[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] possible requirements from GAC / law enforcement recommended documents

Catalyst-Vaibhav Aggarwal va at bladebrains.com
Thu Jul 14 12:19:36 UTC 2016


Its a comment so take it as it is please.

- Please do some of us a favor : I wanna know :

* demonstrate your learned self and share your interpretation of the
document so that I can get corrected. I am happy to learn as it is a
continuous process;
* Also, plz. share the more details on "multiple Registrar & LEA meetings
where some of their wants (most of which they never expected to get and
many of which they couldn't provide any reason for asking for)"
* OR share a document clearly stating the Registrar / Registry / LEA
expectations / wants /dezires and or wants;

My comment w.r.t. Tax-Savings will definitely not go down well with a lot
of people here but since we are a matured group I expect all to take it
NOT with a pinch of salt and work constructively to achieve a good whois
structure. AND MY comment on tax is coming from a few members saying the
³The GAC does not want us to earn² and Privacy being paramount-More than
Security from Terror - Cyber Terror. And Some then seconded it.

Also, I am a law abiding citizen, if you as a register or a registry is
ready to take responsibility for data security, I am happy to share my
photo id to do business with you. Not a worry. If I want to be shady, I
will find ways and means, or (If you know about Law in the US) - I would
plead the 5th :-)

Do I need say more or I rest my case.
Gentlemen - Its a discussion, its not abut defending our territories.



On 7/14/16, 2:05 PM, "Rob Golding" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org on
behalf of rob.golding at astutium.com> wrote:

>On 2016-07-14 08:58, Catalyst-Vaibhav Aggarwal wrote:
>> So now v agree to say that GAC / Law enforcement is over reaching
>> and suggestions, pants made are baseless and have no argument.
>
>You appear to turn many ideas / comments you don't understand into some
>sort of personal attack.
>
>Perhaps if you had
>* read the document
>* understood the document
>* attended any of the multiple Registrar&LEA meetings where some of
>their wants (most of which they never expected to get and many of which
>they couldn't provide any reason for asking for)
>you wouldn't be jumping so quickly to these weird conclusions.
>
>> YET we come back to the table and talk of Privacy and other related
>> factors. How can it be ?
>
>One (of many) examples ..
>
>LEAs wanted the personal details, home address etc of senior STAFF of a
>Registrar listed on a website.
>
>Not simply provided (as is law in most locales) to the company
>regulating authority in that region - most of whom DO NOT make that
>information public without a warrant for very valid reasons
>
>Not even just submitted to ICANN (as indeed much information about the
>management of a registrar already is) for them to know / leak
>
>But published for anyone and everyone on the registration website
>
>If someone LEA or otherwise wants to to talk to my Registrar, they can
>do so at the office (by appointment) or by phone or by email or through
>the ticket system or any number of other *appropriate* and *documented*
>methods - they DO NOT need to know about and turn up at my HOME address
>
>Rob
>--
>Rob Golding   rob.golding at astutium.com
>Astutium Ltd, Number One Poultry, London. EC2R 8JR
>
>* domains * hosting * vps * servers * cloud * backups *
>_______________________________________________
>gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg





More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list