digitallawJournal of Digital Technologies and LawJournal of Digital Technologies and Law2949-2483Kazan Innovative University named after V. G. Timiryasov10.21202/jdtl.2025.16smgmxqdigitallaw-580Research ArticleARTICLESСТАТЬИNeurohacking in the Digital and Artificial Intelligence Age: Legal Aspects of Protecting Neural InformationНейрохакинг в эпоху цифровизации и искусственного интеллекта: правовые аспекты защиты нейронной информацииhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-2082-1231КоэльоД. П.CoelhoD. P.

Коэльо Диого Перейра – аспирант, 

41013, г. Севилья, Калле Сан Фернандо, д. 4.

Scopus Author ID: 57703490300;

WoS Researcher ID: GLU-8923-2022;

Google Scholar ID: -laUdL8AAAAJ.

Diogo P. Coelho – PhD Student, 

4, Calle San Fernando, 41013 Sevilla.

Scopus Author ID: 57703490300

WoS Researcher ID: GLU-8923-2022

Google Scholar ID: -laUdL8AAAAJ

 

diopercoe@alum.us.esСевильский университетИспанияUniversity of SevilleSpain20251911202533397430Copyright © Coelho D.P., 20252025Коэльо Д.П.Coelho D.P.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.lawjournal.digital/jour/article/view/580Objective

Objective: to contribute to the concept of neurocrime; to study the current and future risks from the viewpoint of cybersecurity in the context of digitalization and artificial intelligence development.

Methods

Methods: the study uses a critical and descriptive analysis of the relationship between cybercrime and neurocrime. It provides a conceptual distinction between the brain-computer interface and its use and describes the differences between neural and mental manipulation. The legal autonomy of crimes against mental integrity in relation to crimes against physical integrity is investigated. The methodological framework includes the analysis of existing prototypes of neurocrimes based on a four-phase brain-computer interface cycle and the study of the features of neurohacking in the context of the metaverse and artificial intelligence technologies.

Results

Results: the study revealed the essential characteristics of neurohacking as the misuse of neural devices to gain unauthorized access to and manipulate neural information. Four main types of brain-computer interface applications subject to neurohacking are identified: neuromedical applications, user authentication systems, video games, and smartphone-based applications. The modalities of neurohacking were established at each phase of the brain-computer interface cycle: manipulations at the stage of neural information input, measuring and recording of brain activity, decoding and classifying neural information, as well as at the stage of the result output. The specific threats of neurohacking in the era of digitalization are analyzed, including immersive attacks and human joystick attacks in the metaverse.

Scientific novelty

Scientific novelty: for the first time, a comprehensive differentiation of the concepts of neurocrime and cybercrime was carried out, highlighting their specific legal consequences. The author proposed a classification of neurocrimes based on the four-phase cycle of the brain-computer interface. The study substantiated the need to distinguish mental integrity as an independent object of legal protection, different from the protection of physical integrity. For the first time, the features of neurohacking in the context of the metaverse and artificial intelligence technologies were investigated, including the analysis of new types of attacks and threats to neurosecurity.

Practical significance

Practical significance: the study results are important for the development of legal regulation in the field of cybersecurity and the corresponding regulations. The identified types of neurocrimes and their classification can help to create a specialized legislation on the protection of neural data and mental integrity. Practical recommendations on ensuring the neurosecurity of brain-computer interfaces are in demand in medical practice, video game industry, authentication systems, and for the development of smartphone applications.

Цель

Цель: внесение вклада в осмысление концепции нейропреступности, а также в изучение текущих и будущих рисков с точки зрения нейробезопасности в условиях развития цифровизации и искусственного интеллекта.

