This document discusses cyberstalking, including: 1) Cyberstalking involves using technology like email, social media, and the internet to harass and stalk victims. It can cause psychological harm even if no physical threats are made. 2) There are three primary ways cyberstalkers operate: email stalking, internet stalking by posting information online, and computer stalking by gaining control of a victim's device. 3) Cyberstalkers motives include sexual harassment, obsession over a former relationship, revenge, ego, and power trips. Common victims are women, children, and those new to technology. Preventive measures include warning potential stalkers to stop contact,

1. 1. INTRODUCTION
The emergence of new technologies and innovations has enriched our lives in countless ways.
Also, increased dependence on IT and communication technology for dynamic and fast business
solutions has its own side effect. The effect of digital information technologies upon the world
certainly poses endless benefits for the citizens of the growing global village. The dark side of it,
not surprisingly, is the misuse of Information Technology for criminal activities. Cyberstalking is
a new genus of crimes that existed since the late 1990‟s that emerged as major international
criminological issues (Jaishankar, 2004). In essence Cyberstalking describes the use of ICT in
order to harass one or more victims (Bocij, 2006). In addition, harassment means any behavior
that causes the victim distress, whether intentional or not. Cyberstalking often find their victim
online (Morley, 2008) as they use computers and networks for criminal activities as these
technologies can easily be misused to frighten, intimidate, coerce, harass, and victimize
unsuspecting users. Cyberstalking is analogous to traditional forms of stalking, in that it
incorporates persistent behaviours that instil apprehension and fear. However, with the
emergence of new technologies, traditional stalking has taken on entirely new form through
various medium such as email and the Internet i.e. cyberspace. Cyberstalking dramatically
signals the potential of the Internet to facilitate some types of crimes, as well as pointing to the
interventions available and likely to prove effective.
Cyberstalking is an entirely new form of deviant behaviour that uses technology to harass others
in a variety of ways. In a decade, our reliance on the Internet, e-mail, instant messaging, chat
rooms, and other communications technologies has made Cyberstalking a growing social
problem that can affect computer users anywhere in the world. This paper is devoted entirely to
an examination of Cyberstalking, providing an overview of the problem, its causes
andconsequences, and practical advice for protecting yourself and your loved ones. Although
Cyberstalking usually involves one person pursuing another, this is not always the case. As the
behaviour has evolved, it has come to include such acts as stock market fraud, identity theft,
sexual harassment, data theft, impersonation, consumer fraud, computer monitoring, and attacks
by political groups on government services. More disturbingly, pornographers and paedophiles
have begun to use Cyberstalking as a way of locating new victims. While Cyberstalking has
1|Page

2. become a worldwide problem, most cases originate in the United States, making Americans the
most vulnerable group of targets.
The information super highway is undergoing rapid growth as a result Internet and other
telecommunications technologies are making advances virtually in every aspect of society
through out the world to foster commerce, improving education, health care, promoting
participatory democracy in the developed and developing countries, facilitating communications
among family and friends, whether across the street or around the world. Unfortunately, many of
the attributes of this technology- low cost, ease of use, and anonymous nature, make it an
attractive medium for fraudulent scams, sexual exploitations which are causing us a new concern
to know “cyber stalking”.
Cyber stalking is one among of the cyber crime. Cyber stalking in a way is the use of the Internet
to stalk someone which may be computer oriented harassment. The term is used interchangeably
with online harassment and online abuse. A cyber stalker does not present a direct physical threat
to a victim, but follows the victim‟s online activity to gather information, make threats in
different forms of verbal intimidation. The anonymity of online interaction reduces the chance of
identification and makes cyber stalking more common than physical stalking. Though cyber
stalking might seem relatively harmless, it can cause victims psychological and emotional harm.
It may occasionally lead to actual stalking. Cyber stalking in the present information society is
becoming a common tactic in racism, and other expressions of bigotry and hate.
1.1 Examples of Cyberstalking
Threatening or harassing email
“Flaming” - online verbal abuse
Mass unsolicited email
Identity Theft
Leaving improper messages at guestbook‟s or newsgroups from the victim
Initiating directed computer viruses
Email forgery - sending false or damaging email from the victim - usually to people they
know like co-workers, employees, neighbors, etc.
2|Page

3. 1.2 Probability of Cyber Stalking
A study by Meloy J.R (1998) reports that both men and women resort stalkers behavior that
induces fear and make credible threats against their victims such as:
a. Stalkers made threats to about 45 percent of victims.
b. Stalkers spied on or followed about 75 percent of victims.
c. Stalkers vandalized the property of about 30 percent of victims.
d. Stalkers threatened to kill or killed the pet(s) of about 10 percent of victims.
2. WAYS OF CYBER STALKING
There are three primary ways in which cyber stalking is conducted:
A. E-mail stalking: Direct Communication through E-mail.
B. Internet Stalking: Global communication through the Internet.
C. Computer Stalking: Unauthorized control another person‟s computer
A. E-mail stalking: is one of the most common forms of stalking in the physical world involve
telephoning, sending mail, and actual surveillance, cyber stalking which can take many forms.
Unsolicited e-mail is one of the most common forms of harassment, including hate, obscene, or
threatening mail. Other forms of harassment include sending the victim viruses or high volume
of electronic junk mail. It is important to note here that sending viruses or telemarketing
solicitations alone do not constitute stalking. However, if these communications are repetitively
sent in a manner which is designed to intimidate (that is, similar to the manner in which stalkers
in the physical world send subscriptions to pornographic magazines), then they may constitute
concerning behaviors which can be categorized as stalking.
B. Internet Stalking: Here in this case stalkers can comprehensively use the Internet in order to
slander and endanger their victims. In such cases, the cyber stalking takes on a public, rather than
a private dimension. What is particularly disturbing about this form of cyber stalking is that it
3|Page

