Certainly!
Here's the *revised version* with *longer, more detailed responses* for each
cybercrime case — ideal for a more formal and comprehensive MUN speech:
---
*Honourable Chair, distinguished delegates,*
The delegation of *Switzerland* acknowledges the urgent need for cohesive global action to
address the growing threat of cybercrime. We would like to present notable recent cases,
along with Switzerland's proposed responses under a multilateral, rights-respecting
framework.
---
*Case 1: Qantas Data Breach (2025)*
In 2025, the Australian airline Qantas suffered a major data breach, affecting over 5 million
customers. Sensitive information — including names, birthdates, and contact details — was
leaked and sold on the dark web. The breach was traced back to third-party vendor
vulnerabilities, highlighting the global risks of unsecured data supply chains.
*Swiss Response:*
Switzerland believes that such attacks expose a lack of *universal data protection
standards*. We call for the *harmonization of international cybersecurity and data handling
norms*, modeled after the *Swiss Federal Act on Data Protection (FADP)* and GDPR.
Moreover, we propose a *UN-mandated Cybersecurity Certification Framework* for all
companies managing large-scale consumer data, including third-party vendors. This would
prevent companies from outsourcing responsibility without accountability.
---
*Case 2: Oracle EBS Extortion Attacks*
Attackers exploited a zero-day vulnerability in Oracle’s E-Business Suite, executing remote
code and threatening businesses with data leaks unless ransom was paid.
*Swiss Response:*
Switzerland emphasizes the need for *shared intelligence networks* to combat exploitation
of software vulnerabilities. We propose the formation of an *International Cyber
Vulnerability Database*, supported by public–private partnerships, to enable real-time
reporting, patching, and transparent alerts on emerging zero-day threats. Additionally,
Switzerland supports incentives for ethical hacking and responsible disclosure through a
*Global White Hat Program* to identify such vulnerabilities before bad actors do.
---
*Case 3: British Library Ransomware Attack (2023)*
Hackers from the group "Rhysida" crippled systems at the British Library, leaked employee
data, and demanded ransom, significantly disrupting access to national archives.
*Swiss Response:*
Cultural and academic institutions hold not just data but collective memory. Switzerland
proposes that UNESCO and the UNODC jointly establish a *Cybersecurity Resilience Fund for
Public Institutions*, which will provide funding for digital infrastructure upgrades and
backup systems for museums, libraries, and archives. Furthermore, Switzerland supports
*capacity-building programs* to train IT staff at these institutions in digital risk management,
ensuring their long-term protection.
---
*Case 4: LockBit Gang Disruption (2024)*
The ransomware group LockBit was one of the most dangerous global cybercriminal
syndicates. In 2024, Operation Cronos, involving several nations, led to a coordinated
takedown of its infrastructure and release of decryption keys to victims.
*Swiss Response:*
This case proves that *transnational cooperation is effective*. Switzerland strongly
advocates for the creation of a *UN Cybercrime Task Force*, composed of forensic experts,
policy specialists, and legal advisors, tasked with investigating major cybercrime networks
and facilitating joint takedowns. Switzerland is willing to offer hosting and logistical support
for the task force, given its tradition of neutrality, strong legal system, and secure digital
infrastructure.
---
*Case 5: Kido Nursery Hack (2025)*
In a deeply disturbing incident, hackers breached a UK-based nursery group’s systems,
accessed children’s photos, and launched extortion attempts. The attack extended to
hospital supply chains, showing how vulnerable human-centered sectors remain.
*Swiss Response:*
Switzerland finds any attack targeting children or healthcare infrastructure to be an attack on
*core human dignity*. We recommend that the UN draft a *Cybercrime Convention
Addendum* establishing *special protections for educational, healthcare, and child-
centered systems*. This would include stronger penalties for such crimes and a mandate to
build secure-by-design digital systems in these sectors. Switzerland also proposes
international funding to help low-resource nations upgrade these critical digital
infrastructures.
---
*Conclusion:*
The delegation of Switzerland urges this committee to act decisively and collectively. As
cybercriminals evolve, our responses must be faster, smarter, and more humane. We must
integrate *digital technologies into justice systems* while upholding *privacy, international
law, and sovereignty*.
Switzerland stands ready to contribute its technical expertise, legal neutrality, and global
partnerships to shape a *resilient, rights-based global response* to cybercrime.
Thank you.
---
Would you like a *shortened version* for timed delivery or a *position paper* version of this
content?
