{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018619084561675717, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0023273855702094647, 'mean_word_length': 4.944700460829493, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Investigating Electronic Defamation Using The Internet

The study was aimed at identifying the most important methods that help in developing criminal investigation skills to confront cyber-crimes. The study was based on more than one approach. It was based on the inductive method, which is based on the deductive approach. The most important findings were: Electronic evidence has a specific scientific value in referring to the facts it contains, but it is indispensable that it be legitimate, both in terms of existence, to be among the legally accepted evidence as a means of proof.  1. The reasons for the difficulty of detecting cybercrime can be explained by the fact that this crime does not leave any visible external impact that the offender can commit this crime in other countries and continents because cybercrime is a transnational crime. 2. The lack of technical and technical expertise in the police, prosecutors, and the judiciary. This is a major obstacle to proving cybercrime. This type of crime requires training and qualification in information technology, evidence collection, research, and trial in the computer and Internet environment. 3. Cybercrime may be part of traditional crime, in the sense that there is a traditional crime involving an electronic aspect.