Being a criminal has little to do with the list as given.
Simply because all those things listed can also indicate someone who is gifted with computers.
The difference is to do with intent. Just like a hammer can be used to drive in a nail, or crack someone's skull. In such cases "Shows proficiency and to use a hammer and an interest in using it" does not mean you have a killer/criminal in your midst.
I find the list particularly concerning, because if I was a kid nowadays, I would fit most of that profile. That would have been grounds for an "intervention" to put me back on "the right path", and I would not have the skills and abilities now which allow me to earn a decent living.
My hacking around my PC, learning the ins and outs, reading sites online and generally socialising with (very smart, usually older) people on IRC taught me magnitudes more than any IT or CompSci course I have ever taken in a UK institution. Especially in school, where my exposure to this source of information allowed me to improve myself beyond what the courses in school taught me and beyond my peers in ability. Most of my abilities were self-taught, and these kinds of recommendations will stunt development of future generations at best, and result in kids getting into serious trouble because of misconstrued intent (OMG you got TOR installed, hacker! ) in the worst case.
I fully expect if this advice got rolled out and enforced, in a generation or so those people in government will be sitting around and scratching their heads, wondering why the UK population seems to completely lack "cybersecurity experts" while other countries run rings around a populace generally ignorant of how computers work.
And I like how TOR is described as solely a tool for illicit activities, because there is no legitimate reason to have TOR installed in the UK, especially after recent legislation to do with snooping, eh?