Panel 54: Transnational Crime and Terrorism...
Transcript of Panel 54: Transnational Crime and Terrorism...
Panel 54: Transnational Crime and TerrorismChair: Douglas Salaneid 8Friday, June 7, room 1.85
4:30 ‐ 5:45 pm
Justifying the Unjustifiable: Delegitimization and the Meta‐Ethics of Intergroup RelationsAndrew Pilecki and Phillip Hammac UC Santa CruzAndrew Pilecki and Phillip Hammac, UC Santa Cruz
An Analysis of Recent Attempts to Protect IP on the InternetEvan Misshula and Douglas Salane, John Jay College of Criminal Justice
Modern ‘War’ on Terrorism: Conceptual Fallacy v. Potential SolutionCharles Lieberman, John Jay College of Criminal Justice
Understanding the Position, the Factors and the Motives of Women in TerrorismNicholas Malkov, John Jay College of Criminal Justice
Evan MisshulaPh.D. Program in Criminal Justice
G d C f CUNYGraduate Center of CUNY
Douglas SalanefAssociate Professor
Mathematics & Computer Science Dept.
Center for Cybercrime StudiesJohn Jay College of Criminal Justice
I f ili h h i i f i Internet facilitates the sharing information ( documents, songs, videos, books, proprietary information)
P ti W b it Y T b Wiki di i l t ki it Posting on Web 2.0 sites: YouTube, Wikipedia, social networking sites
Peer to Peer Networks: Napster, KaZaA, Gnutella( LimeWire and variants)variants)
Bit Torrent: Designed to download large files, popular for downloading movies requires tracker facilitated by index systems downloading movies, requires tracker, facilitated by index systems, e.g., Pirate Bay
File Hosting/Sharing Systems: DropBox and MegaUpload (recently File Hosting/Sharing Systems: DropBox and MegaUpload (recently brought down)
S d fil i C b k d U S State sponsored exfiltration: Cyber attacks and U.S. employees who steal trade secrets to foreign governments. g
State sponsored pirating: China second largest market for h d l d i hth l t k t f ft hardware sales and eighth largest market for software sales (NY TIMES, 1/11/11)
Access to counterfeit products, illegal products and on‐line pharmacies (poses considerable risks to consumers)
Napster (1999‐2001) closed down – P2P network sharing MP3 Napster (1999‐2001) closed down – P2P network, sharing MP3 files, purchased in bankruptcy proceeding, now on‐line music store
RIAA vs. Lime Wire, LLC (2010) Uses Gnutella P2P network, $105 million settlement (2012)
Google fined $500 million by DOJ (2011) for allowing illegal on‐line pharmacies to run ads through Ad Words Network
Current standard: Digital Millennium Copyright Act (1998)
b k b WEB 2.0 Facebook IP Page, YouTube TOSDOJ, IPR Center ‐DHS
S f l i f i il bl h I h ld b Some feel information available on the Internet should be free. (response to Mega Upload shutdown)
Web 2.0 companies will oppose any measures that force them to police their content.
Too many copyrights and they are too restrictive (Sonny Bono law). Paula Samuelson, Comm of ACM
Prescription medicines much less expensive if purchased abroadabroad.
Di i l Mill i C i h A ( 8) Digital Millennium Copyright Act (1998)
Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) – House Billp y ( )
PROTECT IP ACT (PIPA) – Senate Bill
Anti Counterfeit Trade Agreement (ACTA) – multilateral trade agreement g
Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA)
A G l ld k d i h f Attorney General could seek a court order against the owner of a “foreign infringing web site” accused of enabling or facilitating copy right infringement.
Service providers and search engines would be required to block subscribers access to infringing site. AG would provide the text of notice displayed to subscribersnotice displayed to subscribers.
Service providers could be ordered to block sites that provide information necessary to access rogue sites (e g DNS BitTorrentinformation necessary to access rogue sites (e.g., DNS, BitTorrentIndex)
Focus is on intermediaries (search engines ISPs social networks Focus is on intermediaries (search engines, ISPs, social networks, peer‐to‐peer networks)
AG i ld if f ili (P P l) d AG service agents could notify payment facilitators (Pay Pal) and ad networks (AD Works) to stop offering services to suspended sites.
Protects ad networks and payment facilitators from liability.
Raises penalties for selling counterfeit drugs and consumer goods, military materials and streaming copyright videos.
Raises penalties for foreign economic espionage.
Intermediaries are the “only accessible defendant.”y
Ph ti l R h d M f t f A i Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America
International Intellectual Property Alliance and most organized labor (AFTRA Creative America SAG AFL CIO)(AFTRA, Creative America, SAG, AFL‐CIO)
Business Software Association, Entertainment Software Association, Netflix (led SOPA PACT movement) Netflix (led SOPA PACT movement)
National Governors Association, National Association of Mayors, Better Business Bureau, Most Law Enforcement
Motion Picture Association of America, Recording Industry Association of America
Republicans, Democrats, Liberals and Conservatives
I li S B ll i Ti B L Internet evangelists: Steve Bellovin, Tim Berners‐Lee,Vint Cerf
Google, Facebook, Twitter, Wikipedia
M bli i t t (EFF CDT ACLU ALA) Many public interest groups (EFF, CDT, ACLU,ALA)
European Union Parliamentp
Many editorial boards (NY Times and NY Post)
Democrats, Republicans, Liberals, Conservatives
E i ll i h h i l i Especially with respect to technical requirements
Internet Society, IAB and IETFy,
RFCs – blue prints for Internet protocols
ICANN manages Internet names and numbers
Great suspicion of legislative mandates (Can Spam Act)
Th i i k f h d l d The processing is kept out of the core and relegated to end points. Critical for scalability.
Search engines and ISPs can’t be put in position of censors. Enormous technical problems and costs.
Proposed legislation could require deep packet inspection and filtering.g
O i i l i f PIPA d SOPA i d bl ki d Original versions of PIPA and SOPA required blocking and redirection through DNS.
DNS is a critical service in the Internet. Provides a uniform naming system. ICANN assigns names and numbers.
DNS redirection would compromise the integrity and security of DNS.y
DNS blocking would not be effective.
DNS i d i i l k i i h I DNS recognized as a critical weak point in the Internet. Authenticity and integrity of DNS requests not guaranteed in original protocol. g p
DNSSEC vital for Internet security
Sandia Labs Report “Enshrine and Institutionalize the network manipulation DNSSEC must fight to prevent p g pcyber attacks and malevolent behavior.”
IP t b t t d i th I t t i t IP must be protected in the Internet environment.
Enforcement should not interfere with Internet plumbing (too many unforeseen side effects measures don’t work unfunded mandate)unforeseen side effects, measures don t work, unfunded mandate).
Enforcement should focus on edges (web sites, index sites, those violating IP laws, those providing services to infringing sites). violating IP laws, those providing services to infringing sites).
Employ “follow the money tactics.” Cut revenue sources from payment services and ad networks.
Web 2.0 companies have to take more responsible for the content on their sites.
International cooperation is essential. (Mega Upload case)