4. appears to be the most likely to spill over into physical space. Generally, cyber stalking is
accompanied by traditional stalking behaviors such as threatening phone calls, vandalism of
property, threatening mail, and physical attacks. There are important differences between the
situation of someone who is regularly within shooting range of her/his stalker and someone who
is being stalked from two thousand miles away. While emotional distress is acknowledged in
most criminal sanctions, it is not considered as serious as actual physical threat. Thus, the links
between stalking, domestic violence, and feticide have been empirically demonstrated in real
life, much cyber stalking remains at the level of inducing emotional distress, fear, and
apprehension. However, this is not to say that causing apprehension and fear should not be
criminally sanctioned.
C. Computer Stalking: The third mode of cyber stalking is computer stalking which exploits
the workings of the Internet and the Windows operating system in order to assume control over
the computer of the targeted victim. It is probably not widely recognized that an individual
Windows based computer connected to the Internet can be identified and connected to another
computer through to the Internet. This connection is not the link via a third party characterizing
typical Internet interactions, rather it is a computer-to-computer connection allowing the
interloper to exercise control over the computer of the target.
A cyber stalker mostly communicates directly with their target as soon as the target computer
connects in any way to the Internet. The stalker can assume control of the victim‟s computer and
the only defensive option for the victim is to disconnect and relinquish their current Internet
address. The situation is like discovering that anytime you pick up the phone, a stalker is on-line
and in control of your phone. The only way to avoid the stalker is to disconnect the phone
completely, and then reconnect with an entirely new number. Only one specific example of this
technique was used in stalking for instance, a woman received a message stating “I am going to
get you”, the interloper then opened the women‟s CD-Rom drive in order to prove he had control
of her computer. More recent versions of this technology claim to enable real-time keystroke
logging and view the computer desktop in real time. It is not difficult to hypothesize that such
mechanisms would appear as highly desirable tools of control and surveillance for those
engaging in cyber stalking.
4|Page

5. 3. CATEGORIES OF CYBER STALKERS
Cyber stalkers can be categorized into three types:
a) The common obsessional cyber stalker: The common obsessional stalker refuses to believe
that their relationship is over. Do not be misled by believing this stalker is harmlessly in love.
b) The delusional cyber stalker: The other type is the delusional stalker. They may be suffering
from some mental illness like schizophrenia etc and have a false belief that keeps them tied to
their victims. They assume that the victim loves them even though they have never met. A
delusional stalker is usually a loner and most often chooses victims who are married woman, a
celebrity or doctors, teachers, etc. Those in the noble and helping professions like doctors,
teachers etc are often at risk for attracting a delusional stalker. Delusional stalkers are very
difficult to shake off.
c) The vengeful cyber stalker: These cyber stalkers are angry at their victim due to some minor
reason- either real or imagined. Typical examples are disgruntled employees. These stalkers may
be stalking to get even and take revenge and believe that they have been victimized. Ex-spouses
can turn into this type of stalker.
5|Page

6. 4. PSYCHOLOGY OF CYBER STALKERS
Psychology of Cyber Stalkers depends up the mental health of stalker which can be studied as
under:
a. The rejected stalker: had an intimate relationship with the victim (although occasionally the
victim may be a family member or close friend) and views the termination of the relationship as
unacceptable. Their behavior is characterized by a mixture of revenge and desire for
reconciliation.
b. Intimacy seekers: They attempt to bring to fruition of relationship with a person who has
engaged their desired and who they may also mistakenly perceive reciprocates that affection.
c. Incompetent suitors: They tend to seek to develop relationships but they fail to abide by
social rules governing courtship. They are usually intellectually limited or socially incompetent.
d. Resentful stalkers: They harass their victims with the specific intention of causing fear and
apprehension out of a desire for retribution for some actual or supposed injury or humiliation.
e. Predatory stalker: who stalk information gathering purposes or fantasy rehearsal in
preparation for a sexual attach.
f. Delusional stalker: Usually has a history of mental illness which may include schizophrenia
or manic depression. The schizophrenia stalker may have stopped taking his or her medication
and now lives in a fantasy world composed of part reality and part delusion which s/he is unable
to differentiate. If they‟re not careful, targets of the delusional stalker are likely to be sucked in
to this fantasy world and start to have doubts about their own sanity, especially if the stalker is
intelligent, and intermittently and seamlessly lucid and normal.
g. Erotomania stalker: is also delusional and mentally ill and believes he or she is in love with
you and will have created and entire relationship in their head.
6|Page

7. h. Harasser stalker: mostly some stalker types like to be the centre of attention and may have an
attention-seeking personality disorder. They may not be stalker in the strict sense of the word but
repeatedly pester anyone (especially anyone who is kind, vulnerable or inexperienced) who
might be persuade to pay them attention. If they exhibit symptoms of Munchausen Syndrome
they may select a victim who they stalk by fabricating claims of harassment by this person
against themselves.
i. Love rats: These may not be stalkers in the strict sense of the word but they have many similar
characteristics. Love rats surf the web with the intention of starting relationships and may have
several simultaneous relationships. The targets of a cyber stalker may know little about the
person they are talking to (other than what they‟ve convincingly been fed) and be unaware of a
trail of other targets past and present.
j. Trol: The trol‟s purpose is to be given more credibility than he deserves, and to such people
into useless, pointless, never-ending, emotionally-drawing, ranting discussion full of verbal loops
and word labyrinths, playing people against each other, hurting their feelings, and wasting their
time and emotional energy.
7|Page

