Cyber-Cops Outgunned
eWeek has an article on the state of law enforcement with regards to online crimes. As expected, many deficiencies have been found.
Source: eWeek
I can attest through personal experience that the way of thinking needs to change dramatically in the realm of law enforcement with the information age. -KFSince the 1980s, when computer crimes first became a concern for law enforcement, agencies have wrestled with how to deal with the often-confusing, highly technical realm of the cyber-criminal. Early efforts to centralize enforcement within federal agencies were seen as convenient and mostly logical but ultimately have led to jurisdictional squabbles and turf wars.
Source: eWeek
0
Comments
US-Cert, for example is a clearinghouse that will take a user report and feed to routes the reporter of info thinks should be done (FBI, FTC, FCC, NIPC(by default), publisher of software can all be reached through this single report venue, which is designed as a secure reporting session), and CERT can forward optionally the info to folks concerned with that issue.
Carnegie Mellon does the infrastructure side of CERT, and is under US Gov't contract to dev it and do local admin for it. CERT then releases proven things of public need-to-know nature (like vuln plus link to workaround after vuln is worked on, or link to patch when patched) in email and in linkages to new security reports that public can get routinely delivered. Public does not see a lot of what is done, true, by default, but individuals can opt in and get lots of info if wanted.
Communications of fact to people empowewred to act are key, and not hiding info from one area of enforcement by another. Turf needs to be redesigned to foster more cohesive interexchangeablility as far as factual info goes.