REPORT ON
THE ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION
ON
CYBER-TERRORISM
6TH DEC, 2008.
Chairing the Conference,
Mr. Na. Vijayashankar, made an opening statement briefly mentioning about
the stand of the Organization in earlier sessions that the need to have a
separate entity like the ‘National Infrastructure for cyber security” and
to have an umberalla organisation to co-operate and co-ordinate the Cyber
Security systems including that of the private agencies. He Opened the
discussion by categorizing the theme of the present Conference as follows:
Round
I: - Cyber-terrorism – Its definitions in International and Indian
scenario.
It was
brought to the notice of the group that the FBI Definition of Cyber
terrorism, any "premeditated, politically motivated attack against
information, computer systems, computer programs, and data which results in
violence against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or
clandestine agents."---thereby the three main ingredients are (1)
Premeditated, (2) Politically motivated, (3) Violence.
But this
definition is insufficient for the Indian Scenario as the “Politically
Motivated: ingredient to be stretched.
Another stretched
definition of cyber terrorism, is taken up - “A criminal act
perpetrated by the use of computers and telecommunications capabilities,
resulting in violence, destruction and/or disruption of services,
where the intended purpose is to create fear by causing confusion
and uncertainty within a given population, with the goal of influencing a
government or population to conform to a particular political, social or
ideological agenda”
Also the
conference noted the definition given by Pakistani government, "…any
person, group or organization who, with terroristic intent utilizes,
accesses or causes to be accessed a computer or computer network or
electronic system or electronic device or by any available means, and
thereby knowingly engages in or attempts to engage in a terroristic act."
Death penalty is imposed by the government in case of death due to
cyber terrorism.
With this background, the
argument was raised on :
(1)
The need of specific definition of cyber terrorism
in Indian statutes and also what could be the main ingredient in defining
the Cyber terrorism?
(2)
Can cyber-terrorism be always linked to Physical
harm or death?
The Participants debated
on the issues and the important points that came up are:
1.
Cyber Crime and Cyber terrorism should be
distinguished as there is a dividing line
2. Cyber Terrorism can cause grave destruction like
instability in e-governance, insecurity due to this instability, threat and
so, cannot be linked always with death.
3.
The need of the proper definition and broad
classification of the vital ingredient in cyber terrorism, “Violence” – an
act of Militants, an act of Terrorist and an act of Crime need be
distinguished in legal sphere.
4.
The need for specific procedural and evidential
provisions in the investigation and trial of Cyber-terrorist cases. The
participants also debated on diluting the Procedural provisions for
cyber-terrorist cases compared to cyber –crime cases.
5.
The Participants also called for arming the
enforcing agencies with special powers and debated the need of provision of
S. 80 of ITA 2000 to be extendable to private areas also in case of Cyber
–terrorist attacks.
PROPOSITIONS MADE:
-
Cyber-terrorism to be dealt separately and it is high
time to define them and pass a separate statute.
-
Need to elaborately define “violence” in the context of
cyber-terrorism and to formulate specific procedures thereon and to form
special agencies thereon keeping in view of the personal liberties of the
common people.
Round II :- Cyber
_security aspects - in the light of post 9/11 and post 26/11 scenario:
Then the second set of
discussion points were taken up on securing the cyber space. The group
argued whether there is space for Cyber terrorist in cyber space and how to
restrict or eradicate their virtual presence. He also discussed about the
Cyber security measures taken by US aftermath 9/11 attack.
Discussed
about the working of “Department of Homeland security” Of USA government,
as an umbrella organization and their main tasks are highlighted as follows
-
coordinating the federal , state and Local government
with the multiple Security agencies
-
making the security aspects of information as sharable
-
Preparing the defensive platform for the cyber terrorist
attack at the national level.
Also, the
provisions of Patriotic act are discussed noting that it empowers the
Government to safeguard the national security by providing appropriate
tools to combat the current sophisticated techno-terrorism. With this
scenario, the following lead questions are raised for debate:
-
Do we need an Umbrella organization in the lines of
Homeland security of
USA?
-
Do we need a statute in the lines of the Patriotic Act
to combat cyber terrorism?
Debating on the issues,
certain valuable facets are raised and that can be summarized as follows:
-
Setting Up of a special Platform for information sharing
and co-ordinating with various security agencies in state levels and also
with private agencies, though is a promising move, it is debated to have
its own difficulties: AS in the case of Information sharing with the
private agencies – the difficulties are : how cooperate are they going to
be and what is the level of their disclosure not affecting their trade
secrets or business reputation. This information sharing got its own
advantages especially considering the National interest. But the interest
of the corporate is also brought out in the debate.
-
ISPs and Cyber cafes – the need to regulate them
especially viewing them as a vulnerable platform for conducting the
Cyber -terrorist act.
-
By the Patriotic Act, Government are empowered to sent
sponsored viruses – FBI’S magic lantern – could this kind of measures be
legalized by India Government also as part of the intelligence is
debated and need for the counter-intelligence is also provoked.
-
E-discovery of evidences and their collection and
preservation is also debated.
-
“Information security” in companies is a major target
for terrorist act and so to counter them, measures were debated and
argument on the third party inspection were also considered. “Critical
Infrastructure Information Act, 2002” of
USA
is put forth by Naavi for better understanding.
PROPOSITIONS MADE:
-
A special Unit or expert Unit of Cyber security
specialists are required at state level and a common platform like a Task
force or agency is required to co-ordinate and co-opertae with these
governmental agencies as well as the private security agencies.
-
Information sharing is considered to be essential in
order to counter the cyber-terrorist attack as well as to counter any
future potential attacks. But, if this sharing to be kept in the public
domain is still debated as the conference felt this should be protected
especially from the knowledge of the terrorists.
-
A separate law like USA Patriotic Act is essential in
the current scenario to combat terrorism in real as well as virtual
world. And a separate provision under ITA 2000 is insufficient and
inappropriate also.
ROUND III:- Role of
Netizens.
Mr. Na. Vijayashankar went
to the concluding round of discussion about the role of Netizens in
countering the terrorism and put forth the following questions;
-
Do Netizens have a role in combating cyber terrorism?
-
Do netizens know what to do in case of cyber-terrorist
attacks?
The participants
unilaterally accepted that Netizen have a role in combating cyber terrorist
attacks. The following suggestion are made
PROPOSITIONS MADE:
-
In case of a suspected attack or any suspicions,
reporting and sharing that informations.
-
Creating awareness and educating the netizens about the
botnets in cyberspace and making them as vigilant Netizens.
-
Academic participation – like the Darkweb project.
-
Media websites are basically infested websites and so
need for the media to protect their sites as well the netizen to be aware
of their security aspects.
OUTCOME OF THE
CONFERENCE:
Upholding the
responsibility of the technical and legal wings of the Country, the
Conference unanimously felt the need to form a forum, and unilaterally
declared the formation of the “National Cyber security Forum” , and the
members RESOLVED
(1)
to research, formulate and advise the government on
the Cyber security issues.
(2)
Committed to safeguard the Cyberspace from the
attacks of Cyber –terrorist attacks by demanding the government for a
separate Special Cyber-security Task force and a Separate statute for cyber
terrorism,
(3)
TO stand by the government in achieving and
furthering this goals.
(P.S: I thank Smt Lalith
Arun, Advocate, one of the participants for helping in the preparation of
this report.. Naavi)
