Last month, UN governments met to vote on a resolution on cybercrime, which was adopted by Russia, that could improve the irreversible consequences for the management of cybercrime in countries and cooperate with cybercrime investigations. While the resolution was firmly rejected by a number of major Western powers and human rights groups, it succeeded in adopting it in a final vote on 27 December 2019. With this passage, proponents of an open, free and secure model of the Internet – supported for years by the United States, Europe and other like-minded countries – should now change their global engagement strategy on cybercrime and develop broader approaches and clearer narratives to rally more countries to their cause. Its main objective, set out in the preamble, is to establish a common criminal policy to protect society from cybercrime, including by adopting appropriate legislation and encouraging international cooperation. Secondly, countries would be well advised not to focus solely on the same arguments against a new UN convention, but rather on concerns about the Budapest Convention and incentives for accession. The Budapest Convention is an operational contract that continues to be reviewed and updated. It establishes common procedures for law enforcement cooperation in cybercrime cases, and its members include some of the countries with the world`s largest ict service providers, which have critical electronic evidence. It is important that the second additional protocol, currently being negotiated under the Convention, can help to make it more effective to share certain cross-border electronic evidence in criminal investigations between its Member States (although concerns have been expressed in this regard). It is essential to demonstrate the importance and usefulness of the Budapest Convention and this possible protocol for swing states to achieve this. Despite its limitations, the Budapest Convention has been a trusted mechanism between the countries that have joined for more than a decade.