8. 5. MOTIVES BEHIND CYBER STALKERS
Studies on Stalkers behavior reveals that Cyber Stalkers were reported to be having the following
types of motives:
a. Sexual Harassment: This should not surprise anyone major motive of cyber stalker is to
harass women. The internet reflects real life and psyche of the people. It‟s not a separate,
regulated or sanctified world. The very nature of anonymous communications also makes it
easier to be a stalker on the internet than a stalker offline.
b. Obsession for Love: Obsession for love could begin from an online romance, where one
person halts the romance and the rejected lover cannot accept the end of the relationship. It could
also be an online romance than moves to real life, only to break-up once the persons really meet.
c. Revenge and Hate: Could be one of the major causes of Cyber Stalking. This could be an
argument that has gone out of hand, leading eventually to a hate and revenge relationship.
Sometimes, hate cyber stalking is for no reason at all (out of the blue) you will not know why
you have been targeted nor what you have done, and you may not even know who it is who is
doing this to you and even the cyber stalker does not know you. This stalker may be using the net
to let out his frustrations on line.
d. Ego and Power Trips: Ego and power tr ips are harasser‟s online showing off their skills to
themselves and their friends. They do not have any grudge against you they are rather using you
show-off their power to their friends or doing it just for fun and you have been unlucky enough
to have been chosen. Most people who receive threats online imagine their harasser to be large
and powerful. But in fact the threat may come from a child who does not really have nay means
of carrying out the physical threats made.
8|Page

9. 5.1 Victims of Cyber Stalking
These days Internet is becoming main source of communication tool for entire family
communication rather communication center, which is opening up many more victims to be
stalked. The thing to remember is that a talker is someone that wants to be in control. A stalker is
not going to pick a victim that is equal to them. This keeps the victim submissive. The main
targets are the new to the Internet i.e. females, children, emotionally unstable etc. Someone new
to being online is pretty easy to pick out of a crowd in the net.
6. COMPARING OFFLINE (“IN REAL LIFE”) AND ONLINE STALKING
 Similarities
 The majority of cases involve stalking by former intimates, although stranger stalking occurs
in the real world and in cyberspace
 Most victims are women; most stalkers are men
 Stalkers are generally motivated by the desire to control the victim
 Differences
 Offline stalking generally requires the perpetrator and the victim to be located in the same
geographical area; cyberstalkers can be located anywhere.
 Electronic communication technologies make it much easier for a cyberstalker to encourage
third parties to harass and/or threaten a victim (impersonating the victim and posting
messages to bulletin boards and in chat rooms, causing viewers of that message to send
threatening messages back to the victim).
 Electronic communications technologies also lower the barriers to harassment and threats; a
cyberstalker does not need to physically confront the victim.
9|Page

10. 7. PREVENTIVE MEASURES FROM CYBERSTALKING
Studies in the field suggest the following measures to be adopted to impede the effect of Cyber
Stalking:
a. Victims who are under the age of eighteen should tell their parents or another adult they trust
about any harassments or threats.
b. Experts suggest that in cases where the offender is known, victims should send the stalker a
clear written warning. Specifically, victims should communicate that the contact is unwanted,
and ask the perpetrator to cease sending communications of any kind. Victims should do this
only once. Then, no matter the response, victims under no circumstances ever communicate with
the stalker again.
c. Victims should save copies of this communication in both electronic and hard copy for if the
harassment continues; the victim may wish to file a complaint with the stalker‟s Internet service
provider, as well as with their own service provider.
d. Many Internet service provides offer tools that filter or block communications from specific
individuals.
e. As soon as individuals suspect they are victims on online harassment or cyber stalking, they
should start collecting all evidence and document all contact made by the stalker. Save all email,
postings or other communications in both electronic and hard-copy form. If possible, save all of
the header information from e-mail and newsgroup postings. Record the dates and times of any
contact with the stalker.
f. Victims may also want to start a log of each communication explaining the situation in more
detail. Victims may want to document how the harassment is affecting their lives and what steps
they have taken to stop the harassment.
10 | P a g e

11. g. Victims may want to file a report with local law enforcement or contact their local
prosecutor‟s office to see what charges, if any, can be pursued. Victims should save copies of
police reports and record all contact with low enforcement officials and the prosecutor‟s office.
h. Victims who are being continually harassed may want to consider changing their e-mail
address, Internet service provider, a home phone number, and should examine the possibility of
using encryption software or privacy protection programs.
i. Furthermore, victims should contact online directory listings such as www.four11.com,
www.switchboard.com, and www.whowhere.com to request removal from their directly. Finally,
under no circumstances should victims agree to meet with the perpetrator face to face to work it
out, or talk. No contact should ever be made with the stalker. Meeting a stalker in person can be
very dangerous.
7.1 Protecting Yourself
Protection against the cyber-criminal is a difficult subject to address because of shifting
technology on the internet. There are three basic avenues of protection. The first is doing what
you can to defend yourself from cyber intrusion. Secondly, if you are being stalked there are
additional measures that you can take. The third is information gathering. If you are being
bullied or stalked then proving the crime is often quite difficult.
A. Vigilance
Password protect all of your accounts - use complex passwords
Don‟t use the same password for all accounts
Install anti-virus and anti-spyware software
Keep security software regularly updated
Use advanced security settings
Remember, if it‟s on the internet and free it‟s because you are the product
Don‟t carry security details in your wallet
11 | P a g e

12. Be suspicious of unsolicited contact
Be suspicious of unusual contact or content
Never give out detail unless you are absolutely sure of integrity
Regularly reset your passwords and PIN numbers
Monitor your account activity
Reset passwords if used on an unknown computer
Be cautious of using geo-location services on your mobile phone
Keep work and family activity separate
Use encryption software to store data
If you are suspicious, act quickly
B. Shut the gates
Reset all passwords and PIN numbers
Check security software settings
Create new e-mail and social media accounts
Minimize use of cordless phones, baby monitors etc.
Replace your mobile phone
Review encryption software
Regularly check your credit rating
Regularly search your name on the internet
12 | P a g e

