Regional hub for countering global threats

The global Internet audience is growing at a rate of 1,000,000 new users per day, according to a new set of reports on the state of the global digital industry for 2019.

When we look at the data that can be found in the We Are Social and Hootsuite reports on the global state of digital technology for 2019, we see the following picture.

Today, there are over 5.11 billion unique mobile users in the world, which is 100 million (2%) more than in 2018.

In 2019, the Internet audience is 4.39 billion, which is 366 million (9%) more than in January 2018.

There are 3.48 billion registered users on social media. Compared to the data at the beginning of 2018, this figure has grown by 288 million (9%).

Now about 3.26 billion people access social networks from mobile devices. This is 10% more than in 2018, when 297 million fewer people sat on mobile in social networks.

There are over 5.11 billion unique mobile users in the world today, which is 100 million (2%) more than in 2018.

In 2019, the Internet audience is 4.39 billion, which is 366 million (9%) more than in January 2018.

There are 3.48 billion registered users on social media. Compared to the data at the beginning of 2018, this figure has grown by 288 million (9%).

Analysis of social networks by Brand Analytics in Kazakhstan showed that as of 2019 in our country there are:

1 781 760 active users of Вконтакте;

1 008 360 active users of Instagram;

413 026 active users of Facebook;

27 776 active users of Twitter.

 

In turn, the results of a sociological survey indicate that only 10.6% of Kazakhstanis are not registered in any of the social networks.

As you can see, the Vkontakte network is the most popular in almost all aspects, the second and third lines of the rating are occupied by Instagram and My World, Facebook is slightly behind.

It is the first that is most attractive for conducting propaganda work of extremist groups and recruiting new members into their ranks.

Due to the large amount of information that requires constant monitoring, measures taken by authorized and law enforcement agencies to identify and block extremist content currently have little impact on the emerging situation.

Without much effort in social networks, you can find individual users, interest groups, communities and even entire sites (especially DarkNet – “Dark Network”) that conduct not only veiled propaganda, but also openly call for a change in the state system and the murder of other people views and faith.

This circumstance is also caused by the fact that many Internet resources of extremist and terrorist organizations are outside the laws of states.

The practice of law enforcement agencies in foreign countries clearly demonstrates that information countering extremism on the Internet currently requires all available approaches.

In this regard, the methods of information counteraction to extremism, developed and used in the USA, China, Israel and other countries, are quite promising.

For example, the Georgia Bureau of Intelligence (GBI) published its strategic best practices for organizing the presence of special services on social networks in October 2012. According to them, the employees of the Bureau are given the right to use various tactics of using their status on the network: open, not attracting attention (encrypted) and secret (covert) presence. Officers and analysts can also act at different levels in the case of visual observation and gathering information from social media.

The first level is an obvious or open status, which is used when an employee does not hide his affiliation with the department and considers open sources of information. For example, a proctor might simply look at an open Facebook page, LinkedIn profile, or Twitter page to gather information.

At the second level – the status of non-attention, clear signs of a law enforcement agency should not be advertised, since efforts to collect information can be difficult if it becomes known which agency is interested in this or that information (for example, in case of interest in the corresponding blog or Facebook page intelligence analyst working on certain cases).

Individual criminally active individuals may have the ability to control Internet Protocol (IP) addresses. Therefore, in some cases, the analyst needs a mechanism by which it is possible to hide the belonging of the corresponding IP address to the law enforcement agency. However, agency policy should ensure supervisory approval and control of such actions.

The last level – secret, takes place when the efforts of a law enforcement officer are aimed at keeping his identity unknown. For example, they have a secret profile or a fictitious name to interact with the perpetrator.

Since this level involves active interaction between the law enforcement officer and the suspect, agency policy should determine who can fill this role and also establish the authority required to approve the use of this level.

In addition, the employee should consider the actions taken at the local, federal, and state (applies to the US) levels to avoid duplication or interference by other law enforcement agencies investigating the same case.

It is the policy of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) to require a written request to use social media controls. The request must indicate the purpose, time frame of the event, type of control mechanism, a list of websites that will be monitored, as well as the estimated storage period of the information received.

As you can see, electronic evidence plays a special role in the detection and investigation of such crimes, which an employee of a law enforcement or special agency needs to receive quickly and legitimately from an Internet service provider (hereinafter – SP).

