EURIM e-Crime Working Group
(2003 - 2007 Programme)

This page and the links from it record previous work 
carried out by this group.

Back to Current programme

Introduction and Terms of Reference

Meeting Details, Agendas, Tabled Papers and Minutes

Group Outputs (Papers and Briefings)

Other Relevant Documents & Links

Working Group Noticeboard

Introduction and Terms of Reference

The group objectives are to secure action to set the agenda for a cross-cutting national strategy to address e-crime and the fear of e-crime, to provide business and consumers with the same level of protection and redress on-line as off-line and to make the UK the safest place to do business on-line.

Over 10% of the population of the world, including half that of developed nations like the United Kingdom now use the Internet - so does a similar proportion of the criminals: to automate the search for victims, achieve economies of scale in committing old crime and to invent new ones. 

Achievements to Date

The current programme began in 2001 with work on secure electronic commerce and personal identity leading to a call for a national strategy (see EURIM Briefing 34 published in 2002). The follow up on electronic commerce regulation is in co-operation with the Electronic-Regulatory Alliance. That on Personal Identity is via the EURIM Personal Identity Working Group. 

This group then conducted a major study with the Institute of Public Policy Research on "Partnership Policing for the Information Society". Six main papers were produced.

• Separating Myth from Reality and Snake-Oil from Practicality (with an appendix on the scale and nature of computer assisted crime)
• Protecting the Vulnerable: (addressing the needs of small firms plus associated crime prevention material)
• Supplying the Skills for Justice: (addressing the needs of law enforcement and industry for investigatory and enforcement skills)
• Reducing Opportunities for e-Crime: (making it harder for criminals to identify and attack or impersonate Internet users and their systems)
• The Reporting of Cybercrime: (who should report what to whom? How should they do so? What should happen next?)
• Building Cybercommunities: Beating Cybercrime: The organisation of Internet policing

In parallel the group produced a number of other papers including: 

• Policing: Building Safer On-line Communities Together: The response to the Police Reform consultation White Paper
• Current Internet Regulation Issues: Status Report for MPs
• Police Reform White Paper: EURIM submission
• Fighting The Cyberwar Against Terrorism (press release only)

Forward Programme

The group is now focussed on securing political support for those recommendations where action is not yet under way.

The immediate objectives are:

• political briefing activities to increase political awareness of the scale and urgency of the problems and the value of concentrating on activities where rapid improvement is not only practical but will facilitate longer term co-operation;
  
• to clarify understanding as to who is already doing what, especially with regard to protecting and educating the most vulnerable (e.g. child protection) and help promote and channel industry support from corporate social responsibility programmes;
  
• to promote effective co-operation (public-private, customer-supplier etc.) in reducing and avoiding on-line vulnerabilities, whether caused by ignorance or bad practice, ad hoc or systemic;
  
• to pilot co-operation at every level between law enforcement and industry, building on what has been learned to date, locally, nationally and internationally;

Success will entail:

• identifying/allocating responsibility for actions which cross departmental and organisational, legal and geographic boundaries;
  
• helping identify and resolve conflicts of culture, priorities, objectives, understanding, experience etc. on the part of those who need to work together;
  
• addressing complexity and conflict in legacy legislation and regulation, compounded by concern that publicity for unresolved problems enhances criminal opportunities;
  
• avoiding the commitment of scarce resource to courses of action which may be superficially attractive but are almost certain to be impractical or counter-productive;

While the group has no resources other than those contributed by its members (corporate and associate) and observers (government, law enforcement etc.) that membership now includes over 200 individuals from over 70 organisations including many (perhaps most) of the main players active in the fight against computer assisted crime.