At a debate on how to 'control the Internet', a top EU policymaker warned onlookers that the EU should hold web firms to account for their part in letting cyber criminals use their services and turn its back on a "Californian libertarian" approach, which highlights Internet freedoms over security.
"Whether its child porn or botnet-making sites, there should not be a libertarian discourse that says we won't ask Facebook or Internet Service Providers to take sites down because that would be against freedom of speech," warned Robert Madelin, head of the European Commission's directorate-general for the information society.
In March, the European Commission launched the debate on tackling cybercrime by releasing a long-awaited draft proposal on Critical Information Infrastructure Protection, which focused on cybersecurity.
But key questions on tackling cybercrime remain open-ended as this week's debate, orgnaised by the Security and Defence Agenda, a think-tank, showed.
Disagreements are rife between key decision-makers, including industry, on how to tackle a range of cybercrimes, from illegal downloading to child pornography or wholesale attacks on critical infrastructure.
While NATO defends the use of a kill-switch on the Internet to prevent cyberattacks from spreading, many warn this is a draconian measure which would show countries guilty of curbing Internet access, like China, Iran and Egypt, that the EU does not believe in a free Internet.
The European Commission agrees. In a statement released on 27 April, the EU executive said: "The European Commission does not consider switching off part of or all IT networks as an appropriate and balanced way to address security issues."
Many also disagree on whether so-called 'Internet freedoms' should be upheld over security, while Madelin warned that the word 'freedom' was an unsustainable absolute term which was holding up policymaking on cybersecurity.
"In the Internet world we will get to acceptable international laws when we drop the word 'freedom', because actually freedom is an absolute," the commission official argued.
But when international law on tackling cybercrime will materialise is unknown and its realisation has been cast into doubt by onlookers, who lament current disagreements on cybersecurity both at the UN and the Council of Europe.
"I will be in retirement by the time the UN signs its convention on cybercrime," Joe McNamee of European Digital Rights group EDRi remarked sarcastically.
Both the Council of Europe (CoE) and the UN have failed to get Russia and China to ratify agreements on tackling cyber criminals.
McNamee lambasted the CoE's convention on cybercrime as a "significantly flawed text" because the body neglected to consult with industry while drafting it.
Under the CoE agreement, Internet providers agreed to streamline their procedures to co-operate with law enforcement bodies, a move which is being painted as self-regulation.
Global devolution of responsibility?
McNamee argues such agreements are part of a global devolution of responsibility from law enforcement to Internet providers, something that has been highly contested at EU level.
He points to recent debates around a draft global anti-piracy treaty, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), which has spurred widespread fears that Internet service providers will be forced to police the Internet for illegal downloads.
Negotiations have reached a standstill on India's insistence than any such trade agreement should be carried out by the World Trade Organisation.
In the EU, the text has angered swathes of policymakers, many of whom are getting ready to give it the thumbs down in an upcoming European Parliament vote.
In spite of the tension around Internet policy, Madelin remains confident that the EU is making progress on establishing globally acceptable norms.
At the debate, the policymaker said fully-formed norms on cybersecurity would begin to emerge in the next six months.
The EU is currently engaged in talks on establishing such norms in several fora such as the G8, the OECD, the Council of Europe and the Aspen Institute.
