Search results

Intellectual property (IP) theft is an increasing threat that can lead to large financial losses and reputational harm. These attacks are typically noticed only after the IP is stolen, which is usually too late. This paper aims to investigate the psychological profile and the socio-technical events that statistically predict the likelihood of an IP threat.

This paper analyses 86 IP theft cases found in court documents. Two novel analyses are conducted. The research uses LLMs to analyse the personality of these insiders, which is followed by an investigation of the pathways to the attack using behaviour sequence analysis (BSA).

These IP theft insiders scored significantly higher on measures of Machiavellianism compared to the normal population. Socio-technical variables, including IP theft via photographs, travelling overseas, approaching multiple organisations and delivering presentations, were identified. Contrary to previous assumptions that there is a single pathway to an attack, the authors found that multiple, complex pathways lead to an attack (sometimes multiple attacks). This work, therefore, provides a new framework for considering critical pathways to insider attacks.

These findings reveal that IP theft insiders may come across as charming, star employees rather than the stereotype of disgruntled employees. Moreover, organisations’ policies may need to consider that IP theft occurs via non-linear and multiple pathways. This means that sequences of events need to be considered in detecting these attacks instead of anomalies outright. The authors also argue that there may be a case for “continuous evaluation” to detect insider activity.

This paper offers a new framework for understanding and studying insider threats. Instead of a single critical pathway, this work demonstrates the need to consider multiple interconnected pathways. It elucidates the importance of a multidisciplinary approach and provides opportunities to reconsider current practices in detection and prevention.

This paper develops a debt-run model to study the effects of liquidity injections on debt markets in the presence of a renegotiation option. In the model, creditors decide when to withdraw their funding and equityholders can renegotiate the contract terms of debt. We show that when equityholders have a large bargaining power, liquidity injections into distressed firms can rather cause more aggressive runs from their creditors, hurting the debt value. This outcome occurs because equityholders can strategically utilize the renegotiation option as a bankruptcy threat, pushing down the debt value below the potential liquidation value of the firm. In such a scenario, a deterred default resulting from emergency capital injections could be detrimental to creditors.

Recent developments in the EU’s anti-corruption strategy have brought the EU closer to meeting the UNCAC’s objectives, i.e. the Proposal for a Directive on combating corruption (2023) and the Proposal for a Directive on Asset Recovery and Confiscation (2022). This paper aims to discuss these developments from the perspective of the UNCAC, to identify missing elements in the EU’s asset recovery mechanisms.

Critical approach towards EU anti-corruption policy (discussing the problems and solutions). Review of EU developments in asset recovery law.

There is a political will on the part of the EU to fight corruption through the rules enshrined in the UNCAC. However, improving EU law by introducing a new type of confiscation of unexplained wealth and criminalising illicit enrichment, without establishing convergent rules for the return of corrupt assets from EU territory to the countries of origin, cannot be seen as sufficient action to achieve the UNCAC’s objectives. In modelling mechanisms of the return of assets, the EU should search for solutions to overcome the difficulties resulting from the ordre public clause remaining a significant factor conditioning mutual legal assistance.

This paper discusses the possible input of the EU, as a non-State Party to the UNCAC, to advance implementing the UNCAC solutions on asset recovery by establishing convergent rules for the return of corrupt assets from EU territory to countries of origin.