KEY FINDINGS AND OPTIONS KEY FINDINGS AND OPTIONS General Assembly resolution 65/230 requested the intergovernmental expert group to conduct a comprehensive study of the problem of cybercrime with a view to examining options to strengthen existing and to propose new national and international legal or other responses to cybercrime. This Part presents the key findings from the Study together with such options. Key findings  The key findings from the Study concern issues of:  the impact of fragmentation at international level and diversity of national cybercrime laws on international cooperation  a reliance on traditional means of formal international cooperation in criminal matters involving cybercrime and electronic evidence for all crimes  the role of evidence ‘location’  harmonization of national legal frameworks  law enforcement and criminal justice capacity  cybercrime prevention activities The Study examined the problem of cybercrime from the perspective of governments, the private sector, academia and international organizations. The results are presented in eight Chapters, covering internet connectivity and cybercrime; the global cybercrime picture; cybercrime legislation and frameworks; criminalization of cybercrime; law enforcement and cybercrime investigations; electronic evidence and criminal justice; international cooperation in criminal matters involving cybercrime; and cybercrime prevention. Key findings in these areas are presented below and further expanded upon in the Executive summary that follows this Part: (a) Fragmentation at the international level, and diversity of national cybercrime laws, may correlate with the existence of multiple instruments with different thematic and geographic scope. While instruments legitimately reflect socio-cultural and regional differences, divergences in the extent of procedural powers and international cooperation provisions may lead to the emergence of country cooperation ‘clusters’ that are not always well suited to the global nature of cybercrime; (b) Reliance on traditional means of formal international cooperation in cybercrime matters is not currently able to offer the timely response needed for obtaining volatile electronic evidence. As an increasing number of crimes involve geo-distributed electronic evidence, this will become an issue not only for cybercrime, but all crimes in general; (c) In a world of cloud computing and data centres, the role of evidence ‘location’ needs to be reconceptualized, including with a view to obtaining consensus on issues concerning direct access to extraterritorial data by law enforcement authorities; xi