Net security firms have lent their support to a new group that is seeking to provide cybercrime training for law enforcement officials as part of a wider fight against cybercrime. McAfee and Trend Micro have both pledged to support the fledgling International Cyber Security Protection Alliance (ICSPA). The international business …
Do we really need this?
There is already a vast proliferation of cyber security industry bodies, advocates, advice centres, co-ordinating centres. I am sure they all mean well, but their very number means that advice to those who need it becomes diffuse and they all compete for the same relatively small pool of funds and resources from commercial and government interests.
John Lyons, ICSPA's CEO, has a background in the RAF, the old NHTCU and FIRST. But the number of current sponsors is really quite small and EUROPOL is scarcely the most important of international law enforcement players.
Wouldn't it be better if the resources ICSPA has so far gathered were put at the disposal of one of the existing rather similar ventures? (And no, I am not going to recommend any specific one because you will then think I have a favourite of my own)
Not wishing to be cynical
"We are a business-led organisation comprising large national and multi-national companies who recognise the need to provide additional resourcing and support to law enforcement officers ..."
"The mission of the International Cyber Security Protection Alliance is to enhance the online safety and security of business communities, by helping to deliver resources and expertise from the private sector to support both domestic and international law enforcement agencies in their task of reducing harm from cyber crime. This will include raising public sector funding from Governments and Institutions ...."
Ideas for which part of the public sector gets their funding cut to help support this?
Will they understand it?
Thanks to the alarming number of stories in 'El Reg' about Mr Plod routinely arresting people with 'electronic digital image capture and storage devices' (digital cameras to you and me) for being guilty of various fictitious crimes (mostly related to terrorism) I really do wonder whether they can grasp the concept of a 'computer' and the complex laws associated with it......
We already have that organization
It is called the High Technology Crime Investigation Association and to be a member requires you to work in IT security or law enforcement. It has chapters worldwide.
"The High Technology Crime Investigation Association (HTCIA) is designed to encourage, promote, aid and effect the voluntary interchange of data, information, experience, ideas and knowledge about methods, processes, and techniques relating to investigations and security in advanced technologies among its membership."
..but the challenge is gone.
I remember back in the 90s when the SFO asked us to help draft a standard. It was technically inaccurate and meant changing the way we'd been preparing evidence for them for a couple of years. Did anything ever come of that? I'm rather glad I got out of that game. Encase pretty much dumbed the whole thing down (click 'guilty' or 'innocent' to generate your report).
It's *very* rude to mock the idea of an IT security organisation lead by a blind ex-politician
And indeed *very* easy to do so. (Especially when said former Minister was *so* keen on the UK National ID card scheme).
Which is why I won't do so.
I will retain a polite silence on the matter.
Not a word.
- Nokia: Read our Maps, Samsung – we're HERE for the Gear
- Ofcom will not probe lesbian lizard snog in new Dr Who series
- Kaspersky backpedals on 'done nothing wrong, nothing to fear' blather
- Too slow with that iPhone refresh, Apple: Android is GOBBLING up US mobile market
- Episode 9 BOFH: The current value of our IT ASSets? Minus eleventy-seven...