zahra arhadi alashti; abdoreza javan jafari bojnordi
Abstract
Situational crime prevention techniques are considered as fundamental
elements of the cyber security and protection of likely targets from possible
criminal attacks. The technological nature of some measures are such that
can violate a vast number of fundamental rights, including the free flow of
information, ...
Read More
Situational crime prevention techniques are considered as fundamental
elements of the cyber security and protection of likely targets from possible
criminal attacks. The technological nature of some measures are such that
can violate a vast number of fundamental rights, including the free flow of
information, and can prevent users from receiving, seeking, and imparting
intended contents. International human rights obligations of governments
prevent them from the maximum application of preventive measures.
However, the security for the sake of public order is accepted to the extent
that human dignity can still be guaranteed in areas where possible crimes of
this nature may be committed; the whole context should not be determined
by security considerations any more than is absolutely necessary. Hence, the
application of situational prevention measures is logical and supported to the
extent where everyone is some how extent responsible for crime prevention,
and users are not deprived of a legitimate right of access to the World Wide
Web when the goal is a reduction of potential opportunities for crime. In this
article, we evaluate the violation of the right to the free flow of information
through the most common measures used to limit or deny access, taking into
account on the one hand the fact that extensive application of these measures
could also limit the spread of creative ideas of network users while, on the
other hand it can safeguard against political and social despotisms.
