[GNSO-Accuracy-ST] External Data Point on Accuracy

[Sarah Wyld]

Hi Michael,

Thanks for sending that article over, I have a couple thoughts in response.

1. I would find this much more interesting if there were an explanation of what kinds of data verification/validation occurred since the project started in 2019; how did they identify that these domains were using false or incorrect data, and how do those techniques compare to current practices or the discussions held in this ST? Further, how does the .es registry define accurate data, does it match our working definition? 

2. I'm not sure that we can come to any agreement of an acceptable number or percentage of domains with inaccurate data without also considering what data is included in that rate, and what the data is used for. Is an outdated fax number or incorrectly-entered zipcode as important a data point as a registrant's name or email address? Does the rate of accuracy for some data need to be higher than the rate of accuracy for other data? I don’t recall considering that as a team and I'm not sure that it appears in our Instruction #1 or #2. 

I'm glad to know that this ccTLD is working on keeping their registry space up to date, but I'm not sure how to extend this to our work in a productive manner at this time. 

Hope everyone enjoys their long weekends! 

Thanks,



-- 
Sarah Wyld, CIPP/E

Policy & Privacy Manager
Pronouns: she/they

swyld at tucows.com 



From: Michael Palage
Sent: June 30, 2022 12:35 PM
To: gnso-accuracy-st at icann.org
Subject: [GNSO-Accuracy-ST] External Data Point on Accuracy

Hello All,

Please make sure that everyone has used their “free time” today to complete the survey which is critical as we wrap up our work on Assignments 1 & 2. 

One of the themes that we have struggled with is providing a fact based approach to our work. While there has historically been a large number of inaccuracy complaints submitted to ICANN compliance, most of those complaints dissipated when RDDS data went dark (just checking to see if Marc Anderson is reading this email). 

I recently read this article involving the Spanish ccTLD Manager which reported the cancellation of more than 29,000 suspicious domain names “linked to fake online shopping websites that contained false or incorrect data.” See https://www.dominios.es/en/informacion-de-interes/noticias/collaboration-between-redes-and-incibe-enabled-cancellation-more

So here are some questions I would like to pose to the group. 
1) I think this is an interesting data that should be included as a reference point as part of the broader domain name marketplace issue we are trying to address;
2) With approximately 2 million names in the .ES zone, 29K domain names represents about 1.5% of domain names with false and inaccurate data. With 214 million gTLDs registered, 1.5% would account for over 3 million domain names with false/inaccurate data. Do members of this group find these numbers acceptable? 
3) If not, what would be an acceptable number?
4) I believe most credit card companies now look at credit charge back rates of less than 1%, to be deemed acceptable. Is this an appropriate reference point given that most domain name transactions probably take place via a credit card transaction?
Best regards,

Michael



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-accuracy-st/attachments/20220630/80689058/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: B4A106F9C70E432BA9B6C39BA10AEFD0.png
Type: image/png
Size: 15060 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-accuracy-st/attachments/20220630/80689058/B4A106F9C70E432BA9B6C39BA10AEFD0.png>