13. 8. METHODS OF INTIMIDATION
Identity theft – With a few simple details such as name and address a criminal can impersonate
you. Given a date of birth and a password, the cyber-criminal can wreak havoc by setting up
online shopping accounts, interfere with online banking and hack in to social media accounts.
Data Attack – An unprotected computer and network provides a criminal with access to your
data such as personal photos, letters, hobbies and interests. The data can be manipulated or
destroyed or even read and used against a victim.
Scare tactics – A cyber-stalker hides behind the internet and to many this means that they are
elusive and untouchable. By issuing threats and manipulating personal accounts, the bully seams
powerful.
False accusation – A cyber-stalker may make false accusation via social media or free access
web sites to try and incite others to abuse the victim. Adult content sites and accusations of
paedophilic activity are common techniques for damaging the reputation of a victim.
There are many other known techniques that a cyber-stalker may employ from false
victimisation to GPS tracking. E-bombs will swamp your inbox with junk e-mail and micro
cameras can record your activity. The YouTube Nation means that getting information broadcast
is relatively easy.
13 | P a g e

14. 9. WHAT TO DO IF YOU ARE BEING CYBERSTALKED
If you are receiving unwanted contact, make clear to that person that you would like him or her
not to contact you again.
 Save all communications for evidence. Do not edit or alter them in any way. Also, keep a
record of your contacts with Internet system administrators or law enforcement officials.
 You may want to consider blocking or filtering messages from the harasser. Many email
programs such as Eudora and Microsoft Outlook have a filter feature, and software can be
easily obtained that will automatically delete emails from a particular email address or
contain offensive words. Chat room contact can be blocked as well.
 If harassment continues after you have asked the person to stop, contact the harasser‟s
Internet Service Provider (ISP). Most ISP‟s have clear policies prohibiting the use of their
services to abuse another person. Often, an ISP can try to stop the conduct by direct contact
with the stalker or by closing their account. If you receive abusive emails, identify the
domain (after the”@” sign) and contact that ISP. Most ISP‟s have an email address such as
abuse@ (domain name) or postmaster@ (domain name) that can be used for complaints.
Visit the ISP web site for information on how to file a complaint
 Contact your local police department and inform them of the situation in as much detail as
possible. In appropriate cases, they may refer the matter to state or federal authorities.
14 | P a g e

15. 10. CYBER-STALKING: the Regulation of Harassment on the Internet
Recent years have seen a series of “moral panics” regarding information accessible on the
Internet and its use for criminal activity. These include the availability of sexually explicit
material,1 the use of the Internet by paedophiles to distribute child pornography,2 the use of the
Internet by Neo-Nazis and other racist groups,3 the availability of hate speech and bomb making
instructions4 and the use of encryption technology to secure private communications by terrorists
and organised crime.5 In reality, these fears are largely misplaced; while the Internet tends to
produce extreme versions of problems, it rarely produces genuinely new ones.
The phenomenon of cyber-stalking and on-line harassment looks set to be the focus of the next
Internet-related moral panic. In the US, a number of states have already introduced specific
cyber-stalking legislation. In the UK, extensive press coverage of stalking cases, which focused
upon the bizarre and menacing behaviour of stalkers and the devastating effect stalking had on
the lives of victims, ensured its place as the crime of the nineties.6 The stalking debate within the
UK was fuelled by a number of high-profile acquittals which served to highlight the deficiencies
of both civil and criminal law in dealing with those who engage in stalking activity.7 In March
1996, Charles Wilson was found not guilty of intentional harassment, having allegedly plagued
Charlotte Sell for two years. The magistrate in the case, Geoffrey Breen, stated that while Sell
had clearly been caused considerable alarm and distress by the defendant‟s actions, what the
defendant had done amounted to stalking but stalking was not a criminal offence.8 Dennis
Chambers allegedly waged a campaign of harassment against Margaret Bent for four years but
was acquitted of causing grievous bodily harm in September 1996, on the grounds that there was
no evidence of intention to cause psychological injury.9 At this time there were also important
developments in both the criminal and civil law responding to the problem of stalking.10
Concern that existing laws did not adequately protect victims of stalking finally led to the
enactment of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.11
This article sets out the case against the introduction of further legal measures to deal with on-
line harassment. It argues that fears about on-line activity and content which prompt calls for
heavy-handed legislation are often founded on misconceptions as to the nature and the scale of
the problem. Such calls also invariably belie a certain naivety with regards to the unique law
enforcement problems created by the Internet. In the case of on-line harassment, there are the
15 | P a g e

16. difficulties of tracing the cyber-stalker who remains anonymous and problems of dealing with
harassment that crosses national boundaries. The borderless nature of the Internet also means that
actions by individual governments and international organisations can have a profound effect on
the rights of the law-abiding Internet users, or “netizens”, around the world. Legal regulation of
the Internet, this article contends, should not be achieved at the significant expense of
fundamental rights such as freedom of speech and privacy of on-lineusers around the globe.
What is on-line harassment?
Harassment on the Internet can take a variety of guises.12 A direct form of Internet harassment
may involve the sending of unwanted e-mails which are abusive, threatening or obscene from
one person to another.13 It may involve electronic sabotage, in the form of sending the victim
hundreds or thousands of junk e-mail messages (the activity known as “spamming”) or sending
computer viruses. Indirect forms of harassment may involve a cyberstalker impersonating his or
her victim on-line and sending abusive e-mails or fraudulent spams in the victim‟s name.14
Victims may be subscribed without their permission to a number of mailing lists with the result
that they receive hundreds of unwanted e-mails everyday. One victim of cyber-stalking in the
United States, Cynthia Armistead, received thousands of offensive telephone calls after her
stalker posted a phoney advertisement on a Usenet discussion group offering her services as a
prostitute and providing her home address and telephone number.15 In another case, again in the
United States, a woman who complained about a literacy agency on-line found that her home
address and telephone number were posted on alt.sex. Usenet discussion groups.16 Being the
victim of on-line harassment undoubtedly causes considerable anxiety as well as annoyance. The
real fear, however, is that offensive and threatening behaviour that originates on-line will
escalate into “real life” stalking. If the name of the victim is known to the stalker, then it is
relatively easy to find out further personal details such as the victim‟s address and telephone
number. In the case of Cynthia Armistead, offensive e-mails were soon followed by abusive
telephone calls.
Fears in the United States have been fuelled by a number of cases of Internet dating which have
been linked to assaults, stalking incidents, and even murders.17 The arrival in Britain of a
controversial new computer database, 192.com, which enables users to obtain an address and
telephone number simply by typing in a name promises to make life even easier for stalkers.18
16 | P a g e

