of payment systems via the internet, frauds that exploit the greedy, gullible and vulnerable; and genuinely "new" cybercriminality,
Policy actors are already trying to imagine the progress of cybercrime ten years into the future. How much is this process based on myths and how much on a desire to turn every possible institution into an arm of policing? What are the real agendas of the prophets of cybercrime and cybersecurity? Can privacy be protected from state and private sector sureillance?
