<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
Hi there,<br>
<br>
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):<br>
<p>
<i><strong>Do police lack sophistication?</strong></i>
</p>
<p><i>
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?” <br>
</i></p>
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. <br>
<br>
On a final note, the <i>exception</i> 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.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Tamir Israel<br>
Staff Lawyer<br>
<br>
Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy & Public Interest
Clinic<br>
University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law, CML<br>
57 Louis Pasteur Street<br>
Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5<br>
Tel: (613) 562-5800 ext. 2914<br>
Fax: (613) 562-5417<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.cippic.ca">www.cippic.ca</a> <br>
<br>
<br>
On 20/10/2011 5:35 PM, Alain Berranger wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CANgs+SuL97gNowP=8HHpg2h1G+btkcJ0ukZ-KGVTH5CKZfUCWQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">Thanks Kerry,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best, Alain</div>
<div><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Kerry
Brown <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:kerry@kdbsystems.com">kerry@kdbsystems.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);
padding-left: 1ex;">
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.<br>
<br>
Kerry Brown<br>
<br>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<div class="im">From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>]
On Behalf Of Alain Berranger<br>
</div>
Sent: October-20-11 8:45 AM<br>
<div>
<div class="h5">To: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><br>
Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] for Debbie: Explaining votes
made while representing NCSG while on GNSO Council<br>
<br>
Thanks Milton,<br>
<br>
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...<br>
<br>
See <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/exploring-the-growing-threat-of-cyber-crime/article2205621/"
target="_blank">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/exploring-the-growing-threat-of-cyber-crime/article2205621/</a> for
a Canadian overview...<br>
<br>
What chagrines me to no end is that cybercrime benefits
are "fungeable" and contribute to other cross-border
crimes like human trafficking, child pornography,... <br>
<br>
Alain<br>
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Milton L Mueller <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu">mueller@syr.edu</a>>
wrote:<br>
Alain,<br>
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. <br>
<br>
From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>]
On Behalf Of Alain Berranger<br>
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 3:44 PM<br>
To: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><br>
Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] for Debbie: Explaining votes
made while representing NCSG while on GNSO Council<br>
<br>
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. <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA<br>
Member, Board of Directors, CECI, <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.ceci.ca"
target="_blank">http://www.ceci.ca</a><br>
Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.schulich.yorku.ca" target="_blank">www.schulich.yorku.ca</a><br>
Trustee, GKP Foundation, <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.globalknowledgepartnership.org"
target="_blank">www.globalknowledgepartnership.org</a><br>
Vice Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://npoc.org/%0AO:+1" target="_blank">http://npoc.org/<br>
O:+1</a> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:514%20484%207824" value="+15144847824">514
484 7824</a>; M:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%2B1%20514%20704%207824"
value="+15147047824">+1 514 704 7824</a><br>
Skype: alain.berranger<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
<div>Member, Board of Directors, CECI, <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/"
target="_blank">http://www.ceci.ca</a><br>
<div>Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.schulich.yorku.ca"
target="_blank">www.schulich.yorku.ca</a><br>
Trustee, GKP Foundation, <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.globalknowledgepartnership.org"
target="_blank">www.globalknowledgepartnership.org</a><br>
Vice Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://npoc.org/" target="_blank">http://npoc.org/</a><br>
O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824<br>
Skype: alain.berranger<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>