17. The National Anti-Stalking and Harassment Campaign reports that between January 1994 and
November 1995, 7,000 victims of stalking telephoned their helpline.19 It is clear that stalking is
a major real life problem but whether the Internet is to prove an attractive picking ground for
stalkers remains to be seen.
Legal Regulation
There have been calls in the United States for specific cyber-stalking legislation. It is argued that
victims of cyber-stalking are inadequately protected as existing laws are too inflexible to cover
on-line harassment. Since its experiences in regard to the Internet tend to be more advanced than
those in the UK, this section briefly examines the difficulties experienced in the United States in
the legal regulation of e-mail harassment but argues that such problems are unlikely to be
encountered in the UK.
The Anonymous Stalker
Internet technology creates possibilities for anonymous communications and hence for
anonymous cyberstalking. The identity of a cyber-stalker may, therefore, not be revealed or
found. The fluidity of identity on the Internet has been described as one of its chief attractions.
The Internet facilitates experimentation with different identities. Users may adopt an on-line
persona which bears little, if any, resemblance to his or her real identity. Pseudonymity is
achieved by simply forging or “spoofing” an e-mail header so as to create an on-line digital
persona. For example, Alice can create a new persona for her on-line participation in Usenet
discussion groups with an e-mail address such as Billy- Kid@compuserve.com rather than using
her real e-mail address, alice@compuserve.com.
Impersonation of other users may also be possible by faking the header of an e-mail message to
make it appear as if it originates from the victim‟s account. Anonymity on the Internet can be
achieved by using an anonymous re-mailer. Re-mailers are computer services which cloak the
identity of users who send messages through them by stripping all identifying information from
an e-mail and assigning a random replacement header. The most sophisticated re-mailer
technology is called MixMaster60 which uses public key cryptography, granting unprecedented
anonymity to users who wish to communicate in complete privacy. A user who chains together
several re-mailers could send communications safe in the knowledge that the trail created would
17 | P a g e

18. be so complex that it would be impossible to follow.61 According to Ball, true anonymous re-
mailers maintain no database of addresses: “When messages are resent from a truly anonymous
re-mailer, the header information is set either to a deliberately misleading address, or to
randomly generated characters. There is no record of the connection between the sending address
and the destination address. For greater security, many users program messages to pass through
five to twenty re-mailers before the message arrives at its final destination. This technique,
known as chaining, assures greater security than sending through a single re-mailer. Even if
some re-mailers keep secret records of their transactions, a single honest re-mailing system will
protect the user. One disadvantage is that unless the sender has identified herself in the body of
the message, the recipient has no way to reply to an anonymously sent message.” The ease with
which users can send anonymous messages would render legal regulation of on-line harassment
a difficult, if not impossible, task. Tracing a cyber-stalker may prove an insurmountable obstacle
to any legal action when the electronic footprints which users leave behind are effectively
eliminated by re-mailer technology.
Given these enforcement problems, some commentators have called for the prohibition of
anonymous communications while others have called for restrictions to be placed on anonymity.
Opponents of anonymity argue that it facilitates illegal or reprehensible conduct and allows
perpetrators to evade the consequences of their actions. Arguments based on the social
psychology of anonymity have been used. Anonymity, it is alleged, lowers social inhibitions and
encourages anti-social behaviour and aggression.
People will say and do things on the Internet, it is maintained, that they would never seriously
entertain doing in real life. Those who call for the prohibition of anonymous remailers or other
restrictions on on-line anonymity may, however, fail to recognise the cost of such action to the
on-line community in terms of fundamental freedoms. Placing restrictions upon anonymity on-
line would have serious negative repercussions for freedom of expression and privacy on the
Internet, as shall now be described.
Anonymity and Privacy
Anonymity, apart from facilitating free speech, can also facilitate the protection of privacy on the
Internet. Many users are unaware that every time they surf the Internet, information about the
web sites they have visited is logged and stored. The Center for Democracy and Technology
18 | P a g e

19. (“CDT”) has an on-line demonstration entitled “Who‟s Watching You and What are You Telling
Them?” which allows users to view their personal on-line biography. CDT‟s web site notes that:
“Many people surf the web under the illusion that their actions are private and anonymous.
Unfortunately, there is more information collected about you than you might think. Every time
you visit a site, you leave a calling card that reveals where you‟re coming from, what kind of
computer you have, and many other details. Most sites keep logs of all visitors.” There are
Internet-based marketing organisations who build comprehensive profiles of users and then sell
on the information. With the right equipment, a user‟s e-mail address together with files viewed
and other detailed information can be obtained by web systems even though no information is
supplied directly to a web site. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (“EPIC”) reviewed
100 of the most frequently visited web sites on the Internet in the summer of 1997. EPIC found
that few web sites have explicit privacy policies (only 17 of their sample), and none of the top
100 web sites met basic standards for privacy protection. On-line users can currently use web
based services such as the Anonymizer to surf the web anonymously. The Anonymizer shields a
user‟s personal information from the other web sites that he or she visits. On visiting the
Anonymizer web site a user is assigned an anonymous identity and is thus able to surf the web
without revealing his or her true identity.
Anonymity enables users to prevent surveillance and monitoring of their activities on the Internet
not only from commercial companies but also from government intrusion. In Britain, the DTI
Consultation Paper, “Licensing of Trusted Third Parties for the Provision of Encryption
Services”, which may have been expected to address privacy and anonymity on the Internet,
devoted no space to the issue. The Internet Watch Foundation (formerly known as Safety-Net),
endorsed by the UK Government, sees anonymity on the Internet as a danger, proposing that:
“Anonymous servers that operate in the UK [should] record details of identity and make this
available to the Police, when needed, under Section 28 (3) of the Data Protection Act (which
deals with the disclosure of information for the purpose of prevention of crime).”
A key aspect of the Safety-Net approach is making users take responsibility for material they
post on the Internet; stressing the importance of being able to trace the originators of child
pornography and other illegal material.92 For this purpose, the Safety-Net document proposed
that the Internet Service Providers should not provide their users with anonymous accounts. ISPs
must ensure that they know who all their customers are. This approach is in contrast with
19 | P a g e