Here are *more recent cybercrime case studies* + *strong responses* you can use (as
Switzerland) to gain points in your MUN debate. These are fleshed out to show both depth
and proactive policy direction.
---
🔍 Additional Cybercrime Cases & Proposed Swiss Responses
*Case 6: Snowflake Data Breach (2024)*
- *What happened:* Due to misconfigurations and weak access controls in Snowflake cloud
systems, hackers gained unauthorized access to many clients’ environments. Sensitive data
from over 100 organizations—including AT&T, Ticketmaster, and others—was exposed and
used for extortion. [1]
- *Problems highlighted:* Cloud misconfigurations, weak access controls, over-privileged
access, and inadequate cloud security governance.
*Swiss Response:*
1. Propose *Global Cloud Security Best Practices* — standards for configuration, identity &
access management (IAM), logging, and segmentation.
2. Offer Switzerland as a neutral location for a *Cloud Security & Audit Center* (under UN)
that can certify cloud deployments used across jurisdictions.
3. Encourage *shared threat intelligence* between cloud providers, states, and law
enforcement to quickly flag misconfigurations and breaches.
4. Support binding *cloud provider accountability norms* so providers must adhere to
minimum security standards in jurisdictions adopting them.
---
*Case 7: Change Healthcare / UnitedHealth Ransomware Attack (2024)*
- *What happened:* The BlackCat (ALPHV) group attacked Change Healthcare via a Citrix
remote-access portal lacking multi-factor authentication (MFA). This disrupted healthcare
billing, operations, and patient services across many U.S. hospitals and pharmacies. [2]
- *Problems highlighted:* Critical infrastructure (healthcare) vulnerability, weak
authentication, cascading effects across systems.
*Swiss Response:*
1. Advocate for *“Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity Protocols”* — mandatory MFA, zero-
trust access, regular penetration testing.
2. Propose a *Cyber Rescue Fund for Essential Services* so that hospitals, medical labs, etc.,
can receive rapid financial/technical support during attacks.
3. Promote *cross-border health data security agreements*, ensuring health systems across
nations adopt similar security baselines to contain risks.
4. Support establishment of *Rapid Cyber Incident Task Teams* under international
agencies, specializing in healthcare or other critical infrastructure domains.
*Case 8: 2024 Global Telecommunications Hack (“Salt Typhoon”)*
- *What happened:* A Chinese-linked hacking campaign compromised multiple telecom
firms (e.g. AT&T, Verizon) and accessed metadata, wiretap systems, and communications
metadata from high-value individuals. [3]
- *Problems highlighted:* Telecom networks as strategic infrastructure, espionage, lack of
oversight on metadata access, state-level cyber operations.
*Swiss Response:*
1. Emphasize *telecommunications as core infrastructure* — propose global protocols for
securing telecom core networks, routers, and management systems.
2. Call for transparency in *state-sponsored cyber operations* through an international
*Cyber Conduct Treaty*.
3. Promote *metadata oversight mechanisms*, including judicial review, audit logs, and
cross-country probes.
4. Offer Switzerland’s judicial neutrality as a mediator in cross-state telecom/metadata
disputes.
---
*Case 9: Dutch Police Data Breach (2024)*
- *What happened:* The Netherlands’ National Police Corps suffered a data breach exposing
names, emails, and phone numbers of ~63,000 police employees. [4]
- *Problems highlighted:* Sensitive law-enforcement data leaks, personnel risks, internal
trust, insider vs external threats.
*Swiss Response:*
1. Propose *special classification protocols* for law enforcement and judicial data —
requiring stricter access, compartmentalization, and monitoring.
2. Recommend *regular security audits and threat hunting units* within police agencies
across nations.
3. Call for international *legal cooperation frameworks* specially for leaks of law
enforcement data, with mutual assistance in investigation.
4. Offer Swiss data protection consultancy/training for police forces globally, emphasizing
secure personnel data handling.
---
*Case 10: 23andMe Data Leak (2023/2024)*
- *What happened:* Hackers accessed personal and genetic data of millions of users by
credential stuffing, exploiting poor authentication practices in 23andMe systems.
- *Problems highlighted:* Genetic data is extremely sensitive, re-identification risk, weak
authentication, long-term privacy harm.
*Swiss Response:*
1. Advocate for a *Global Genetic Data Protection Convention* to govern handling, sharing,
and breach controls of DNA/genetic data.
2. Propose *mandatory strong multi-factor authentication and anomaly detection* for
systems handling biometric/genetic data.
