[governance] Re: IG questions that are not ICANN [was: Irony]

[Meryem Marzouki]

Hi George, Suresh and all,

I'm trying to catch up with the huge amount of mails exchanged on  
this list in only few days.. But on this issue particularly,  the  
feeling I've got from the last Octopus Interface conference I  
attended last June, specially from Interpol presentation and the  
harsh critics it received from an audience almost only composed by  
LEAs, it seems that Interpol is seen as too "closed" in its ways of  
operation and too slow-acting. LEA representatives were all  
complaining about Interpol bureaucracy, making it far less effective  
in their opinion than, say, networks of 24/7 LEAs points of contact.
FYI: Octopus is the European (CoE and EC) programme against  
corruption and organized crime.
more info at: http://www.coe.int/t/e/legal_affairs/legal_co-operation/ 
combating_economic_crime/3_technical_cooperation/OCTOPUS/

That said, I've got the impression that the recent discussion on  
cybercrime on this list is rather mixing apples and oranges: one  
cannot address in the same way phishing (and all its versions  
depending on which technology is used), spam, different kinds of  
transnational organized crime commited using computers and networks  
(including money laundering), the issue of infrastructure security  
(involving in its turn different issues whether you consider, say, a  
nuclear plant or any other critical infrastructure on the one hand  
and the security of SMEs networks and computers on the other hand),  
etc. Moreover, this shouldn't be mixed up with issues mainly dealing  
with conflicts of rights, conflicts of jurisdictions and the absence  
of dual criminality (e.g. someone mentioned illegal gambling in a  
discussion on spam). Each category involve different problems, and  
different possible solutions, or at least different ways of  
addressing these problems.

Best,
Meryem

Le 2 déc. 07 à 15:13, George Sadowsky a écrit :

> Suresh,
>
> Thank you very much.  This is quite interesting.
>
> It's worth listening to Ron Noble's interview.  He is the head of  
> Interpol. He pleads emotionally, to the point of breaking down and  
> crying, for governments to understand that he has a billion dollar  
> program, not a million dollar program.  He cites budgets of  
> comparable international institutions and shows what a pittance  
> Interpol gets compared to them.
>
> If the world believes (whatever that means) that Interpol is part  
> of the solution against cybercrime and not part of the problem.  it  
> is certainly not putting its money where its mouth is.
>
> Is there any evidence that Interpol is not a worthwhile  
> investment?  I haven't seen any.
>
> George
>
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance