E-Government Services: The Formal, Technical and Informal components of E-Fraud Prevention for Government Agency

The increasing use of E-Government Services applications has created a lot of opportunities by fraudsters to commit E-Fraud crimes from remote locations. The rise of E- Commerce frauds has significant impact over E-Government services applications. Maintaining community confidence and developing trust to its citizen are seen as the key challenges by government agencies in order to sustain its credibility and competitive advantage. Therefore, E-Fraud and perpetrator platforms employed by fraudsters are explored to review techniques/methods used by them. The security problem including E-Fraud cannot be solved using a linear approach (narrow approach) because E-fraud is a complex and requires concurrent interaction from other components. In this study, E-Fraud prevention for government agency is proposed and classified into three components first, the formal component, second is the technical component and third is informal component.

[1]  Gurpreet Dhillon,et al.  Computer crimes: theorizing about the enemy within , 2001, Comput. Secur..

[2]  Gurpreet Dhillon,et al.  Technical opinion: Information system security management in the new millennium , 2000, CACM.

[3]  C. Centeno.  Building Security and Consumer Trust in Internet Payments , 2002 .

[4]  S. Benabdallah,et al.  Security issues in e-government models: what governments should do ? , 2002, IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.

[5]  Ioana Vasiu,et al.  Dissecting computer fraud: from definitional issues to a taxonomy , 2004, 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the.

[6]  Rossouw von Solms,et al.  From policies to culture , 2004, Comput. Secur..

[7]  Gordon Stevenson,et al.  Computer Fraud: Detection and Prevention , 2000 .

[8]  Amitava Dutta,et al.  Management's Role in Information Security in a Cyber Economy , 2002 .

[9]  Harri Oinas-Kukkonen,et al.  A review of information security issues and respective research contributions , 2007, DATB.

[10]  Susan J. Harrington,et al.  The Effect of Codes of Ethics and Personal Denial of Responsibility on Computer Abuse Judgments and Intentions , 1996, MIS Q..

[11]  Rossouw von Solms,et al.  A Responsibility Framework for Information Security , 2004, IICIS.

[12]  Jan H. P. Eloff,et al.  Feature: What Makes an Effective Information Security Policy? , 2002 .

[13]  Nicholas Gaunt,et al.  Practical approaches to creating a security culture , 2000, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[14]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Coping With Systems Risk: Security Planning Models for Management Decision Making , 1998, MIS Q..

[15]  Matthew Warren,et al.  Defining Fraud: Issues for Organizations from an Information Systems Perspective , 2003, PACIS.

[16]  Herbert J. Mattord,et al.  Principles of Information Security , 2004 .

[17]  Donn B. Parker,et al.  Fighting computer crime - a new framework for protecting information , 1998 .

[18]  A. Seetharaman,et al.  Anatomy of computer accounting frauds , 2004 .

[19]  Charles Cresson Wood.  Don’t Let Role of Information Security Policies in the Arthur Andersen/Enron Case Go Without Mention to your Chief Executive Officer , 2002 .

[20]  Trevor Wood-Harper,et al.  An interconnected success factor approach for service functional in Malaysian electronic government , 2004, ICEC '04.