Apparently, IT industry chiefs have accused UK government of failing to take e-crime seriously. They say that the abolition of the National High Tech Crime Unit in 2006 left a serious vacuum in the investigation of e-crime, with responsibility now split between agencies. Further pressure is being applied to Government to set-up a central e-crime unit, in light of revelations relating to the loss of the child benefit records of 25m people by HM Revenue and Customs.
It seems that the Government is again on the backfoot.
However, one must first consider the true nature of this enquiry and resulting questions.
1. Why for instance are IT security chiefs calling for change? Why not the Institute of Directors or the Financial Services Authority? Why IT chiefs in particular?
2. Who has what to gain from beating up the Government to fork out more money on e-crime?
3. What has a breach in adminsitrative practice at HMRC got to do with e-crime?
4. Why are IT chiefs building systems that can be so easily compromised. Where does their own responsibility lie?
5. Give IT chiefs a ga-zillion and they still won't stop e-crime. Government already know that.
6. Is one e-crime unit, going to do any better, than several?
7. Are we more exposed by centralising e-crime intelligence, than splitting it?
8. Are we over-reacting to media hype and commercial self-interest?
9. Should we be considering investing in an advanced e-crime research unit which feeds multiple intelligence agencies, rather than centralising e-crime per se?
We say, IT chiefs should shut-up and start cleaning up their own act before they ever think of rocking any confidence the people have in its government.