A few days after Facebook rebranded itself as Meta, a friend asked if I had viewed Mark Zuckerberg’s keynote address. I hadn’t, so my friend exclaimed, “It’s unbelievable!” After watching it, I responded, “Unbelievable? More like confusing!” Among the many issues raised by Meta’s vision for the metaverse, I found myself pondering whether groups could engage in terrorism within this digital realm.

A Blended Reality The principles and technologies that underpin the concept of a metaverse are not new. However, what is innovative about Facebook’s vision is the integration of physical and virtual realities into a seamless environment where both can coexist. Andrew Bosworth, Meta’s senior vice president for augmented and virtual reality, emphasized that “realistic presence is the key to feeling connected in the metaverse.” This statement underscores a crucial distinction between the metaverse and current online spaces: the authentic sense of presence. On the internet, interactions occur on a two-dimensional plane—users engage with posts, scrolling through and reacting to content that lacks physical presence. Even three-dimensional online environments are limited to predefined settings, which restrict emotional and sensory experiences. For instance, a virtual roller coaster or a video game features set sounds and characters.

Conversely, the metaverse alters this framework. By focusing on realistic presence, users will experience a diverse array of previously unknown emotions. In the metaverse, individuals will don clothing, establish “homes,” maintain offices, shop, and socialize with other avatars. Unlike conventional online platforms, users will actively engage, making decisions and experiencing emotions throughout their time in the metaverse.

Terrorism within the Metaverse To determine the feasibility of terrorism in the metaverse, it is essential to note that it cannot exist in a vacuum. Government entities must have a presence—think of a metaverse equivalent of a DMV or courthouse. Furthermore, real-world laws and regulations must extend into the metaverse. Copyright violations or digital theft, for example, could occur when avatars pilfer virtual goods from someone’s metaverse residence. This assumption is pivotal since terrorism is inherently political and operates outside legal confines. It is also assumed that governments will actively regulate and engage in the metaverse, a potential reality given recent interest from U.S. financial regulators in cryptocurrencies.

If these assumptions hold, the possibility of terrorism in the metaverse becomes plausible. The metaverse’s emphasis on realistic presence may address the physicality challenge that some advocates of "cyberterrorism" struggle to articulate. For an action to be classified as terrorism, it must meet three criteria: it should be politically motivated, instill fear in others, and involve a threat or act of physical violence. Some proponents of “cyberterrorism” argue that physical harm may be less significant than the fear generated by a cyber incident. However, this reasoning is flawed and may represent an attempt to stretch the definition of terrorism to the point of vagueness. Moreover, even when a “cyberterrorism attack” occurs, it often results in inconvenience rather than fear, blurring the line between terrorism and typical cybercrime.

However, the metaverse’s realistic presence could allow terrorist groups to meet and potentially exceed the physicality requirement. For instance, imagine a Pink Floyd concert in the metaverse, sponsored by a major Wall Street firm. Countless avatars attend, experiencing a lifelike concert environment from their homes. As the performance reaches its climax, a leftist anti-capitalist group detonates virtual bombs, “killing” numerous avatars. While no physical harm occurs in reality, the perceived threat of violence due to the realistic presence creates a vivid experience of fear. This sensation is reminiscent of dreams where individuals feel as though their experiences are real.

Additionally, the metaverse could satisfy the instrumental element of terrorism. In the previous example, the virtual explosions might deter concertgoers, discourage firms from sponsoring such events, and prevent artists from performing—consequences that mirror real-world outcomes. Thus, paradoxically, the concept of cyberterrorism may gain credibility through the metaverse.

Will They Choose to Engage? While terrorism in the metaverse might be possible, groups may not opt to pursue this avenue. Terrorist organizations tend to be surprisingly conservative in their methods of attack. In the 1990s, Hoffman noted that although terrorist activity increased during the 1980s, the targets, weapons, and tactics remained notably consistent. An examination of recent attacks across various ideological spectrums supports this claim. For instance, the ISIS attack in November 2015 employed conventional weapons like machine guns and bombs. Similarly, a far-right terrorist in New Zealand killed 49 individuals in two mosques in 2019. Even the 9/11 hijackings, often seen as a hallmark of terrorist innovation, were not entirely novel; for example, in 1989, a faction of Pablo Escobar's Medellín Cartel blew up an Avianca Boeing 727, resulting in 107 fatalities.

Moreover, terrorist groups generally utilize the internet as a tool rather than a method. As Holt observed, extremist organizations have leveraged the internet for recruitment, fundraising, and sharing attack information over the past two decades. This may stem from a lack of technical expertise among these groups to create bomb-carrying avatars within the metaverse, a trend also seen in the current cyberspace where sophisticated cyberattacks are typically attributed to nation-states.

This is not to say that terrorist organizations do not innovate; however, as Hafez and Rasmussen found, such innovation tends to be gradual rather than abrupt. Terrorist groups typically avoid high-risk targets and often innovate only in response to security measures. Therefore, the metaverse may emerge as a viable operational space only if counterterrorism efforts severely constrain traditional avenues of operation.

A Metapuzzle The full realization of the metaverse may still be years away, potentially even a decade. Yet, it presents a complex puzzle of pressing questions regarding governance, privacy, and security. If society hopes to glean lessons from the rapid evolution of social media, these questions must be addressed sooner rather than later. In this context, the potential for terrorism in the metaverse is merely one piece of the larger puzzle.