15) Consider the cybercrime reporting mechanisms of Bangladesh. a.

Where is cybercrime
reported?

ANS: Cyber Police Center, CID; Cyber Branch, Police Bureau of Investigation and Cyber & Special
Crime Division, DB, DMP are responsible to investigate cybercrime in Bangladesh.The CT-Cyber
Crime Investigation, former Cyber Security & Crime Division, commonly known as the Cyber
Crime Unit, is a division of Counter Terrorism and Transnational Crime is operated under Dhaka
Metropolitan Police of Bangladesh Police.

b. Were you informed about where to report cybercrime? If so, when and by whom?

c. Are there any national education and/or awareness campaigns on cybercrime reporting?
Have these campaigns been evaluated?

Ans: Dhaka police has taken initiative to train the school girls about cyber safety in last April and May
with participation of 10, 0000 school-girls. According to authority, about 70% women face cyber
harassment but do not place complain.In the training, the participants are taught how to recognize fake
IDs and report to police if needed.

***Just nine months back in March this year, the Cyber Police Centre of Criminal Investigation
Department (CID) launched a Facebook page to create awareness and receive complaints of cybercrime
victims. It can also be reached over the phone by dialling 01320-010148

16) Why is cybercrime underreported?

Existing research identifies several reasons why cybercrime is underreported, including the shame and
embarrassment associated with being a victim of certain cybercrimes (e.g., romance scams);
reputational risks associated with publicizing cybercrime (e.g., if the victim of the cybercrime is a
business, loss of consumer confidence); being unaware that victimization occurred; low confidence or
expectations that law enforcement can assist them; too much time and effort to report cybercrime; and
lack of awareness on where to report cybercrime.

Q.17 Who investigates cybercrime?

First responders in cybercrime investigations are responsible for "securing" digital evidence at the
"scene" (the location) of a cybercrime.

A first responder can be a law enforcement agent, digital forensics expert, military police officer, private
investigator, an information technology specialist, or other person (e.g., an employee in the workforce)
who is tasked with responding to incidents of cybercrime.

This illustrates that the public and private sector, as well as national security agencies, conduct
cybercrime investigations (to varying degrees).

Irrespective of who the first responder is, search and seizure practices for ICT must be in accordance
with national law, and the methods used to obtain digital evidence from ICT must be valid and reliable
to ensure its admissibility in a court of law

Q.18) what are public-private partnerships? Why have these been created for cybercrime
investigations?

Ans: Partnerships are essential in fighting cybercrime since the expertise often lies in other sectors

When it comes to cybercrime, police do not have all the answers. Partnerships with other organizations
allow INTERPOL and its member countries to benefit from the cyber and technological expertise
available in the public, private and academic sectors.

INTERPOL's Cyber Fusion Centre, which includes both law enforcement and industry cyber experts, who
work together to provide actionable intelligence and share this intelligence with relevant stakeholders.
TrendMicro, Kaspersky work on cybercrime or cyber security related matters work closely with
INTERPOL 

National Cyber Forensics and Training Alliance (USA) brings together cybercrime subject matter experts
from government, academia and the private sector to detect, mitigate, and counter cybercrime. In
Japan, Europe also have similar PPP.

Example: Cooperation between American, Moroccan, Turkish police, and Microsoft lead to the arrests of
the writers and distributors of the Zotob Virus
19) What are the obstacles encountered during cybercrime investigations?

I) Attribution: determination of who and/or what is responsible for the cybercrime. This process seeks to
attribute the cybercrime to a particular digital device, user of the device, and/or others responsible for
the cybercrime (e.g., if the cybercrime is state-sponsored or directed). The use of anonymity-enhancing
tools can make the identification of the devices and/or persons responsible for the cybercrime difficult.

ii) Back-tracing (or traceback) is the process of tracing illicit acts back to the source (i.e., perpetrator
and/or digital device) of the cybercrime. Traceback occurs after a cybercrime has occurred or when it is
detected. Logs can reveal the IP address used in the cybercrime. However, it can be time-consuming.
Tracing may not lead to a single identifiable source- where malware-infected zombie computers are
utilized to commit cybercrime or when multiple perpetrators simultaneously conduct a DDoS attack.

iii)Lack of harmonized national cybercrime laws, international standardization of evidentiary

requirements (both in terms of admissibility in a court of law, and in terms of international state
responsibility), mutual legal assistance on cybercrime matters, and timely collection, preservation, and
sharing of digital evidence between countries.

iv) Politically motivated cybercrimes- a general lack of will of countries to cooperate

v) Technical challenges: numerous digital devices have proprietary operating systems and software that
require the use of specialized tools to identify, collect, and preserve digital evidence. Investigators may
not have the necessary equipment and digital forensics tools needed to adequately conduct cybercrime
investigations involving digital devices.

vi) Limited abilities of law enforcement agencies to conduct these investigations 

vii) National specialized units- ineffective due to limited capacity of investigation. Training national law
enforcement officers-recommended by UNODC

viii) Short lifespan of the expertise of cybercrime investigators- criminal capacity evolve