Методы

Методы: в исследовании применен критико-описательный анализ связи между киберпреступностью и нейропреступностью, проведено концептуальное разграничение интерфейса «мозг – компьютер» и вариантов его использования, выполнено описание различий между нейронными и психическими манипуляциями. Исследуется правовая автономия преступлений против психической неприкосновенности по отношению к преступлениям против физической неприкосновенности. Методологический аппарат включает анализ существующих прототипов нейропреступлений на основе четырехфазного цикла интерфейса «мозг – компьютер» и изучение специфики нейрохакинга в контексте метавселенной и технологий искусственного интеллекта.

Результаты

Результаты: исследование выявило сущностные характеристики нейрохакинга как неправомерного использования нейронных устройств для получения несанкционированного доступа к нейронной информации и ее манипулирования. Определены четыре основных типа приложений интерфейса «мозг – компьютер», подверженных нейрохакингу: нейромедицинские приложения, системы аутентификации пользователей, видеоигры и приложения на базе смартфонов. Установлены модальности нейрохакинга на каждой фазе цикла интерфейса «мозг – компьютер»: манипуляции на этапе ввода нейронной информации, измерения и записи мозговой активности, декодирования и классификации нейронной информации, а также на этапе вывода результата. Проанализированы специфические угрозы нейрохакинга в эпоху цифровизации, включая иммерсивные атаки и атаки типа «человек – джойстик» в метавселенной.

Научная новизна

Научная новизна: впервые проведено комплексное разграничение концепций нейропреступности и киберпреступности с выделением их специфических правовых последствий. Предложена авторская классификация нейропреступлений на основе четырехфазного цикла интерфейса «мозг – компьютер». Обоснована необходимость выделения психической неприкосновенности как самостоятельного объекта правовой защиты, отличного от защиты физической неприкосновенности. Впервые исследованы особенности нейрохакинга в контексте метавселенной и технологий искусственного интеллекта, включая анализ новых типов атак и угроз нейробезопасности.

Практическая значимость

Практическая значимость: результаты исследования имеют важное значение для развития правового регулирования в области нейробезопасности и разработки соответствующих нормативных актов. Выявленные типы нейропреступлений и их классификация могут служить основой для создания специализированного законодательства о защите нейронных данных и психической неприкосновенности. Практические рекомендации по обеспечению нейробезопасности интерфейсов «мозг – компьютер» востребованы в медицинской практике, индустрии видеоигр, системах аутентификации и разработке приложений для смартфонов.

