<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7654.12">
<TITLE>AW: [governance] November 1-2 Ministerial Cyber Event was Re: [] Cyber Security 2011</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>For those interested, here's William Hague's opening address at the London Cyberspace Conference (accessed from: <A HREF="http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?id=684997682&view=Speech">http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?id=684997682&view=Speech</A>).<BR>
<BR>
Best,<BR>
<BR>
philipp<BR>
<BR>
-----------<BR>
<BR>
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY<BR>
<BR>
Good morning and welcome to the London Conference on Cyberspace, the first of its kind.<BR>
<BR>
This is not a traditional summit between governments. We have brought together representatives from industry, companies that own and operate international digital infrastructure, civil society and major international organisations. <BR>
<BR>
I proposed this meeting in February in Munich to consider how we reach new international agreement about behaviour in cyberspace.<BR>
<BR>
Many of the countries and representatives here will have very different views. But the reasons to cooperate are far more compelling than the issues that divide us.<BR>
<BR>
The spread of connectivity between individuals, governments and organisations is bringing benefits and opportunities on a vast scale.<BR>
<BR>
We have pushed the bounds of ingenuity and discovery to develop incredibly versatile technologies which we use in every area of life, with the prospect of further yet-undreamt of innovations still to come.<BR>
<BR>
As an elected Member of Parliament, I relish how social media has narrowed the gap between government and individual citizens. It allows the exchange of ideas between people who otherwise never would meet, and in my case as Foreign Secretary, direct digital engagement with not just British citizens, but people of many other countries too.<BR>
<BR>
Across the world we see an explosion of new ways of accessing information and education and of doing business. Whether it is internet banking here in Britain or mobile banking across Africa, people are adapting technology to their local circumstances and improving it all the time. The economic benefit is clear: as the internet expands, so does global GDP.<BR>
<BR>
But we also see glaring inequalities - 95% internet access in Iceland, 0.1% in Liberia – and the rise in malicious use of digital networks, targeted often at the most vulnerable in our societies and at national systems themselves. <BR>
<BR>
The internet is not separate from society; it is part of society and mirrors it. The best and worst of human behaviour find expression online, and the technology lends itself to misuse as well as to great benefit.<BR>
<BR>
This particularly applies to online crime, which is growing exponentially. Across the globe there are people and groups seeking to turn our personal information into cash, or to wreak havoc on the net to express political grievances. In Europe and North America, one single denial of service tool designed by hacktivists was downloaded by more than 75,000 computer users earlier this year. Militaries, citizen services, credit card companies and businesses like Amazon were attacked. More than 6 million unique types of new malware were detected by industry in the first three months of this year.<BR>
<BR>
As all our societies become more wired-up and technologies converge, the scope for malignant activity will widen alongside the many advantages, whether it is the theft of intellectual property or the spread of malware and viruses. It will become harder to protect our users or to prevent our defences from being swamped.<BR>
<BR>
Furthermore it is increasingly clear that countries with weak cyber defences and capabilities will find themselves exposed over the long term; at a serious strategic disadvantage given the apparent rise in state-sponsored attacks.<BR>
<BR>
So if we want a future in which the benefits of the digital age are expanded to all peoples and economies of the world, and the risks minimised as much as possible, then we need to act to achieve that.<BR>
<BR>
I believe we must aspire to a future for cyberspace which is not stifled by government control or censorship, but where innovation and competition flourish and investment and enterprise are rewarded. Nothing would be more fatal or self-defeating than the heavy hand of State control on the internet, which only thrives because of the talent of individuals and of industry within an open market for ideas and innovation.<BR>
<BR>
The internet must remain open and not become fragmented and ghettoised, subject to separate rules and processes in different regions set by isolated national services; with state-imposed barriers to trade, commerce and the free flow of information and ideas. It would be deeply counter-productive to import into the digital world barriers to trade that we have spent years trying to negotiate away across the world.<BR>
