All available in:
- Swatting is a dangerous form of cybercrime in which false emergency calls trigger police operations.
- Germany lacks a specific criminal offense; acts fall under existing criminal offenses.
- Offenders use revenge, attention and disruption as motives for swatting.
- The consequences include mental stress and a waste of police resources.
- The public must be informed about swatting in order to promote prevention measures.
- The anonymity of the perpetrators makes the prosecution of swatting cases considerably more difficult.
- Swatting shows the downsides of digitalization and emphasizes the need for better security measures.
Swatting is a particularly dangerous form of cybercrime in which perpetrators make an emergency call with false information about a serious crime or threat situation in order to provoke the deployment of special units (such as SWAT teams in the USA) at the address of an innocent victim. The term is derived from the English “SWAT” (Special Weapons and Tactics).
Legal classification in Germany
In Germany, there is no specific criminal offense for swatting. However, such acts can fall under various existing criminal offenses:
1. misuse of emergency calls and impairment of accident prevention and emergency aid (Section 145 StGB)
2. pretending to commit a crime (Section 145d StGB)
3. disturbing the public peace by threatening to commit a crime (Section 126 StGB)
4. coercion (Section 240 StGB)
5. in serious cases: Dangerous bodily harm (Section 224 StGB) or even manslaughter (Section 212 StGB)
Features and procedure
1. false emergency call report: perpetrators report a serious crime or threatening situation.
2. credible presentation: The report is designed in such a way that it triggers an immediate police intervention.
3. destination address: The message contains the address of the unsuspecting victim.
4th police operation: Special units move out to the alleged crime scene.
5. endangerment: The victim is confronted with a potentially dangerous police action.
Motives of the perpetrators
1. revenge or personal feuds
2. attention and “entertainment”
3. disruption of live streams or online events
4. demonstration of power or technical skills
5. political or ideological motives
Consequences and risks
1. psychological stress for the victims
2. physical danger from the police operation
3. waste of resources in the police and emergency services
4. possible traumatization of uninvolved persons
5. undermining trust in emergency call systems
Prevention and countermeasures
1. raising public awareness of the phenomenon of swatting
2. training control center employees to recognize swatting attempts
3. improving the traceability of emergency calls
4. international cooperation in criminal prosecution
5. technical measures for the verification of emergency calls
Challenges for law enforcement
1. anonymity of the perpetrators through the use of VoIP services and concealment techniques
2. cross-border nature of many swatting cases
3. difficulty of providing evidence
4. balancing quick response to emergency calls and avoiding false alarms
Significance for the digital society
Swatting poses a serious threat to public safety and trust in emergency call systems. It highlights the downsides of increasing digitalization and networking and underlines the need to continuously develop digital skills and security measures.
Conclusion
Swatting is a complex problem that occurs at the interface between cybercrime and the real world. Combating it requires a combination of legal, technical and social measures. In Germany, there is a need for action to explicitly record the phenomenon of swatting under criminal law and to facilitate prosecution. At the same time, preventive measures and raising public awareness are of great importance in order to minimize the risks and consequences of swatting attacks.
