Posts Tagged ‘NIJ’

Data retention vs. criminal anonymizer use

Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011

This week, German authorities released data suggesting that Internet Service Provider (ISP) data retention policies – which the United States hopes to implement – could actually have a negative impact on online crime fighting.

Why? As the article puts it:

This is because users began to employ avoidance techniques, says AK Vorrat. A plethora of options are available to those who do not want their data recorded, including Internet cafés, wireless Internet access points, anonymization services, public telephones and unregistered mobile telephone cards.

The European Union is looking at policy changes that protect both privacy and public safety. In the meantime, however, we know that “hard core” criminals will continue to use anonymization technology, and it will take more than policy to address this.

That’s why we’re pleased to announce that the National Institute of Justice has awarded us funding under its Electronic Crime and Digital Evidence Recovery grant. The funding is for the development of forensic and investigative tools and techniques to investigate criminal use of Internet anonymizers – tools that law enforcement doesn’t currently have.

We’ll be working in conjunction with researchers at the University of Nevada’s Department of Computer Science and Engineering on the development, while investigators from the Washoe County Sheriff’s Department will test the software and offer their feedback. Meanwhile, we’d love to hear from you. What has your experience been trying to investigate online crime despite anonymizers?

Some thoughts on Howard Schmidt’s appointment as Cyber Security Coordinator

Wednesday, January 6th, 2010

I first met Howard Schmidt around 1999 at one of the many National Institute of Justice (NIJ) cybercrime programs we eventually served on together. Howard was someone I looked up to and sought advice from when we saw each other. I have always been impressed by his demeanor and his ability to simplify the complex cybercrime problem when he speaks.

So, I thought initially that I should jump out and comment on my friend Howard’s new appointment as the U.S. Cyber Security Coordinator and congratulate him on the appointment.  But, I then I thought I should wait and not be part of the pack.

After the announcement of his appointment, I surfed the Web to see what kind of reaction his appointment would cause in the media and the blogosphere.  What I have seen so far is fairly tame for an Obama appointment. 

For the most part the traditional media have been fairly benign in their response to the announcement. It appears to them it is just another Obama “Czar”. Most seemed interested in his introduction as the new Cyber Security Coordinator through a videotaped presentation on the White House’s website rather than his ability to do the job. 

Indeed, Howard’s overall non-political stances appear to have placed him in the right place at the right time. And his extensive back ground in the cyber crime fighting arena is encouraging for a lot us involved in the cyber crime fight.

But some people are not as encouraged. The attacks on Howard have already started, as evidenced by the comments on Bruce Schneier’s  blog. (Ironic that the very technology he is asked to defend is the same anonymous place used to attack him.)If he was involved as part of the Bush administration, this promises to NOT be an improvement. Others here have correctly observed that it is a position completely set up to fail. Schmidt has never stayed in any one position very long. What has he ever actually accomplished over the years?

By taking this job, Schmidt is able to cash out of eBay without having to pay some taxes on gains he made there.

Howard, like so many in the public eye, takes a beating for being able to stand up and offer themselves to the wolves of criticism.  He is a fine man, a veteran federal and military investigator, an experienced law enforcement officer, and a Chief Security Officer in large corporations.

In other words, he has seen the problems from multiple levels within and from without government. His appointment will give him the opportunity to put a varied background of experience to work on a problem affecting everyone. How many people considered by the Obama administration had a resume to compare? 

So what should Howard focus on and attempt to accomplish? First of all, he could help to define better the understanding in this country of the differences between Cyber-Security and Cyber-Crime. All too often they get melded into the same concept or believed they are the same thing.

Some think that Cyber Security matter are the only issues he has or should deal with. Investigating Cyber Crime is a complex issue with just as many complex, multi-level facets as Cyber Security.  Howard’s clear understanding of the issues related to both give him an advantage. I would just like to see Cyber Crime investigation given the attention it needs and deserves.

Given his background and the infighting amongst the current bureaucrats governing IT security and cybercrime in the United States, Howard has a rough road ahead. Even though he  does seem to want  to remain out of the politics of the job (as evidenced by his release of a videotaped statement rather than a press conference),  many feel the job is all title and no authoritative bite.

With the dissatisfaction of Melissa Hathaway and others that where standing in line or considered for the job this year, I hope the Obama administration gives Howard the latitude and support  to do the work that needs to be done.  Good luck Howard…..