- A State may gain knowledge of such an act following a notification from an affected State. Such notification must be made in good faith and should be accompanied with supporting information. Supporting information may include sharing possible Indicators of Compromise (IoCs), such as IP address and computers used for malicious ICT acts and malware information. States should be encouraged to ensure that non-State actors, including the private sector, are prevented from conducting malicious ICT activities for their own purposes or those of State or other non-State actors to the detriment of third parties including those located on another State’s territory. This aim could be achieved by working with the private sector to define permissible actions using a risk-based approach and to develop concrete tools - certification processes, best-practices guides, response mechanisms to incidents and, as appropriate, national regulations. This norm should not be interpreted as requiring a State to monitor proactively all ICTs within its territory, or to take other preventative steps. ii. A State that becomes aware of harmful ICT activities emanating from its territory but lacks the capacity to respond may choose to seek assistance from other States, including through standard assistance request templates. In such cases, assistance may be sought from other States, or from a private entity, which if provided should be done in a manner consistent with national law, and international human rights law. d. States should consider how best to cooperate to exchange information, assist each other, prosecute terrorist and criminal use of ICTs and implement other cooperative measures to address such threats. States may need to consider whether new measures need to be developed in this respect. (2015 ¶13(d)). i. In implementing this norm, States should: - - - e. Consider, as appropriate, supporting the work of the UN Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, including by renewing the mandate of the openended intergovernmental Expert Group, and supporting its ongoing efforts to study, in a comprehensive manner, the problem of cybercrime. Support the efforts of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime to continue to provide, upon request and based on national needs, technical assistance and sustainable capacity-building to Member States to deal with cybercrime, through the Global Programme on Cybercrime and, inter alia, its regional offices, in relation to the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of cybercrime in all its forms, recognizing that cooperation with Member States, relevant international and regional organizations, the private sector, civil society and other relevant stakeholders can facilitate this activity. Implement existing measures in a manner that is consistent with their obligations and consider taking new measures, such as adopting national legislation to combat cybercrime, in a manner that is consistent with States’ human rights obligations and that ensures judicial guarantees. States, in ensuring the secure use of ICTs, should respect Human Rights Council resolutions A/HRC/RES/20/8 and A/HRC/RES/26/13 (The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet), as well as General Assembly resolutions A/RES/68/167 and A/RES 69/166 (The right to privacy in the digital age), to guarantee full respect for human rights, including the right to freedom of expression. (2015 ¶13(e)) i. States should: Comply with their obligations under national and international law, when considering, developing or applying national cybersecurity policies or legislation or when designing and putting into place cyber security related initiatives or structures including measures to ensure the protection of all human rights. 12