3. Introduce *user-controlled encryption regimes* so that even service providers can’t
unilaterally access data in clear text.
4. Support a *breach-notification system* specifically for biomedical/genetic data with fast
public alert mechanisms.
---
🧩 Tips to Maximize Your Gains in MUN with These Cases & Responses
- *Diversity of sectors*: Show you’ve thought across telecom, health, cloud, law
enforcement, genetics. This breadth gives you an edge.
- *Bind responses to the agenda*: Always tie back to *“integration of digital technologies
into criminal justice systems”* — e.g., how forensic cloud logs, cross-border evidence
sharing, secure data storage, privacy laws feed into justice.
- *Neutral mediator role*: Switzerland’s neutrality is valuable — offer to host cyber forensics
centers or act as moderator for disputes.
- *Rights & accountability balance*: Always emphasize human rights, privacy, accountability
— so you avoid criticisms of overreach.
- *Technical realism*: Use concrete solutions (cloud configs, MFA, zero trust, intelligence
sharing) rather than vague promises.
- *Propose binding frameworks & treaties*: Not just soft recommendations — push for
structured, enforceable cooperation.
If you like, I can stitch all these into a *long, polished speech* or produce a *position paper*
that combines them with your country’s stances. Do you want me to do that?
Here are *older yet high-impact cybercrime cases* (from 2016–2022) with *detailed
responses* you can use as Switzerland to gain strong points in MUN:
---
*Case 10: WannaCry Ransomware Attack (2017)*
- *What happened:* A global ransomware attack affected over *300,000 systems* in 150+
countries, including hospitals (NHS UK), telecoms, and banks. It exploited a Microsoft
Windows vulnerability (EternalBlue).
- *Impact:* Paralyzed healthcare systems, caused financial losses over *$4 billion* globally.
*Swiss Response:*
1. Advocate for a *Global Vulnerability Disclosure Framework* — countries must report
exploitable bugs to vendors rather than stockpiling them.
2. Support *mandatory OS and software patch policies* across public institutions worldwide.
3. Promote creation of a *UN-backed digital emergency alert system*, where threat
intelligence is shared in real time with certified agencies globally.
4. Offer Switzerland’s CERT (Computer Emergency Response Team) as a model to help train
others in quick ransomware response.
---
*Case 11: SolarWinds Supply Chain Attack (2020)*
- *What happened:* Nation-state hackers (linked to Russia) inserted malicious code into
SolarWinds’ Orion platform, which was distributed via updates to thousands of companies
and US government agencies.
- *Impact:* Silent surveillance for months; compromised U.S. Treasury, Homeland Security,
etc.
*Swiss Response:*
1. Push for *global code integrity standards* and *digital signing mandates* for all supply-
chain software providers.
2. Recommend *third-party supply chain audits* and *tamper-proof build systems*,
especially for software managing sensitive data.
3. Offer Switzerland’s independent and neutral standing to *host a multilateral Supply Chain
Security Council*.
4. Encourage use of *zero-trust architectures* and “assume breach” models to limit such
intrusions.
---
*Case 12: Colonial Pipeline Cyberattack (2021)*
- *What happened:* A ransomware attack by DarkSide group led to the shutdown of the
largest fuel pipeline in the U.S., causing gas shortages.
- *Impact:* Disruption of critical energy infrastructure, panic buying, and price spikes.
*Swiss Response:*
1. Advocate for *global cyber resilience regulations for energy infrastructure*—mandating
segmentation, MFA, and ransomware protection.
2. Propose creation of a *Cyber Emergency Response Mechanism for Critical Infrastructure*,
under the UN or Interpol.
3. Call for a *Cyber Incident Reporting Obligation* for essential service providers to improve
transparency and readiness.
4. Suggest *cryptocurrency traceability norms* to track and freeze ransomware payments
used in such attacks.
---
*Case 13: Facebook–Cambridge Analytica Scandal (2018)*
- *What happened:* Personal data of 87 million Facebook users was harvested without
consent and used for political profiling.
- *Impact:* Global concern over data privacy, manipulation of elections, loss of trust in
platforms.
*Swiss Response:*
1. Promote a *Universal Data Consent and Usage Framework* modeled after Swiss and EU
laws (FADP, GDPR).
2. Propose that social media platforms be bound by *algorithmic transparency laws* and
*third-party audits*.
3. Advocate for *digital sovereignty and personal data ownership* as human rights.
4. Switzerland supports establishing a *UN Data Ethics Board* to monitor global tech giants'
practices.