20. European Union initiatives. The benefits of anonymity on-line were recognised at the recent
“Global Information Networks, Ministerial Conference,” in Bonn, in July 1997. At the Bonn
Ministerial Conference, the Ministers declared that:
“Ministers recognise the principle that where the user can choose to remain anonymous offline,
that choice should also be available on-line. Ministers urge industry to implement technical
means for ensuring privacy and protecting personal data on the Global Information Networks,
such as anonymous browsing, e-mail and payment facilities.” An express right to privacy in UK
law will be granted for the first time once the Human Rights Bill is passed and comes into force.
Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights demands “respect for ...private and
family life...home and ...correspondence”, and this undoubtedly requires a greater recognition of
the value of privacy than has hitherto been forthcoming from English judges or Parliament.94 In
particular, it will be noted that Article 8 expressly protects “correspondence”, and this has been
applied by the European Court of Human Rights to curtail unregulated police access to telephone
conversations as well as other forms of electronic surveillance.95 “Correspondence” on the
Internet is deserving of at least an equal degree of protection, though whether the importance of
anonymity on the Internet both to free speech and to privacy will ultimately be recognised and,
in turn, influence the shape of future regulatory initiatives remains to be seen.
Non-legal Solutions
This article has highlighted the limitations of legal regulation of on-line harassment in cases
which involve anonymous and international cyber-stalkers. These limitations in legal regulation
are, to some extent, compensated for by the availability of non-legal solutions to on-line
harassment. A number of more suitable ways in which users can both empower and protect
themselves from on-line harassment are discussed below.
Self-Protection
The education of users is the first step towards self-protection from Internet harassment. There
are many web sites and books which provide information for selfprotection from cyber-stalkers
for on-line users.96 In general, women are advised, where possible, to adopt either a male or
gender neutral user name. Passwords, it is advised, should ideally be a meaningless combination
of letters and numbers and changed frequently.
20 | P a g e

21. Passwords should never be given out and should never be sent out via simple e-mail message as
these are the equivalent of sending traditional “postcards” via snail mail. It is recommended that
personal information divulged on-line be kept to a minimum. Users should regularly check their
on-line profile (finger files) or biography to see what information is available to a potential
stalker. To guard against on-line impersonation, users are also advised to use strong encryption
programmes such as the Pretty Good Privacy (“PGP”) to ensure complete private
communications. Strong encryption can provide confidentiality, integrity and authenticity of the
information transferred via on-line communications. Strong encryption and use of such software
as PGP is the only solution for having truly private communications over the Internet. Using
strong encryption would put your electronic “postcard” in a secure envelope and seal it.
A number of self-appointed Internet patrollers have been involved in tracking the senders of
offensive e-mail messages. Among the organizations offering assistance in tracking down
stalkers are Cyber Angels, a branch of the New York based Guardian Angels, Cyber trackers,
and Women Halting On-line Abuse (“WHOA”).100 Once the perpetrator is identified, a message
through e-mail calling for an end to the harassing behavior is sent out to the perpetrator. These
self-policing activities may help in some instances but their overall effectiveness remains to be
determined.
Role of the Internet Service Providers
Access to the Internet is possible through Internet Service Providers (“ISPs”). An individual who
receives unwanted e-mail or finds that offensive information about them has been posted on the
Internet should contact the offender‟s ISP who may eliminate his or her account. As mentioned
above, the ISPs in Britain do not provide their customers with anonymous accounts, and every
single Internet user through the British ISPs or ISPs that provide services within Britain should
have identifiable customers. These precautions may assist the police in cases in which they are
trying to find the identity of a cyber-stalker who may be accessing the Internet and conducting
his or her cyber-stalking activities through a British ISP. These precautions may not be of help in
cases in which the offender is untraceable, e.g. when he or she uses anonymous re-mailers or
where the cyber stalker is not a customer of the ISP in question or has posted messages from
outside the jurisdiction. Some of these issues were discussed in a recent US defamation case
involving America Online, Kenneth M. Zeran v. America Online, Inc.101 On April 25, 1995, six
21 | P a g e

22. days after 168 people were killed in the Oklahoma City bombing, an unidentified America
Online user posted an advertisement on one of AOL‟s bulletin boards for “Naughty Oklahoma”
Tshirts and bumper stickers, all of which contained offensive slogans. The advertisements asked
interested parties to contact “Ken” and gave Kenneth Zeran‟s telephone number in Seattle,
Washington. Death threats to Zeran started immediately after the initial postings. Zeran, who was
not at all responsible for the postings and did not even have an AOL account, decided to sue
AOL, arguing that the company had unreasonably delayed in removing the defamatory messages
and had failed to screen for similar postings thereafter. A District Court found that section 230 of
the Communications Decency Act 1996,102 which “creates a federal immunity to any cause of
action that would make service providers liable for information originating with a third-party
user,” barred Zeran‟s suit. This was also confirmed by the US Court of Appeals.103 The court
further stated that tort-based lawsuits would have an “obvious chilling effect” on the Internet and
on Internet Service Providers. As a result, the controversial CDA 1996104 now offers more
protection to ISPs than any other media but falls short of granting “common carrier” status
enjoyed by telephone companies.
This may even go too far: according to David Sobel of EPIC, “there should be some degree of
accountability on the part of online services as there is for other forms of media.”105
Software
New and innovative software programmes which enable users to control the information they
receive are being developed. There are, for example, technical means by which users may block
unwanted communications. Tools available include „kill‟ files and bozo files which delete
incoming e-mail messages from individuals specified by the user, and such tools are included
with most of the available e-mail software packages. There is also specially designed software to
filter or block unwanted e-mail messages. These tools such as CyberSitter and Netnanny are
designed mainly to block the access of children to sexually explicit web sites and newsgroups,
but they can be used to filter out and block e-mail communications. Some of this software can
also filter words through the incoming and outgoing e-mail messages. The mandatory use of
such software, especially at access level, by libraries and ISPs is criticised within the US because
the decisions taken to block certain web sites are arbitrary and within the discretion of the private
companies that develop these systems. They are also defective since most of them block such
22 | P a g e

