(No.87) Cross border cooperation in incidents involving (Internet) Critical Infrastructure
Question1: What are the effects of jurisdiction and territoriality on the ongoing discussions about
The Internet is main driving force of the modern economy. Economic growth is sustained by availability of a secure Internet. As a consequence the daily lives of more and more institutions, companies and people have become even more dependent on the Internet. With this dependency safe use and a secure Internet access as such have become a necessity for all involved in order to sustain future development and growth. Trust in this critical infrastructure is an important asset. While the relevance of the Internet grows, cross border trade, data storing and sharing, hosting and registrations have become common standard, law enforcement and CERTs are still held back by national borders, making international cooperation a slow and difficult process. Any crime against a critical Internet resource involves almost certainly data and persons located in other countries. In fact it could be anywhere in the world. In order to amend, prevent and investigate individual cases, it is necessary that this data is somehow accessible for CERTs, companies or law enforcement in a timely but legal manner. Present measure like the 24/7 network are a step forward, but not the answer. A new frame work for cooperation is necessary. Does the Internet need an internationally accepted law or treaty like The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)? This session stages a panel discussion between stakeholders on the most important issues surrounding jurisdictional and territorial restrictions for those involved in incident response and case handling. The panel, holding politicians, incident response, critical infrastructure, law enforcement, parliamentarians and supra national bodies, in the form a debate try to define the main issues, debate potential solutions and propose next steps on the road to change.
Each panelist has 2 minutes to introduce him/herself and make one statement on the topic.
- Open discussion
This is followed by an open discussion between panelist and the audience, fed and led by the moderator.
15 minutes before the end of the workshop, recommendations, emerged from the open discussion, will be put to word.
ECP on behalf of the IGF-NL, (ECP | Platform for the Information Society wants to take barriers for the implementation and acceptance of ICT away to the benefit of our economy and society, and in order to strengthen our international competitive position. In addition, ECP (also at a political-governmental level) draws attention to a number of specific themes such as growth of productivity, strengthening of competitiveness and the European Digital Agenda. One of it programs is the public-private partnership NL IGF. NL IGF prepairs for the IGF and provides good embedding of the results of the IGF in national policy) Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture & innovation
NL IGF organized : 2010: Public-private cooperation on Internet safety/cybercrime http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/chronocontact/?chronoformname=W... 2011: Parliamentarian Challenge: a Round Table between Parliamentarians and other Stakeholders http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/chronocontact/?chronoformname=W...
Moderator: Wout de Natris, expert on national and international cooperation on spam enforcement and cybercrime
- Mr. Timo Lehtimaki, Ficora, Finland. CERT, botnet mitigation centre
- Mr. Gaurab Upadhaya from Nepal, Limelight Industries, Singapore
- Mr. Maarten van Horenbeek, FIRST, global leader in incident response
- Mr. Ivo Ivanov, AC/DC
- Mr. Christopher Painter, Coordinator for Cyber Issues at US State Department
- Mr. Michael Niebel, former HoU of the Internet Governance and Cybersecurity Unit
- Mr. Roelof Meijer, CEO of SIDN, the registry for .nl
- Mrs. Sarah Falvey Policy Manager, Google