Section III HIPCAR – Cybercrime/e-Crimes targeted computer system no longer becomes available for potential lawful users as well as the owner of the computer system. However a more specific provision (Section 9) was included to ensure the criminalisation of such acts. The suppression of computer data denotes an action that affects the availability of data to the person with access to the medium, where the information is stored in a negative way. Section 6 requires that the offender carries out the offences intentionally and without lawful excuse or justification. The right to alter data was discussed, especially in the context of “remailers” that are used to modify certain data for the purpose of facilitating anonymous communications. The intentional use of such services is considered an authorisation for the necessary alterations. Section 8: Data Espionage The Convention on Cybercrime as well as the Commonwealth Model Law and the Stanford Draft Convention provide legal solutions for illegal interception, but not for illegally obtaining data. It is questionable whether Article 3 of the Convention on Cybercrime applies to other cases than those where offences are carried out by intercepting data transfer processes. Section 8 protects the secrecy of stored and protected computer data. Unlike other approaches this section not only covers economic secrets, but also stored computer data in general. In terms of its objects of protection, this approach is broad in nature, but the application of the provision is limited as obtaining data is only criminalised where data are specially protected against unauthorised access. The special protection requires that the hoster of the information has implemented protection measures that significantly increase the difficulty of obtaining access to the data without authorisation. Examples are password protection and encryption. It is necessary that the protection measures go beyond standard protection measures that apply to data as well as other property, for example access restrictions to certain parts of government buildings. On the other hand it is not necessary that the measures are computer technology related. Even physical measures like locks enable the application of the provision. The act of obtaining covers any activity undertaken by the offender to obtain possession of the relevant data. This can for example be done by removing a storage device or copying files from the original source to the offender’s storage device. Section 9: System Interference In order to protect access of operators and users to ICTs a provision was included that criminalizes the intentional hindering of the lawful use of a computer system. This provision therefore aims to protect the integrity of computer systems. The application of the provision requires that the offender hinders or interferes the functioning of a computer system. “Hindering” means any act that interferes with the proper functioning of a computer system. The term is further defined in Section 3. The working group discussed whether the problem of spam e-mail could be addressed under Section 5, since spam can overload computer systems. Due to the fact that the application of a similar provision in the Convention on Cybercrime in relation to SPAM evinced challenges the drafters decided to include a specific provision that addressed SPAM in Section 15. Section 9 requires that the offender carries out the offences intentionally and without lawful excuse or justification. It therefore stands to follow that authorised computer test shall not be criminalised. Subparagraph 2 contains a regulation pertaining to an aggravated penalty if the offences affects critical infrastructure. The functioning of computer system has become essential for the control of critical infrastructure such as health care, transportation and energy supply. Subparagraph 2 therefore takes this threat into consideration by providing the possibility to refer to higher penalties. > Model Policy Guidelines & Legislative Text 35