23. web sites as the Middlesex County Club or the Mars Explorer while trying to block the word
“sex” or they block web sites by looking at the keywords in the meta-tags offered by the
individual html files.111 But these tools may be of some use to victims of cyber-stalkers to filter
out unwanted messages. In the future, advanced filtering systems which recognise insulting e-
mail may also be available.
11. MANAGING CYBER STALKING - IDENTIFY MANAGEMENT
The individual‟s responsibility is an important aspect of being online. So is a recognition that
people can choose to manage their online presence rather than allowing the technology – and by
extension a stalker - to manage them. Management of that presence does not offer everyone
immunity from harassment, danger and victimisation, just as there is no comprehensive solution
for all social interaction offline. Management does however offer opportunities to minimize
danger, in for example much the same way that ordinary people deal with risk by keeping their
doors locked and being sensible about which they invite inside. It also offers ways of responding
when Cyberstalking occurs. There is no simple solution: responses vary from individual to
individual (and from jurisdiction to jurisdiction), in the same way that there is variation in
responses to offline stalking. Some people are better equipped than others to deal with a nasty on
the net; some are luckier in finding advice and assistance from colleagues, service providers,
lawyers and police or other investigators.
One fundamental response to Cyberstalking is a decision by victims not to allow the stalker to
deny them use of cyberspace (in the same way that an offline stalker should not deny a victim
use of roads, restaurants, shops or public parks). Be skeptical about myths that all online offences
are necessarily anonymous, that effective prosecution is impossible and that courts or police are
unsympathetic.
Identity Management
Cyber stalkers feed on digital information: information about their victims and signals from their
victims that the target of the stalking is in pain. Potential victims (whether 9 or 90) can and
23 | P a g e

24. arguably should manage their online presence, in particular their online identity – the
information available on the net that allows someone to build a picture of them. The identity
management includes the following points:
a. Being wary about what information you provide online, whether it is on a FaceBook or
MySpace profile, in a blog, on a bulletin board, in the course of chat or in response to an online
1marketer's offer of an amazing deal.
b. Using pseudonyms in adult chat rooms.
c. Using gender-neutral names in other form.
d. Not taking a contact's statements at face value.
e. Not using a pet's name as a password.
f. Wariness about sharing passwords with friends or colleagues (although you may take care,
they may not).
g. Protection of laptops, personal computers - including use of passwords, caution in
downloading potential spyware and attention to keeping virus protection up to date.
h. Choosing ISPs and other service providers on the basis of professionalism, rather than the
lowest cost (professionals are less likely to expose your information and more likely to respond
if you do have problems)
i. Exercising caution about including personal mobile phone numbers in email footers. It also
includes basic precautions such as meeting in a public space, such as a restaurant or café if an
online relationship extends offline.
24 | P a g e

25. 12. CASE STUDIES
12.1 INDIA’S FIRST CYBERSTALKING CASE SOME CYBERLAW PERSPECTIVES
The Delhi Police has recently registered India‟s First Case of Cyberstalking. One Mrs. Ritu
Kohli complained to the police against the a person who was using her identity to chat over the
Internet at the website www.mirc.com, mostly in the Delhi channel for four consecutive days.
Mrs. Kohli further complained that the person was chatting on the Net, using her name and
giving her address and was talking obscene language. The same person was also deliberately
giving her telephone number to other chatters encouraging them to call Ritu Kohli at odd hours.
Consequently, Mrs Kohli received almost 40 calls in three days mostly at odd hours from as far
away as Kuwait, Cochin, Bombay and Ahmedabad. The said calls created havoc in the personal
life and mental peace of Ritu Kohli who decided to report the matter.
Consequently, the IP addresses were traced and the police investigated the entire matter and
ultimately arrested Manish Kathuria on the said complaint. Manish apparently pleaded guilty and
was arrested. A case was registered under section 509, of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). And
thereafter he was released on bail.
This is the first time when a case of cyberstalking has been reported. Cyberstalking does not
have any one definition but it can be defined to mean threatening, unwarranted behaviour or
advances directed by one net user to another user using the medium of Internet and other forms
of online communication. Cyberstalking is a recent phenomenon and women generally are the
main targets of this cybercrime.
The said case of Ritu Kohli raises numerous Cyberlaw issues. It may be pertinent to mention that
the said case came up before the coming into force of the Information Technology Act, 2000,
India‟s maiden foray in Cyberlaw. The case has been registered under section 509, IPC which
reads as follows :
“Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman. – Whoever, intending to insult
the modesty of any woman, utters any word, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object,
intending that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be seen, by
25 | P a g e

