Drawing on the in-depth life history narratives of a small sample (n=5) of people previously involved in cyber-dependent crime, this paper explores the way in which the separation of different social- identities (i.e. online and offline selves; pre- and post-criminalised selves; and the selves presented to different audiences) are sustained, challenged and reconciled and how this impacts on their personal identity and hacking career. It explores the role that different moral actors and communities, and different forms of capital (human, social and cultural) play in this process, as activities become visible and are (re)interpreted, and as the narrators seek to lay claim to neoliberal cultural values of innovation and entrepreneurship. This study’s contribution rests with its synthesis of the cybercrime and desistance literatures. This work acknowledges the utility of identity theories of desistance as an under-utilised tool to make sense of hacking careers, but require researchers to attend to the interplay and battle between multiple co-existing identities. Finally, it presents a provocation to the desistance literature by highlighting dependencies on neoliberal notions of legitimacy and state/corporate definitions of ‘good’ and ‘bad’, specifically where one’s skills, values, and achievements that are criminalised, are commercially valued, highly sought after and legitimately supported to persist.

In an era where traditional crime rates are on a decline in Western countries, notably the UK, the realm of cybercrime has witnessed a remarkable surge, marked by an alarming increase of 89% between 2020 and 2022. A substantial portion of this surge can be attributed to the proliferation of hacking activities. Simultaneously, the escalating demand for IT security experts, possessing akin skills to hackers, underscores the urgency to fortify organisations against such cyber threats. Consequently, unravelling the motivations behind individuals entering the realm of hacking and elucidating the factors guiding their transition from illicit hacking endeavours to legitimate occupations, such as penetration testing or software design, becomes imperative. To address this imperative, we embarked on a qualitative exploration through in-depth interviews with self-identified former hackers (N=7). Employing reflexive thematic analysis, our study delves into their narratives, shedding light on the intricate pathways leading into and out of illegal hacking. Our findings reveal that the initiation into hacking often stems from gamification, and retrospective justifications frequently involve victim-blaming. The shift towards legal hacking, commissioned by organisations, is discernibly characterised by the cultivation of significant social bonds and the gradual de-gamification of hacking pursuits. Remarkably, our investigation discloses a unique trajectory wherein all interviewees not only remained within the IT sector but also continued to leverage their hacking skills. Consequently, the conventional term desistance and associated theories prove inadequate for understanding this phenomenon. Furthermore, the limited stigmatisation surrounding hacking positions it as a distinctive subject within criminological research.

This paper provides a fresh and thorough examination of the evolving boundaries and shifts in criminal behaviour that directly influence the daily experiences of internet users and individuals. Drawing on Luciano Floridi's concept of the 'Onlife' (online+life, 2015), I address the increasingly blurred lines between online and offline criminality, acknowledging that such a distinction is no longer achievable, especially in light of COVID-19 and the unfolding of new AI-driven 'meta' realities. The primary focus of this field is on the techno-criminogenic use of smart devices and the negative interactions with the Internet of Things, exploring the behaviours of users, bots, and artificial intelligence. While the digital/terrestrial criminogenic dichotomy has been an ongoing discussion since the conceptualization of cybercrime, Onlife Criminology highlights the pivotal role of technology, particularly 'smart' technology, in facilitating hybrid forms of crime and harm. The term 'onlife' (online+life), coined by Luciano Floridi (2015), previously used in Surveillance Studies by David Lyon (2018) and mentioned in Digital Zemiology by Wood (2022), offers a clear and dynamic explanation of criminogenic phenomena, with a prime focus on social harm (Pemberton, 2015) and its specific dangers 'leaking' in everyday life (Richards, 2013; Marganski, 2020). This paper incorporates various current sources and adopts an interdisciplinary approach. Overall, Onlife Criminology provides a holistic interpretation of our present transitional circumstances. It combines rigorously with elements of cultural criminology, zemiology, and critical criminology worldwide, allowing for a comprehensive and forward-thinking understanding of our current challenges.