This is directly confirmed by the results of the latest research conducted in the European Union:

  • More than half of investigations request cross-border access to electronic evidence;
  • electronic evidence in any form is essential for about 85% of the total (criminal) investigations;
  • In almost 65% of investigations in which it is important to obtain electronic evidence, it is necessary to send a request to a SP located in another jurisdiction.

The current system of mutual legal assistance (MLA) can be complex and, in some States, very bureaucratic, often leading to long delays in obtaining electronic evidence. This is in no way compatible with the rapid nature of cybercrime and cross-border crime, for which there are no boundaries in the media space.

Electronic evidence stored by the SP can be used to confirm the fact of a crime, disclose incriminating connections and locate offenders. Also, obtaining electronic evidence will facilitate the prosecution and prosecution of the perpetrator (or group) who committed the crime.

It is extremely important to consider the possibility of requesting evidence from a foreign SP at an early stage, since the investigation can be time-consuming, complex and costly.

This often leads to recourse for mutual legal assistance (MLA), which can lead to process overload and lead to delays. Naturally, the delayed reaction of the competent authorities will in no way be combined with the impetuous nature of terrorism or organized crime.

Regulatory authorities need to understand how to preserve electronic evidence, retrieve data to prevent an emergency, how and when to use MLA alternatives, and how to draft an MLA Request for Electronic Evidence.

The development of competencies in these areas is necessary as individual governments and regional bodies begin to develop new, complementary structures for obtaining electronic records.

The use of social networks and instant messaging systems (messengers) is constantly evolving. Criminals want to ensure that they remain anonymous and use any technology that helps achieve this.

In turn, our employees must be aware of changes, reforms of national legislation, as well as procedures of foreign SPs in order to be able to obtain the necessary electronic evidence.

In four of its resolutions (№2322 of 2016, №2331 of 2016, №2341 of 2017 and №2396 of 2017), the UN Security Council called on states to collect and preserve evidence to enable investigations and prosecutions to the response of those responsible for terrorist attacks.

One of the resolutions (№ 2322) explicitly notes a significant increase in the number of requests for cooperation in collecting digital evidence from the network and emphasizes the need to reassess methods and best practices (depending on the situation, including those related to investigation techniques and electronic evidence).

Studying this issue, it should be noted that the SPs themselves are now increasingly taking on obligations to control and censor illegal content.

In 2017, Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter and YouTube formed a partnership to fight online terrorism.

The Global Counter Terrorism Internet Forum is part of several existing initiatives that are designed to track terrorist recruitment materials. The forum was supposed to facilitate interaction with each other, with governments, small companies and non-governmental organizations.

In 2019, the head of Facebook proposed to introduce new rules in four areas: malicious content, election integrity, data confidentiality and information transfer to various platforms. It is clear that «all malicious content cannot be removed, but in the context of many data exchange services, a «more standardized approach» is required.

In particular, it would be effective to enact new regulations defining malicious content and obliging companies to provide measures to minimize such content.[1]

However, based on practice, given the conspiracy and veiled qualities of online crime (especially terrorist and extremist), it is impossible to rely on 100% help from machine analysis tools.

Some states are taking legislative measures to oblige national telecom operators to store traffic data for a specified time (for example, the Russian Federation, since 2018, stores data for 30 days).

Summarizing the above, one should once again emphasize the importance of training authorized specialists in the implementation of appropriate procedures for obtaining and using electronic evidence.

Taking this into account, the Academy of Law Enforcement Agencies under the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Kazakhstan (based on the materials of the UNODC) has developed a program for training employees to collect and consolidate electronic evidence in the media space.

In September this year, taking into account the epidemiological situation, the Academy held the first online training seminar for law enforcement officers.

The event includes training sections on ensuring the safety of data (before sending a request for mutual legal assistance), sending urgent requests for information disclosure, mutual legal assistance, as well as problematic issues and ways to solve them.

Taking into account the importance of this work, in the future, the Academy plans to organize such training for employees, implementing innovative approaches in the educational process.

 

Senior Lecturer

Department of special training in countering global threats

V.A. Kuprenko

[1]https://www.tadviser.ru/index.php