---
*Case 14: Microsoft Exchange Server Hack (2021)*
- *What happened:* Chinese state-linked hackers exploited vulnerabilities in Microsoft
Exchange, affecting 250,000+ global organizations.
- *Impact:* Widespread data theft, backdoors left behind even after patching.
*Swiss Response:*
1. Propose a *UN Cyber Attribution Mechanism*, where state-linked cyberattacks can be
investigated and transparently attributed.
2. Support *global patching coordination days*, encouraging synchronized security updates
across critical systems.
3. Promote development of *open-source, secure alternatives* to centralized, high-risk
platforms.
4. Switzerland calls for states to *pledge non-interference in civilian digital infrastructure*,
under an expanded *Digital Geneva Convention*.
---
Would you like me to compile all these into a *final position paper or opening speech* for
your MUN session?
Perfect 🇨🇭 — understood completely.
You’re Switzerland, the agenda is:
“Facilitating an Action Plan towards the Integration of Digital Technologies into Criminal
Justice Systems in Addressing Cybercrime.”
Below are all possible realistic POIs you could receive — easy, moderate, and complex —
each followed by a flawless, diplomatic Swiss-style answer that closes the matter instantly
(so no one can follow up or cross-question).
Every answer is short (10–20 seconds), calm, factual, and procedurally airtight.
🟢 BASIC / INTRODUCTORY POIs
1. What does Switzerland mean by integrating digital technologies into justice systems?
Answer:
Switzerland refers to the responsible use of secure and transparent digital tools—such as
forensic databases, blockchain-based record management, and AI-assisted case tracking—to
make justice faster, fairer, and more accessible while fully respecting privacy and human
rights.
2. How is Switzerland contributing to fighting cybercrime internationally?
Answer:
Switzerland works through UNODC, INTERPOL, and the Council of Europe to promote
information-sharing, legal harmonization, and digital capacity building. We also host
numerous cybersecurity training initiatives and neutral research centres in Geneva.
3. Why is this agenda important to Switzerland?
Answer:
As a global hub for banking, diplomacy, and innovation, Switzerland understands that
cybercrime threatens both national and international trust. Strengthening digital justice
systems ensures transparency, security, and continued confidence in global institutions.
4. Is Switzerland directly affected by cybercrime?
Answer:
Yes. Like every modern economy, Switzerland has faced cyber threats to finance, health, and
government systems. These experiences drive our belief that prevention through
cooperation and transparency is far better than response through isolation.
5. Why does Switzerland support the UN Convention on Cybercrime (2024)?
Answer:
Because it creates a universal framework to strengthen cross-border cooperation,
standardize evidence collection, and ensure that justice in the digital era respects due
process and human rights for all Member States.
🟡 POLICY & FRAMEWORK POIs
6. What is Switzerland’s stance on balancing digital surveillance and privacy?
Answer:
Switzerland believes surveillance must always remain targeted, judicially authorized, and
proportional. Technology should protect citizens, not monitor them. Privacy and security can
coexist when clear legal safeguards are in place.
7. How will Switzerland ensure that human rights are not violated through digital justice
tools?
Answer:
By embedding human rights impact assessments and independent oversight into every
technological adoption. Swiss policy requires transparency, accountability, and the right to
legal remedy in all digital justice procedures.
8. How does your proposed Geneva-based Digital Forensics Centre maintain neutrality?
Answer:
The centre would operate under UN supervision, not Swiss authority. Switzerland only offers
its expertise and neutral territory, ensuring global participation and full transparency under
international oversight.
9. How can developing nations benefit from your proposal?
Answer:
The proposed centre would provide free training, technical assistance, and standardized
forensic support to developing states—helping them modernize justice systems without
imposing political or economic conditions.
10. What is Switzerland’s view on data sovereignty?
Answer:
Switzerland fully respects data sovereignty. Each state should control its data within its legal
boundaries, and cross-border access must occur only through mutual consent and judicially
authorized procedures.
11. How will your proposal prevent misuse of AI in justice systems?
Answer:
Switzerland promotes ethical AI principles: transparency, explainability, and non-
discrimination. Every AI system used in justice should be subject to human oversight and
periodic ethical evaluation.
12. Why is blockchain relevant to justice systems?
Answer:
Blockchain provides immutable, timestamped records that protect evidence from tampering.
It strengthens chain-of-custody procedures and enhances public trust in the integrity of
digital evidence.
13. What safeguards will ensure that digital transformation does not lead to mass
surveillance?
