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.