26. such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman, shall be punished with simple
imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine or with both.”
A perusal of the entire section shows that the said section does not cover cyberstalking. The
important ingredients of the said section includes that a word must be uttered or a sound or
gesture must be made or any object must be exhibited. When a person chats on the Net for the
purpose of the cyberstalking, he is neither uttering a word in the sense of the law nor making a
sound or gesture nor exhibiting any object. The word chatting has been brought into coinage
basically to describe a process by means of which various net users are simultaneously
exchanging their views on the Internet with the help of technology. The net user is only working
on his computer while chatting and that activity would not come within the ambit of Section 509
IPC even with the most liberal interpretation. Another issues is if no word has been uttered in the
eyes of law or no sound or gestures has been make or object exhibited, then the question of
intention behind the same would be very difficult to establish in a court of law, more so when the
case relates to Cyberspace. Further, how would law enforcing agencies and the courts of law be
able to find out about the intention to insult the modesty of any woman in cyberspace? It will be
equally difficult to apply the other condition which talks about intruding upon the privacy of
such woman ,stipulated in Section 509 IPC to cyberstalking. How would the courts adjudicate
upon the intrusion of privacy of any woman in Cyberspace when cyberspace is a free, boundary
less medium where privacy itself is at the center stage of controversy?
Even the new Information Technology Act, 2000 does not address the issue of Cyberstalking at
all. Another Cyberlaw issue concerning cyberstalking is which court would have jurisdiction to
try the offence of cyberstalking. There is a need to create more awareness amongst the
legislature and the law enforcing agencies regarding this new cybercrime in order to enable its
early regulation .
12.2 Culled from the Los Angeles Times
The same networks as those used for the transmission of information, business transactions,
banking and gaming also provide a virtual backdrop from which individuals may conduct
electronic crimes of varying natures. The nature and extent of Cyberstalking is perhaps more
26 | P a g e

27. difficult to assess than its terrestrial cousin, given the anonymity and breath of electronic
communications.
While the differences between the two forms of stalking must be acknowledged, it is most
important to acknowledge that Cyberstalking is fundamentally an extension of the physical act.
Casey (1999) cautions: “the overarching message here is that we should concentrate on the
details, the uniqueness and complexity of a case rather than get caught up on typologies,
terminology or the fact that we are dealing with a different medium”.
The diversity of the problem will only truly be known once a larger number of cases are
presented to both researchers and the criminal justice system for examination.
The inability to access technology does not necessarily protect one from the reaches of the
Cyberstalker. The following example illustrates how a computer or internet access is not even a
requirement to be Cyberstalked
The Case
The victim met the perpetrator at church, and continually rejected his romantic attempts.The
perpetrator, a fifty-year-old security guard, retaliated to her rejection by posting her personal
details to the Internet.
These included her physical description, address and telephone number, and even including
details about how one could bypass her home security system.
He also posted false rape and gang-bang fantasies to on-line forums. On approximately half a
dozen occasions, men arrived at the victim‟s home in the hope of cashing in on these supposed
fantasies. As the victim posted messages to her door stating these requests were false, the
perpetrator posted messages on-line stating that these were simply tests to determine who was in
fact worthy of her fantasies.
The victim‟s mother states that she had men coming to her door at all hours of the night, and that
she got dozens of calls by men who would leave filthy, disgusting messages.
The victim was eventually forced from her home, suffered from weight loss, lost her job, and
developed a fear of going outside of her home (from the L.A. Times Friday the 22nd of January,
1999 and Saturday the 23rd of January, 1999).
The subsequent effects of this behavior on the victim include distinct psychological impairments
and behavior change that brought about the loss of the victim‟s home and job
27 | P a g e

28. 13. CONCLUSION
It can be seen that addressing Cyberstalking involves a variety of different approaches, including
personal prevention strategies, legislative interventions, and technological solutions to current
technological flaws. However, the first step in effectively responding to Cyberstalking in
particular and Internet-based crime in general, is to ensure that the understanding of the Internet
is derived from a realistic appreciation of the nature of the new technologies themselves, rather
than being rooted in a pre-Internet conception of information exchange mechanisms. Whilst it
can be argued that some cyber crimes are not different from real world crimes in as much as they
reflect the same range of offensive and dangerous behaviors‟, it also needs to be acknowledged
that the Internet can magnify, distort, and ignore the attributes of the real world in ways we
urgently need to address. Cyberstalking provides an illuminating example of cyber crime. The
extent to which Cyberstalking can be regulated and responded to by the criminal justice system
depends in many respects upon the extent to which it emulates traditional stalking behaviors‟ in
the physical world. The new technologies are so different from the old that the old ways may no
longer hold good, and we may need to reassess our thinking about the nature of the possible
intervention strategies. In sum, while some of the traditional strategies will remain applicable in
addressing Cyberstalking, new and innovative legislative, technical, and investigative counter
measures will almost certainly be necessary.
It has been reported that about 6,00,000 real life stalkers are operating around the globe, out of
which 60% of the Cyber Stalkers belongs to are in U.S.A. It has been estimated that roughly one
in 1,250 persons is a stalker and in the United States, one out of every 12 women (8.2 million)
and one out of every 45 men (2 million) have been stalked at some time in their lives. Of course,
no one knows the truth, since the Internet is such a vast medium, but these figures are as close as
it gets to giving statistics. As the Internet continues to grow, problems like cyber stalking will
continue to grow. With the Internet being integrated into almost every part of human life, it is not
a solution to simply suggest that turning off your computer will solve the problem. Internet users
must learn to protect themselves from the dangers of Internet based crimes, such as cyber
stalking. It is becoming apparent that anyone including man, woman, or child can become a
victim.
28 | P a g e

29. Jurisdictions across the globe are now beginning to take legal action against stalking behavior,
recognizing it as a public problem which merit attention. The effects of stalking upon an
individual may include behavioral, psychological and social aspects. Specific risks to the victim
include a loss of personal safety, the loss of a job, sleeplessness, and a change in work or social
habits. These effects have the potential to produce a large drain on both criminal justice
resources and the health care system and it is therefore, in the best interests of the authorities to
take swift action when cases are presented to them. Only through the continued study of the
problem will be better equipped to deal with particular cases once they are presented. Through
the continued study and exposure of stalking (and by extension, Cyber stalking), will
investigators and clinicians be better prepared to deal with its consequences and effects.
29 | P a g e

30. 14. REFERENCES
http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminology/cyberstakjubg/index.html
http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/dabrent/380/weborih/jessica.html
http://www.indianchild.com/cyberstalking.htm
U.S. Department of Justice Cybercrime Web Site:
http://www.cybercrime.gov
http://www.cyber-rights.org/watchmen-ii.htm
http://www.aclu.org/issues/cyber/burning.html
http://www.cyberangels.org
30 | P a g e