command and control (C2) servers.91 SpyEye could be tailored to obtain victims’ personal and financial information, with version of the software being sold—on an invite-only basis—for between $1000 and $8500 to at least 150 clients. Ultimately, Defendants sold SpyEye to an undercover FBI agent.92 US authorities indicted Defendants on the grounds of the impact of SpyEye on US interests and on the presence of a control hub in Georgia, and sought extradition for criminal proceedings. For a period of years, Defendants were tracked by a consortium of law enforcement agencies (UK, US, Thai, Dutch, Dominican, Bulgarian, Australian), as aided by several private sector entities (Trend Micro, Dell Secureworks, Trusteer, Underworld.no), and supported by INTERPOL. Following the arrests of Panin and Bendelladj in the Dominican Republic and Thailand, respectively, Defendants were transported to the United States for trial.93 Both pled guilty and were sentenced to a combined twenty-four years and six months in prison.94 The SpyEye case shows the multinational nature of cybercrime and the barriers hindering prosecution. Notably, the absence of a formal extradition agreement between Russia and the United States, along with jurisdictional issues, caused substantial hindrance. On the other hand, the case also illustrates the potential that cooperation and partnerships—both on the international level and between the public and private sectors—can have.95 V. Safeguards Building cyberspace requires attention to implementing the necessary safeguards. Fundamentally, (A) legal limits, notably constitutional and human rights laws,96 must be respected even as appropriate security is implemented. With that in mind, safeguards can be developed to protect (B) both the environment of cyberspace itself by protecting against excessive data collection, as well as by protecting users and their data. Attention must be given to protecting the basic interests of users as members of society by assuring (C) the constituent parts of freedom of communication, namely, freedom of opinion and expression and freedom of information. A. Respecting Constitutional Limits Although discussed in greater depth in section 4 A, specific mention needs to be made to preserving and respecting constitutional guarantees and limits in this context, namely the challenges of developing legal frameworks.97 Any criminalization of communications in cyberspace is potentially in conflict with freedom of expression, a constitutional right in most countries, as well as being a limit on both the freedoms of Page 40 | Chapter 1 | § C. Challenges to Fighting Cybercrime Table of Contents