<BR>
We must strive for a model for internet governance in which governments, industry and users of the internet work together in a collective endeavour, establishing a balance of responsibility.<BR>
<BR>
And it is my passionate conviction that all human rights should carry full force online: not just the right to privacy, but the right to freedom of expression. Human rights are universal. Cultural differences are not an excuse to water down human rights, nor can the exploitation of digital networks by a minority of criminals or terrorists be a justification for states to censor their citizens.<BR>
<BR>
We reject the view that government suppression of the internet, phone networks and social media at times of unrest is acceptable.<BR>
<BR>
In fact we would go further, and boil this concept down to a single proposition: that behaviour that is unacceptable offline is also unacceptable online, whether it is carried out by individuals or by governments.<BR>
<BR>
We know that this is not a view that is shared by all countries. But states will find it harder and harder to try to restrict their citizens’ demands for the freedom to express their ideas on the internet. Furthermore such refusal will have a direct impact on their ability to harness the full economic potential of cyberspace. Britain will always be on the side of people aspiring for political and economic freedom, in the Middle East and around the world.<BR>
<BR>
The truth is that in cyberspace, no one country can go it alone. In Britain we are significantly increasing our national cyber defences and have created a new four year programme with over £650 million of new government funding. We are working to ensure that as many small businesses as possible win contracts to help build our cyber security infrastructure, supporting the next generation of cyber assurance technology as well as innovation and growth in our economy. We want to make the UK the pre-eminent, safe space for e-commerce and intellectual property online.<BR>
<BR>
But many countries do not yet have the resources or capability to invest to the same degree. The international dimensions of the misuse of digital networks also requires new forms of cooperation and collaboration, especially as the internet changes. More of the vital infrastructure of the internet is moving East, and its future users will be different too. 90% of Africa could join the internet in the coming years, for example.<BR>
<BR>
There is currently no forum of the kind this conference represents in which nations, business and civil society can engage as equal partners to discuss issues in cyberspace. We believe that needs to change.<BR>
<BR>
In the place of today’s cyber free-for-all, we need understood rules of the road.<BR>
<BR>
Britain has proposed a set of seven principles as a basis for more effective cooperation between states, business and organisations.<BR>
<BR>
These are:<BR>
<BR>
The need for governments to act proportionately in cyberspace and in accordance with international law;<BR>
The need for everyone to have the ability to access cyberspace, including the skills, technology, confidence and opportunity to do so;<BR>
The need for users of cyberspace to show tolerance and respect for diversity of language, culture and ideas;<BR>
Ensuring that cyberspace remains open to innovation and the free flow of ideas, information and expression;<BR>
The need to respect individual rights of privacy and to provide proper protection to intellectual property;<BR>
The need for us all to work collectively to tackle the threat from criminals acting online;<BR>
And the promotion of a competitive environment which ensures a fair return on investment in networks, services and content.<BR>
<BR>
We suggested these principles as a starting point in efforts to reach a broad agreement about behaviour in cyberspace.<BR>
<BR>
We want to widen the pool of nations and cyber users that agree with us about the need for norms of behaviour and that want to seek a future cyberspace based on opportunity, freedom, innovation, human rights and partnership between government, civil society and the private sector.<BR>
<BR>
Building this consensus is a great challenge for our time.<BR>
<BR>
It must be pursued with the same intensity as efforts to eradicate global poverty or tackle climate change.<BR>
<BR>
For just as our climate is ever-present and all-pervasive, our way of living dependent on our environment and our prosperity inseparable from that of the global economy, so we are all linked by the innumerable connections of the networked world.<BR>
<BR>
We all need the internet to be a driver of growth and innovation in our economies, bringing down costs and supporting employment.<BR>
<BR>
All of us want to benefit from the efficiency, safety and reliability that comes from integrated systems online to deliver public services and manage national infrastructure.<BR>
<BR>
Whatever country we are from, we have an interest in ensuring that our children are not vulnerable online, that terrorists have no safe havens on the web, and that the integrity of our financial systems is maintained.<BR>
<BR>
And many of us want to use the digital sphere to enable us to be more transparent, responsive and accountable to our citizens and to support free trade and democratic development worldwide.<BR>
<BR>
It is in all our interests to ensure a future in which everyone can have safe and reliable access to cyberspace, without fear that they will be targeted by criminals; a future in which the rights, protections and laws that protect us offline do so online; and those who abuse the internet for crime, terrorism or malicious attack find it harder to do so. <BR>
<BR>
That is the positive vision, one in which we are able to use new technologies to the full to spur economic growth in developing countries, to narrow the digital divide, to give our citizens greater choice, to find new ways of addressing conflicts, to protect cultural diversity and the free flow of ideas, to root out and prevent grotesque human rights abuses, and to make successful prosecutions against cyber criminals the norm, rather than the exception as it is today.<BR>
<BR>
But unless we begin to take action to ensure that positive future a darker scenario could well prevail.<BR>
<BR>
For the private sector, rising costs to business from cyber crime, barriers to trade and commerce, companies being held to ransom by hacktivists, and the theft of intellectual property sapping prosperity and innovation and driving investment away from countries whose systems are seen to be insecure.<BR>
<BR>
For individuals, a heightened risk of exposure to crime as efforts to clamp down on crimes such as child pornography in one part of the world are rendered ineffective by illegal practices on networks in other countries; disruptions in service due to state intrusion or crude censorship in some parts of the world, the general uncertainty, fear and loss of confidence in a compromised cyberspace.<BR>
<BR>
And for governments, threats to critical infrastructure, the loss of tax revenue or the defrauding of government services, the theft of confidential national information and vulnerability to attacks in cyberspace.<BR>
<BR>
If these scenarios come to pass, they will undermine the wider benefits of our networked world.<BR>
<BR>
It is time to build on our common interests, developing firm ideas and proposals with real political and diplomatic weight, that help us attain the full economic and social potential of cyberspace while guarding against an unpredictable and potentially dangerous future.<BR>
<BR>
I welcome the leadership shown by Hungary which will offer to host a follow-on conference on norms of behaviour in cyberspace in 2012, and by the Republic of Korea which will also host a conference in 2013. Both conferences will build on what we discuss here in London.<BR>
<BR>
We will not succeed in agreeing a way forward over night, but it is work that must begin now.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----<BR>
Von: governance@lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro<BR>
Gesendet: Di 01.11.2011 00:32<BR>
An: governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
Betreff: Re: [governance] November 1-2 Ministerial Cyber Event was Re: [] Cyber Security 2011<BR>
<BR>
In any democracy, parliamentary rule dictates the formulation of laws in<BR>
the midst of an ecosystem in which the Doctrine of Separation of powers<BR>
exist where the three arms of government are independent and<BR>
constitutionally mandated to act as check and balance each other. The<BR>
reality is that in the 192 member countries that make up the United Nations<BR>
and the few countries that are not part of the UN, this of course differs,<BR>
there are some where rule is by the Executive because of power of the "gun"<BR>
and are not democracies etc and we have a complex range of diverse<BR>
governance models amongst countries and territories.<BR>
<BR>
It is the norm for democracies, that the only legitimate constitutionally<BR>
enshrined exception is when there is a State of Emergency and the President<BR>
invokes the Doctrine of Necessity. There are some jurisdictions that have<BR>
abused this process to legitimise political rule (I won't get into that but<BR>
can discuss offline, lest I be accused of sedition) ;)<BR>
<BR>
For the Doctrine of Necessity to be invoked there has to be proof (visible)<BR>
that it is necessary and relevant for the temporary suspension and<BR>
derogation of certain rights and privileges. With the increasing cyber<BR>
security concerns and the approaches that governments all over the world<BR>
are taking (I see this is an indicator in itself of the political climate<BR>
in the globe today) as governments all over the world are declaring that it<BR>