интерфейс «мозг – компьютер»искусственный интеллекткиберпреступностьметавселеннаянейробезопасностьнейропреступностьнейротехнологиинейрохакингправоцифровые технологииartificial intelligencebrain-computer interfacecybercrimedigital technologieslawmetaverseneurocrimeneurohackingneurosecurityneurotechnologiesReferencesAbegão Alves, C. (2020). Contra a mente: ensaio de integração das lesões resultantes de intervenções na mente no artigo 143.º do Código Penal. In M. Fernanda Palma et al. (org.). Livro em Memória do Professor Doutor João Curado Neves. Associação Académica da Faculdade de Direito de Lisboa (pp. 215–235). AAFDL Editora. (In Portug.).Abegão Alves, C. (2020). Contra a mente: ensaio de integração das lesões resultantes de intervenções na mente no artigo 143.º do Código Penal. In M. Fernanda Palma et al. (org.). Livro em Memória do Professor Doutor João Curado Neves. Associação Académica da Faculdade de Direito de Lisboa (pp. 215–235). AAFDL Editora. (In Portug.).Bernal, S. L., Pérez, M. Q., Martínez Beltrán, E. T., Martínez Pérez, G., & Huertas Celdrán, A. (2022). When Brain-Computer Interfaces Meet the Metaverse: Landscape, Demonstrator, Trends, Challenges, and Concerns. Computer Science – Human-Computer Interaction. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.03169Bernal, S. L., Pérez, M. Q., Martínez Beltrán, E. T., Martínez Pérez, G., & Huertas Celdrán, A. (2022). When Brain-Computer Interfaces Meet the Metaverse: Landscape, Demonstrator, Trends, Challenges, and Concerns. Computer Science – Human-Computer Interaction. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.03169Bublitz, J. C., & Merkel, R. (2014). Crimes Against Minds: On Mental Manipulations, Harms and a Human Right to Mental Self-Determination. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 8, 51–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-012-9172-yBublitz, J. C., & Merkel, R. (2014). Crimes Against Minds: On Mental Manipulations, Harms and a Human Right to Mental Self-Determination. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 8, 51–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-012-9172-yCzech, A. (2021). Brain-Computer Interface Use to Control Military Weapons and Tools. In S. Paszkiel (Ed.), Control, Computer Engineering and Neuroscience. ICBCI 2021. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (Vol. 1362). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72254-8_20Czech, A. (2021). Brain-Computer Interface Use to Control Military Weapons and Tools. In S. Paszkiel (Ed.), Control, Computer Engineering and Neuroscience. ICBCI 2021. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (Vol. 1362). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72254-8_20Denning, T., Matsuoka, Y., & Kohno, T. (2009). Neurosecurity: Security and privacy for neural devices. Neurosurgical Focus, 27(1), E7. https://doi.org/10.3171/2009.4.focus0985Denning, T., Matsuoka, Y., & Kohno, T. (2009). Neurosecurity: Security and privacy for neural devices. Neurosurgical Focus, 27(1), E7. https://doi.org/10.3171/2009.4.focus0985Dias Venâncio, P. (2011). Lei do Cibercrime. Anotada e Comentada. Almedina. (In Portug.).Dias Venâncio, P. (2011). Lei do Cibercrime. Anotada e Comentada. Almedina. (In Portug.).Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Baabdullah, A. M., Ribeiro-Navarrete, S., Giannakis, M., Al-Debei, M. M., Dennehy, D., Metri, Bh., Buhalis, D., Cheung, Ch. M. K., Conboy, K., Doyle, R., Dubey, R., Dutot, V., Felix, R., Goyal, D. P., Gustafsson, A., Hinsch, Ch., Jebabli, I., Janssen, … Wamba, S. F. (2022). Metaverse beyond the hype: Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 66, 102542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102542Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Baabdullah, A. M., Ribeiro-Navarrete, S., Giannakis, M., Al-Debei, M. M., Dennehy, D., Metri, Bh., Buhalis, D., Cheung, Ch. M. K., Conboy, K., Doyle, R., Dubey, R., Dutot, V., Felix, R., Goyal, D. P., Gustafsson, A., Hinsch, Ch., Jebabli, I., Janssen, … Wamba, S. F. (2022). Metaverse beyond the hype: Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 66, 102542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102542Ford, M. (2016). Robôs: A Ameaça de um futuro sem emprego. Bertrand Editora. (In Portug.).Ford, M. (2016). Robôs: A Ameaça de um futuro sem emprego. Bertrand Editora. (In Portug.).Esmaeilzadeh, H., & Vaezi, R. (2021). Conscious AI. arXiv:2105.07879. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2105.07879Esmaeilzadeh, H., & Vaezi, R. (2021). Conscious AI. arXiv:2105.07879. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2105.07879Ienca, M., & Haselager, P. (2016). Hacking the brain: brain-computer interfacing technology and the ethics of neurosecurity. Ethics and Information Technology, 18, 117–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-016-9398-9Ienca, M., & Haselager, P. (2016). Hacking the brain: brain-computer interfacing technology and the ethics of neurosecurity. Ethics and Information Technology, 18, 117–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-016-9398-9Kotchetkov, I., Hwang, B. Y., Appelboom, G., Kellner, Ch. P., & Connolly E. S. Jr. (2010). Brain-computer interfaces: Military, neurosurgical, and ethical perspective. Neurosurgical Focus, 28(5), E25. https://doi.org/10.3171/2010.2.focus1027Kotchetkov, I., Hwang, B. Y., Appelboom, G., Kellner, Ch. P., & Connolly E. S. Jr. (2010). Brain-computer interfaces: Military, neurosurgical, and ethical perspective. Neurosurgical Focus, 28(5), E25. https://doi.org/10.3171/2010.2.focus1027Li, Q., Ding, D., & Conti, M. (2015). Brain-computer interface applications: Security and privacy challenges. IEEE conference on communications and network security (CNS). Florence, 2015 (pp. 663–666). https://doi.org/10.1109/CNS.2015.7346884Li, Q., Ding, D., & Conti, M. (2015). Brain-computer interface applications: Security and privacy challenges. IEEE conference on communications and network security (CNS). Florence, 2015 (pp. 663–666). https://doi.org/10.1109/CNS.2015.7346884Marques, G., & Martins, L. (2006). Direito da informática (2.ª Edição). Almedina. (In Portug.).Marques, G., & Martins, L. (2006). Direito da informática (2.ª Edição). Almedina. (In Portug.).Miranda, R., Casebeer, W. D., Hein, A. M., Judy, J. W., Krotkov, E. P., Laabs, T. L., Manzo, J. E., Pankratz, K. G., Pratt, G. A., Sanchez, J. C., Weber, D. J., Wheeler, T. L., & Ling, G. S. F. (2015). DARPA-funded efforts in the development of novel brain-computer interface technologies. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 244, 52–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.07.019.Miranda, R., Casebeer, W. D., Hein, A. M., Judy, J. W., Krotkov, E. P., Laabs, T. L., Manzo, J. E., Pankratz, K. G., Pratt, G. A., Sanchez, J. C., Weber, D. J., Wheeler, T. L., & Ling, G. S. F. (2015). DARPA-funded efforts in the development of novel brain-computer interface technologies. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 244, 52–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.07.019.Mochan, A., Parkin, B., Farinha, J., & Bailey, G. (2025). Emerging applications of neurotechnology and their implications for EU governance. Publications Office of the European Union. Luxembourg.Mochan, A., Parkin, B., Farinha, J., & Bailey, G. (2025). Emerging applications of neurotechnology and their implications for EU governance. Publications Office of the European Union. Luxembourg.Moulin, T. (2022). ‘I Will Control Your Mind’: The International Regulation of Brain-Hacking. San Diego International Law Journal, 24(65).Moulin, T. (2022). ‘I Will Control Your Mind’: The International Regulation of Brain-Hacking. San Diego International Law Journal, 24(65).Orlosky, J., Sra, M., Bektaş, K., Peng, H., Kim, J., Kosmyna, N., Höllerer, T., Steed, A., Kiyokawa, K., Akşit, K. (2021). Telelife: The Future of Remote Living. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 2, 763340. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2021.763340Orlosky, J., Sra, M., Bektaş, K., Peng, H., Kim, J., Kosmyna, N., Höllerer, T., Steed, A., Kiyokawa, K., Akşit, K. (2021). Telelife: The Future of Remote Living. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 2, 763340. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2021.763340Pooyandeh, M., Han, K. J., & Sohn, I. (2022). Cybersecurity in the AI-Based Metaverse: A Survey. Applied Sciences. MDPI, 12(24), 12993. https://doi.org/10.3390/app122412993Pooyandeh, M., Han, K. J., & Sohn, I. (2022). Cybersecurity in the AI-Based Metaverse: A Survey. Applied Sciences. MDPI, 12(24), 12993. https://doi.org/10.3390/app122412993Radu, R. (2024). Neurotechnologies and the future of internet governance. Technical Report. EUI. RSC (Global Governance Programme). GIFI. Issue Brief.Radu, R. (2024). Neurotechnologies and the future of internet governance. Technical Report. EUI. RSC (Global Governance Programme). GIFI. Issue Brief.Rodrigues, B. S. (2009). Direito Penal Especial. Direito Penal Informático-Digital. Almedina. (In Portug.).Rodrigues, B. S. (2009). Direito Penal Especial. Direito Penal Informático-Digital. Almedina. (In Portug.).Rosenfeld, P., Biroschak, J., & Furedy, J. (2006). P300-based detection of concealed autobiographical versus incidentally acquired information in target and non-target paradigms. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 60(3), 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2005.06.002Rosenfeld, P., Biroschak, J., & Furedy, J. (2006). P300-based detection of concealed autobiographical versus incidentally acquired information in target and non-target paradigms. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 60(3), 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2005.06.002Rosenfeld, P. (2011). P300 in detecting concealed information. In B. Verschuere, G. Ben-Shakhar, & E. Meijer (Eds), Memory detection: Theory and application of the concealed information test (pp. 63–89). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511975196.005Rosenfeld, P. (2011). P300 in detecting concealed information. In B. Verschuere, G. Ben-Shakhar, & E. Meijer (Eds), Memory detection: Theory and application of the concealed information test (pp. 63–89). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511975196.005Shen, F. (2013). Mind, Body, and the Criminal Law. Minnesota Law Review, 97, 2036–2175.Shen, F. (2013). Mind, Body, and the Criminal Law. Minnesota Law Review, 97, 2036–2175.Vallabhaneni, A., Wang, T., & He, B. (2005). Brain – Computer Interface. In B. He (Ed.), Neural Engineering. Bioelectric Engineering (pp. 85–121). Springer. Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48610-5_3Vallabhaneni, A., Wang, T., & He, B. (2005). Brain – Computer Interface. In B. He (Ed.), Neural Engineering. Bioelectric Engineering (pp. 85–121). Springer. Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48610-5_3Van Gerven, M., Farquhar, J., Schaefer, R., Vlek, R., Geuze, J., Nijholt, A., Ramsey, N., Haselager, P., Vuurpijl, L., Gielen, S., & Desain, P. (2009). The brain-computer interface cycle. Journal of Neural Engineering, 6(4), 041001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2560/6/4/041001Van Gerven, M., Farquhar, J., Schaefer, R., Vlek, R., Geuze, J., Nijholt, A., Ramsey, N., Haselager, P., Vuurpijl, L., Gielen, S., & Desain, P. (2009). The brain-computer interface cycle. Journal of Neural Engineering, 6(4), 041001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2560/6/4/041001Vasconcelos Casimiro, S. (2000). A responsabilidade civil pelo conteúdo da informação transmitida pela Internet. Almedina. (In Portug.).Vasconcelos Casimiro, S. (2000). A responsabilidade civil pelo conteúdo da informação transmitida pela Internet. Almedina. (In Portug.).Velasco, C. (2022). Cybercrime and Artificial Intelligence. An overview of the work of international organizations on criminal justice and the international applicable instruments. ERA Forum, 23, 109–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-022-00702-zVelasco, C. (2022). Cybercrime and Artificial Intelligence. An overview of the work of international organizations on criminal justice and the international applicable instruments. ERA Forum, 23, 109–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-022-00702-zYuan, B., Hsieh, Chih-Hung, & Chang, Chien-Ching (2010). National technology foresight research: A literature review from 1984 to 2005. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy, 6(1), 5–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJFIP.2010.032663Yuan, B., Hsieh, Chih-Hung, & Chang, Chien-Ching (2010). National technology foresight research: A literature review from 1984 to 2005. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy, 6(1), 5–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJFIP.2010.032663Zhang, X., Ma, Z., Zheng, H., Li, T., Chen, K., Wang, X., Liu, Ch., Xu, L., Wu, X., Lin, D., & Lin, H. (2020). The combination of brain-computer interfaces and artificial intelligence: applications and challenges. Annals of Translational Medicine, 8(11), PMC7327323. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2019.11.109Zhang, X., Ma, Z., Zheng, H., Li, T., Chen, K., Wang, X., Liu, Ch., Xu, L., Wu, X., Lin, D., & Lin, H. (2020). The combination of brain-computer interfaces and artificial intelligence: applications and challenges. Annals of Translational Medicine, 8(11), PMC7327323. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2019.11.109

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.