The use of references in legal documents to private technological solutions that implement a particular process has the risks of leaving a wide range of illegal acts in the digital environment unappreciated. Such an approach risks describing only the technologies that exist at a certain moment and the consequences of their illegal use, which, observing the dynamics of modern technological development, does not look prudent. All this requires a revision of terminology of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in order to adequately parry existing threats in the field of computer information. A critical analysis of the need to indicate special means of protection and the need for authority in the qualification of actions that infringe on computer information is given. The fact of the presence or absence of special means of protection is not always essential in determining the criminality of an act. It is possible to provide access to information as a result of technological features of the means of information transmission or by mistake. The article analyzes the following methods of committing computer crimes. The paper points out that the malicious impact on information is not always the result of unauthorized access. In particular, the cases of such types of malicious influence on information as: denial of service; transmission of false information; intermediary attack; web injection; physical impact. The greatest criticism of the analyzed crimes is related to the formulation by the legislator of such consequences as the destruction, blocking, modification or copying of information. As a result, the author's interpretation of the key concepts of signs of the elements of crimes provided for in Chapter 28 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is proposed. As a conclusion, it is stated that information crimes should be classified as computer crimes, regardless of the method of influence. The consequences should be considered from the point of view of the impact on the information system as a whole. When qualifying computer crimes, you should not use as constitutive features that have a narrow technological specificity. The list of consequences can be open, and their enumeration should only be of an orienting nature.