is a matter of national priority etc, we are witnessing all over the globe<BR>
the new battle between the state and the private sector over infrastructure<BR>
and when is it legitimate for governments or states to step in etc? Of<BR>
course at the end of the day, there is only cause and effect.<BR>
<BR>
(Thinking out loud: would the threat of "cyber security" justify<BR>
intergovernmental control? I would say, no because at the end of the day,<BR>
one still needs a multistakeholder approach to handling things like cyber<BR>
security threats. What sort of check and balance mechanisms do we need to<BR>
ensure that the end user interests and rights are protected?<BR>
<BR>
What is interesting is that when these plays out in the global context, how<BR>
does the end user fare? What is the role of civil society in the evolution?<BR>
What type of governance models will help preserve an open and free internet?<BR>
<BR>
My 2 cents.<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Lee W McKnight <lmcknigh@syr.edu> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Avri,<BR>
><BR>
> I am missing how a meeting with a bunch of speeches, including one British<BR>
> minister with a pre-existing talking points agenda (William Hague), gets to<BR>
> point of multiple governments reaching consensus.<BR>
><BR>
> Last week the German and French government didn't even want the British PM<BR>
> in the same room with them as they struggled to save the Euro; and now we<BR>
> worry (with all due respect) that William Hague will set the global agenda<BR>
> for cybersecurity? Doubt it.<BR>
><BR>
> Stranger things have happened I admit, but as our on-site reporter hinted,<BR>
> odds of a major advance given the structure of the meeting seems - very<BR>
> low.<BR>
><BR>
> Lee<BR>
> ________________________________________<BR>
> From: governance@lists.cpsr.org [governance@lists.cpsr.org] on behalf of<BR>
> Avri Doria [avri@acm.org]<BR>
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 12:31 PM<BR>
> To: IGC<BR>
> Subject: RE: [governance] November 1-2 Ministerial Cyber Event was Re: []<BR>
> Cyber Security 2011<BR>
><BR>
> On 31 Oct 2011, at 06:31, Deirdre Williams wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > <A HREF="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15355739">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15355739</A> UK seeks 'consensus' at<BR>
> cyberspace conference<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> and earlier message asked:<BR>
><BR>
> > On 30 Oct 2011, at 14:59, Lee W McKnight wrote:<BR>
> ><BR>
> >> I'm unclear what people are alarmed about;<BR>
> ><BR>
><BR>
> Me personally? It is that Governments at a ministerial level reach a<BR>
> consensus, without proper multistakeholder participation and then work to<BR>
> cram it down the collective throats of the world. I fear that such a<BR>
> consensus would be at the expense of the freedoms most of us hold dear, but<BR>
> that governments often find troublesome when trying to control their<BR>
> populations. And I feat that in any follow-up, Civil Society would find<BR>
> itself fighting against the tide - agreeable to the Business community<BR>
> because it spurs the sale of further hardware and software systems, but<BR>
> deleterious to the public good.<BR>
><BR>
> That is what alarms me.<BR>
><BR>
> avri<BR>
><BR>
> ____________________________________________________________<BR>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
> governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
> To be removed from the list, visit:<BR>
> <A HREF="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</A><BR>
><BR>
> For all other list information and functions, see:<BR>
> <A HREF="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A><BR>
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<BR>
> <A HREF="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</A><BR>
><BR>
> Translate this email: <A HREF="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</A><BR>
><BR>
> ____________________________________________________________<BR>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
> governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
> To be removed from the list, visit:<BR>
> <A HREF="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</A><BR>
><BR>
> For all other list information and functions, see:<BR>
> <A HREF="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A><BR>
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<BR>
> <A HREF="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</A><BR>
><BR>
> Translate this email: <A HREF="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</A><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
--<BR>
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala<BR>
<BR>
Tweeter: @SalanietaT<BR>
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro<BR>
Cell: +679 998 2851<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>