From digitization facilitating access to company data to communication within the company and telecommuting, the use of technology is constantly changing our habits and work methods. Thus, it is easier and more convenient to download 500-page confidential report than to make a photocopy, but at the same time this phenomenon makes malicious acts possible, as information assets have become a highly coveted strategic stake in an ultra-connected environment. To situate the practices of a people, there is nothing more edifying than to go through its penal code, so that we are able to list, in the light of the prohibitions, what practices were forbidden at the time. The rapid advance of technology requires a rapid adaptation of legal rules to regulate relations between people, hence the purpose of the law on cybercrime.

To remedy a situation of legal vacuum the legislator has proceeded to a creation of new offences specific to ICT and also adapt the classic offences to ICT such as the theft subject of this post. According to article 364 of the Senegalese penal code "Anyone who fraudulently takes something that does not belong to him is guilty of theft" to adapt this offence it is necessary to go beyond the text, the spirit of this provision is to protect the property while with today's technologies this property can be immaterial. It is true that in cyberspace one cannot speak of 'subtraction' 'dispossession' of the physical property of others, which is why "the fraudulent subtraction of information to the detriment of others is assimilated to theft" Article 431-53 Law 2008-11 of January 25, 2008 on cybercrime.

In the reform of the penal code in 2016, the text is well adapted to the context of the cyber space insofar as it speaks of fraudulent copying (article 431-58.) - The person who fraudulently copied computer data that does not belong to him. is punished by an imprisonment of six months to two years and a fine of 250,000 francs to 1,000,000 francs or one of these penalties.Indeed, the Internet appears most often as a vector for the multiplication of offences carried out by means of technology.

It is now necessary to understand that the fact of knowingly attaching in an email or sharing files marked with the seal 'confidential' can trigger a dismissal procedure in the best of cases, conversely the employer will have to be careful not to open files protected by the mention ''personal'' because it is necessary to remind it the employee to also have the right to the respect of his private life even at work, it will be the object of my next post. By simply copying information that has nothing to do with the content of your work, you risk falling under this provision 431-53. Remarkably, in Senegal, judges did not wait for the entry into force of the law on cybercrime to assimilate to theft the simple fact of copying electronic data contained in servers by simple copying. In deciding the debate on this phenomenon in the digital age in the case of the Clinique du Cap 09 Mai 2006, the judge of the Tribunal Régional Hors Classe de Dakar saw his decision confirmed by a decision of the Court of Appeal of 16 April 2007 admitting the possibility of a theft whose object is nothing more than information. In my opinion, they based their decision on the spirit of article 364 of the penal code, neither more nor less, adapted to ICT and the decision will be consecrated one year later by the legislator who, once again, has followed the dynamics of the case law.

If no one is supposed to ignore the law, it is still useful to clearly define the rules of the game and to review the conditions of BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) in a computer charter, installing a security device for attacks from the outside, because we must remember that we are faced with two situations: either the act is committed by an employee or an ex-employee, hence the importance of withdrawing the access codes and passwords for applications available from the outside in the second case of figure. A security barrier, even if it is not 100% effective in protecting you, remains a means of providing evidence of an attack.