Answer:
Switzerland advocates for independent judicial authorization, parliamentary oversight, and
international review mechanisms—so that no technological measure can bypass the rule of
law or civil liberties.
14. What role does the private sector play in your action plan?
Answer:
Public–private partnerships are crucial. Switzerland encourages collaboration with
technology companies under transparent contracts, ensuring compliance with UN data
ethics and privacy standards.
15. How does your plan address cross-border evidence sharing?
Answer:
Through standardized digital evidence protocols, encryption, and secure UN channels for
transmission—ensuring that no data crosses borders without authorization and auditability.
🔵 ADVANCED / STRATEGIC POIs
16. Is Switzerland not centralizing too much control by proposing a Geneva-based centre?
Answer:
Not at all. Switzerland’s neutrality ensures no political influence. The centre would be fully
UN-governed, with equal representation and decision-making rights for all Member States.
17. How can we trust digital evidence from different jurisdictions with different standards?
Answer:
By creating common certification standards for forensic tools and chain-of-custody
verification, all validated by an independent international body under UN supervision.
18. How will your plan prevent bias in AI used for predictive policing?
Answer:
Switzerland supports transparent datasets, diverse testing, and mandatory human review. AI
should aid human judgment, never replace it. Bias prevention must be built into system
design.
19. Does Switzerland believe in stronger sanctions for cybercriminals?
Answer:
Switzerland believes in proportionate justice. The focus should be on prevention, capacity
building, and rehabilitation rather than purely punitive measures, especially for cross-border
cases.
20. What is Switzerland’s stance on encryption backdoors?
Answer:
Switzerland opposes backdoors. Encryption safeguards privacy and trust. Lawful access
should occur only through judicially approved, case-specific decryption—not systemic
vulnerabilities.
21. How will developing countries access advanced forensic technologies?
Answer:
Through UN-sponsored training, open-source toolkits, and international cooperation funds.
Switzerland advocates equitable technology transfer and skill development for all regions.
22. How will your plan ensure accountability in digital investigations?
Answer:
Every investigation should have a digital audit trail—recording who accessed what data and
when. Such logs create transparency and discourage misuse.
23. What if some states refuse to cooperate under the UN framework?
Answer:
Switzerland believes cooperation must remain voluntary but incentivized through capacity-
building benefits, funding, and shared expertise that make collaboration attractive and non-
political.
24. How can we ensure that cyber laws do not restrict freedom of expression?
Answer:
By clearly distinguishing between cybercrime and legitimate expression. Switzerland
supports content-neutral laws focused on criminal acts, not opinions or speech.
25. How will Switzerland help nations without strong legal infrastructure?
Answer:
Through technical aid, model legislation drafts, and expert missions under UNODC guidance
—to help build cybercrime laws aligned with global standards and human rights.
🔴 DIFFICULT / TRAP POIs (with calm, unbeatable answers)
26. Isn’t Switzerland proposing this to increase its influence since Geneva already hosts
many UN bodies?
Answer:
Switzerland’s offer is purely logistical. Geneva’s infrastructure and neutrality simply make it
an ideal hub for global coordination. The operation would remain under UN, not Swiss,
control.
27. If technology can be misused, why promote its deeper integration into justice?
Answer:
Because responsible use is safer than ignorance. Regulation, training, and oversight ensure
that technology empowers justice instead of endangering it.
28. Does Switzerland trust every country to handle sensitive digital evidence responsibly?
Answer:
Trust is built through verification. That’s why Switzerland supports international certification,
transparent audit trails, and reciprocal obligations to maintain accountability.
29. Some developing countries argue your plan benefits richer states more. How do you
respond?
Answer:
Switzerland’s proposal specifically prioritizes capacity-building, free training, and equitable
access to technology. No country should be left behind; fairness is built into the framework.
30. Is Switzerland ready to share its own digital forensic data?
Answer:
Yes, within legal limits and mutual agreements. Switzerland practices reciprocity —
cooperation that respects national sovereignty and judicial oversight.
🎯 HOW TO DELIVER THESE ANSWERS
Tone: calm, factual, precise.
Pace: ~1.5 seconds per sentence — controlled, confident.
Body language: stand straight, hands on table or clasped; never defensive.
Key closing line (if pressed):
“Switzerland thanks the delegate for their concern and reiterates that all measures
remain grounded in international law and human rights.”
Would you like me to make a printable “POI–Answer Cheat Sheet” (PDF format) so you can
keep it in your MUN folder or hold it during committee for reference?
