Categories
Internet Governance

Report of Workshop 151 Cybersecurity R&D. Developing a Vision & Road Map

This workshop was moderated by Tulika Pandey of the Ministry of Communications & IT of India. She opened the panel by reviewing the current definitions of critical infrastructure, security and cybersecurity under some of the ITU resolutions.

Tracy Hackshaw from ISOC Trinidad y Tobago gave a general perspective of his country and mentioned that his country currently suffers from social and economic dislocation and mentioned that cybercrime is increasing at un-precedent levels, and that there has been an increase of criminal and technological sophistication. He also mentioned the challenges on capacity building and the need to increase awareness and education in order to counter cybercrime in his country.

I made reference to Ciberdelincuencia.Org a regional initiative supported by ISOC and NACPEC, which was launched a year go in order to increase education awareness in the areas of cybercrime and security in the region, and to create a network of experts in the legal and policy field in the fight against cybercrime. I also made a question to the three participants regarding the status of criminal laws to fight against cybecrime in their own region. Tracy mentioned that there are laws that regulate electronic commerce and transactions, but not laws that punish internet related crime yet. He mentioned that the law system of Trinidad and Tobago is based on the common law and that the approach of the authorities with regard to enforcement is somehow informal.

Subsequently Sherif El Tokali gave a perspective of his country and emphasize on the need of the multidimensional approach to counter cybercrime. The moderator then ask the audience to provide perspectives. Some of the issues that were raised by the audience were: (i) the problem of jurisdiction and applicable law to the Internet, and sovereignty of States to apply their existent criminal laws to internet criminal activities,  (ii) whether the UN was the most convenient forum to create legal instruments and policies to fight cybercrime; and (iii) the need to establish 24×7 points of contact and national CERTs to identify criminal activities.