Hi there,

I've had the opportunity to do a reasoanble amount of research and consultation, including, on occasion, with law enforcement, on these issues in Canada, and the emerging issue on cyber crime has really been this (taken from the globe/mail article posted below):

Do police lack sophistication?

It’s usually the reluctance of police superiors to devote resources to this. Because the question they ask is, “Where are the victims? Why am I wasting resources to catch a criminal who’s not committing crimes in my jurisdiction?”

I.e. the problem is one of resources and training, not lack of surveillance powers. Solving it by throwing away our civil liberties hardly seems justified, if it's a problem that can be solved by spending a little more money on resources and training. Also, FYI, the newest and most common meme in civil liberties/security erosion (particularly in the cyber crime setting, but in other law enforcement-related scenarios as well) is to leverage voluntary cooperation of private entities like ICANN. It seems neither justified nor desirable.

On a final note, the exception to this rule are typically child pornography investigation units which are well resourced and highly technically trained. They're also typically very effective, and are least in need of sweeping new powers or information sources, although, of course, child protection always ends up at the forefront of these debates.

Best,

Tamir Israel
Staff Lawyer

Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy & Public Interest Clinic
University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law, CML
57 Louis Pasteur Street
Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5
Tel: (613) 562-5800 ext. 2914
Fax: (613) 562-5417
www.cippic.ca


On 20/10/2011 5:35 PM, Alain Berranger wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">Thanks Kerry,

I stand corrected... Just wanted to share the Globe & Mail space on this issue. Also, I'm with you on opposing the current government on where it is trying to take our country.

Best, Alain

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Kerry Brown <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I'm Canadian and I don't consider this a Canadian overview. It is an interview with an author. I haven't read the book but from the author's answers to the interview questions it seems like much of it is based on hearsay. Personally I prefer to be thought of as innocent until proven guilty. I realise not all countries base their laws on this premise. I also realise that law enforcement agencies may need the power to invade privacy while investigating a crime. Canadian law, which is based on the innocent until proven guilty paradigm, provides for search warrants and other legal means for law enforcement agencies to do this. I would not want to see that change in Canada. The current Canadian government is working to change this. Many Canadians are arguing against this change thus I don't think the article is a fair representation of a Canadian overview.

Kerry Brown

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alain Berranger
Sent: October-20-11 8:45 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] for Debbie: Explaining votes made while representing NCSG while on GNSO Council

Thanks Milton,

Yes, but the reverse is true also: while suspected cyber criminals are given the presumption of innocence during the unavoidable due diligence process, innocent victims are or may have been damaged !... sometimes that damage is "irréparable" or permanent!..given the interconnectedness nature of the internet, much if not most cybercrime is cross-border...in fact criminal schemes are most often designed around cross-border faults or gaps... between countries with opposing ends of the privacy-law enforcement spectrum...  They are a few rogue states today where due diligence and lack of inter-agency collaboration leave no doubt with most about the protection cybercriminals get from rogue politicians, to their mutual benefit... We should use available international law enforcement approaches against the obvious and evidence-based crimes in those cases... I refrain from naming countries for obvious reasons...

See http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/exploring-the-growing-threat-of-cyber-crime/article2205621/ for a Canadian overview...

What chagrines me to no end is that cybercrime benefits are "fungeable" and contribute to other cross-border crimes like human trafficking, child pornography,... 

Alain
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Alain,
The problem is rarely one of deciding how much privacy a criminal should have. Most often, the problem is determining whether the person being taken down, disrupted or exposed IS IN FACT A CRIMINAL. That's the problem typically with conservative approaches to law enforcement: they assume that we already know who is guilty, and structure their procedures accordingly. But the procedures are in place to protect the innocent, and to make sure(r) that we actually have strong reason to believe that the person being affected is a wrongdoer and not an innocent bystander.   
 
From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alain Berranger
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 3:44 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] for Debbie: Explaining votes made while representing NCSG while on GNSO Council
 
Can we all agree that there is malfeasance on the Web and that it should be brought down as often and as much as possible? The raft of cybersecurity legislation around the world's legislations is probably a confirmation of the seriousness and extent of the problem. However it is accepted widely that we must strike a balance between fighting cybercrime and ensuring data protection/privacy. How much privacy should a criminal have in the accomplishment of the crime?... so whatever our personal views on that, please let's allow for all positions along that spectrum and allow for debate. 
 




--
Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca
Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
Trustee, GKP Foundation, www.globalknowledgepartnership.org
Vice Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
Skype: alain.berranger



--
Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca
Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
Trustee, GKP Foundation, www.globalknowledgepartnership.org
Vice Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/
O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
Skype: alain.berranger