7 The Technological Terrorist: Exploring Contemporary Extremism Marjie T. Britz The lack of a universal, or even generalizable, definition of terrorism has complicated both academic and government inquiries into the phenomenon. Traditionally obfuscated by ideological, cultural, or political agendas, conceptualizations of terrorism or terrorist activities could be characterized as localized reactions to situational or historical cultural events. However, the Terror Attacks of 9/11 compelled a virtual plethora of discussions, publications, and policymaking both domestically and internationally. In the United States, the most notable result of such exchange was the passage of the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (i.e. the Patriot Act) 1 . While the Act brought together disparate House committees (e.g. Education and the Workforce, Transportation and Infrastructure, Armed Services, Financial Services, International Relations, Energy and Commerce, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence), it did not result in a global (or even national) definition. Similarly, counterterrorism laws passed in 140 countries since that infamous day demonstrate a lack of universality in definition, ideology, and understanding - particularly in regards to virtual worlds. However, their failure to fully conceptualize the potentiality of the Internet as a terrorist tool does appear somewhat universal. Even the rare acts that did acknowledge the emerging threat associated with technology concentrated overmuch on the web as a mechanism of destruction – completely ignoring the dangers associated with decentralized, global communications and data dissemination. Rather, these characterizations, originally deemed implausible or fantastical, presented scenarios equivalent to a cyber-apocalypse or digital Pearl Harbor. The globalization of commerce, information, and communications has created a technological house of cards. As those in legitimate society have increasingly employed the medium to conduct business, disseminate research findings, store sensitive information, and communicate with others, those in illegitimate society have increasingly exploited the vulnerabilities associated with such interconnectivity. For individuals, potential areas for victimization include: data theft, identity fraud, computer damage, and stalking and harassment. While the costs associated with such activity can be both financial and emotional, they are largely individualized. For corporations, threats include: disruption of commerce or communication, extortion, theft or destruction of intellectual property or trade secrets, loss of consumer confidence, and, theft or destruction of funds or commodities. The costs and prevalence of cybercrime victimization have significantly increased in recent years, with an annual cost to the global economy estimated at more $400 billion (CSIS, 2014). The consequences associated with cybercrime involving corporations are farther reaching than those resulting from crimes experienced by individuals, and an attack may significantly impact the lives and livelihoods of both consumers and employees. However, neither individual nor corporate cases reach the level of significance of those attacks that may be directed at a nation's security, infrastructure, or military. Discussions of a "digital" or "electronic" Pearl Harbor began in earnest in 1998, when 1 It is important to note that three main provisions of the Patriot Act were allowed to expire in July 2015. The affected sections included Section 215 which significantly expanded the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 (FISA) to include compulsory production of business records in foreign intelligence and international terrorism investigations.