[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] a suggestion for "purpose in detail"
John Bambenek
jcb at bambenekconsulting.com
Thu Mar 23 13:33:06 UTC 2017
Inline
On 03/23/2017 04:04 AM, Volker Greimann wrote:
>
>>
>> Whois is the rope with which bad actors hang themselves.
> Maybe dumb bad actors. Savvy bad actors just populate whois with data
> of unknowing third parties, thereby rendering any verification and
> validation instruments useless and inconveniencing the affected data
> subjects as well.
I think maybe its best you let the people who do this work speak for the
value of the information. We're using it in criminal investigations and
prosecutions. You're just simply taking their money.
>> For every piece of data that is already gathered under the most
>> comprehensive WHOIS regime, there is a strong industry backed
>> argument that the data needs to continue being collected, and for it
>> to remain available.
> Which industry? Not the domain industry. And when it comes to
> collection and handling of private data, our purposes for it is all
> that matters legally unless there is a requirement by law to collect
> and store.But in that case, compliance with local law would be the
> acceptable purpose.
Yes, you've made your position quite clear. But ICANN nor this group is
a trade association of registrars solely focused on maximizing your
profits and minimizing your expenses and allowing you to dump all the
risk on society at large. But there are other voices here and that's
what the multi-stakeholder model is, it means you don't get to be the
only one talking.
>
> To drive the point home: the purposes of third parties, including law
> enforcement have no relevance to the legal requirements for the
> collection and handling of private data. None whatsoever!
>
You have a contract with ICANN, that contract establishes requirements.
Those requirements make it legal.
> But we can find criminals faster with it! - No legal relevance.
> But we want to contact infringers! - No legal relevance.
> etc...
ICANN sets the rules, you get to follow them. You get a voice, we get a
voice. That's how contracts work.
Chuck, this is why we're in trench warfare. And it isn't going to change.
>> So fully standardizing this will probably force some registrars to
>> collect and share far more data than they currently do, and it's
>> unlikely to reduce the data collected by the ones who collect more.
> Nope, the opposite is true.
>
> Best,
> Volker
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:17 PM, John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>> <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Excellent suggestion. Perhaps a future action item could be a
>> survey of who various classes of stakeholders use RDS/whois.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Mar 21, 2017, at 21:07, nathalie coupet via gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>> <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>> wrote:
>>
>>> I have a hard time understanding what very stakeholder wants. If
>>> every group of stakeholder could write down how they see the new
>>> RDS functioning, just by doing a Venn diagram, we could better
>>> understand what we have in common and what we need to foncus on
>>> to reduce differences of opinion.
>>> But that would require more work from already busy people. I
>>> think though, it could give us a more tangible view of what we
>>> are up against.
>>>
>>> My .02 cents
>>>
>>>
>>> Nathalie
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, March 21, 2017 9:45 PM, Andrew Sullivan
>>> <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com <mailto:ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 03:01:50PM -0500, John Bambenek via
>>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg wrote:
>>> > Except that is not the only approach to the problem nor the
>>> ones exclusively used by DP authorities (i.e. Twitter). That is
>>> why I asked the question I did and why I will be lobbying them
>>> directly for whois privacy for free.
>>> >
>>>
>>> But I thought the point of what we were doing was to make some
>>> proposals for what to mask and how -- basically, that's what
>>> differential access does. And I also thought we were at the
>>> beginning
>>> of that effort (much as it frustrates me the rate at which we move).
>>>
>>> > The question of whether fields are optional or can be "masked"
>>> is inherently part of this discussion.
>>> >
>>>
>>> That's just conflating two different things. The first thing is to
>>> ask whether something should be collected _at all_. Then one
>>> can ask,
>>> if something is collected, who may obtain it and under what
>>> circumstances. This latter is the "masking" of which you
>>> speak. And
>>> it's all implemented as it currently is because whois is brain-dead.
>>> So let us not be restricted to the functionality we can get from a
>>> primitive protocol that had already been extended well beyond its
>>> design constraints more than 20 years ago.
>>>
>>> > To enable third-parties to communicate directly to resolve and
>>> troubleshoot problems.
>>>
>>> I suggest that's already there.
>>>
>>> > To enable third-parties to report abuse or security incidents
>>> so they may be resolved.
>>>
>>> This too.
>>>
>>> > To enable users and entities to have information to adjudicate
>>> an entity is who they say they are (for instance phishing,
>>> scams, fake news).
>>> >
>>>
>>> I find it impossible to imagine using the whois for this purpose, so
>>> I'd like a use description for this. Since it's not
>>> authenticated or
>>> authenticatable information anyway, as there are no signatures
>>> and so
>>> on, it seems a pretty poor way to do it. This is partly included in
>>> the purposes however when we discuss X.509 certificates.
>>>
>>> > ICANN isn't just a business to confer domain names. Its a
>>> quasi-regulatory body over a "commons" and a natural monopoly.
>>> The purposes must be viewed beyond the prism of the mere
>>> registrar-consumer relationship as many interests are relevant
>>> and just as important.
>>> >
>>>
>>> While I strongly agree that the purposes need to be rather wider
>>> than
>>> the domain name industry, I'm uncomfortable with both of the
>>> claims of
>>> quasi-regulatory authority, the notion of the Internet as a commons.
>>> The root zone is indeed a natural monopoly, though.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>>
>>> A
>>>
>>> --
>>> Andrew Sullivan
>>> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com <mailto:ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> _________________________________
>> Note to self: Pillage BEFORE burning.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
> --
> Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
>
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>
> Volker A. Greimann
> - Rechtsabteilung -
>
> Key-Systems GmbH
> Im Oberen Werk 1
> 66386 St. Ingbert
> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
>
> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
> www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
>
> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> www.twitter.com/key_systems
>
> Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
> Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
> Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
>
> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
> www.keydrive.lu
>
> Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
>
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Volker A. Greimann
> - legal department -
>
> Key-Systems GmbH
> Im Oberen Werk 1
> 66386 St. Ingbert
> Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
>
> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
> www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
>
> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> www.twitter.com/key_systems
>
> CEO: Alexander Siffrin
> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
> V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
>
> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
> www.keydrive.lu
>
> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170323/3705705e/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg
mailing list