Individuals who are responsible for the deviant behavior of cyber crime on can be referred to as computer criminals. According to Campbell & Kennedy(2009) a computer hacker is often used interchangeably with the term computer criminal. However they are not the same. Hacker is often a term used for a computer programer who changes a computer code in a way that is not typically done (Rogers,2001). The reason for the altering of code is to either improve the program or to simply solve a problem within the program. Campbell et.al (2009) states that a computer cracker or a malicious hacker would better fit the term of an internet criminal because these individuals tend to alter coding for many reasons such as financial gain or to destroy the program. In other words these type of hackers like to engage in deviant behaviors that involve activities such as creating viruses, distributing denials of service (DDoS) attacks, and information stealing.(Campbell et.al, 2009). A study done by Goldschmidt (2005) suggests that the reason these hackers engage in these deviant acts is due to moral disengagement. Moral disengagement suggests that hackers are motivated to find answers. They will at often times engage in victim blaming and suggest that the victims of these hacks deserved it (Rogers 2001). Hackers who commit these acts are also aided by the difficulty it is to actually catch them (Sullivan 2000). These individuals use different means of anonymity when they engage in hacking. Campbell et.al (2009) states that they use nicknames, stolen account, and different internet protocol addresses in order to remain hidden online. In fact hackers are so confident in their anonymity that they often times will leave their mark on the sites that they hack and leave behind things like their nickname handle (Woo, Kim, Dominick 2004). In some cases they might even leave their email address behind because that is how confident they are in not being able to be traced back. Sullivan (2000) argues that hackers who launch DoS attacks often times brag about their attack as well as talk about their next attack on Internet Relay Chat (IRC) channels. The reason for that is because the DoS attacks are actually launched from other innocent networks and not from the hackers personal computer (Sullivan 2000). This again makes it more difficult to trace back to the hacker and thus keeps the hacker anonymous. The anonymity and pseudonymity can diminish the effects on social identity. It also reduces identification within a group and it allows these individuals to disengage from the restrictions of norms. Thus furthur explaining why individuals engage in the deviant act. Hinduja (2008) argues that if identifiability was presented instead of anonymity and pseudonymity, it would keep the individual from acting on this deviant act.