[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] FW: IMPORTANT
theo geurts
gtheo at xs4all.nl
Fri Oct 13 20:34:59 UTC 2017
Most likely the eprivacy regulation will be somewhat tighter than the
GPDR in some areas.
Regarding cybercrime and abuse, the article 29 WG advised that the
Eprivacy regulation should offer more grip and control on those issues
for LEA's. Not that it will justify WHOIS in its current shape and form,
but it is a more realistic approach.
Theo
On 13-10-2017 22:23, jonathan matkowsky wrote:
> I think the proposed amendment to the eprivacy directive in effect is
> being debated as a regulation
>
> http://www.informationpolicycentre.com/uploads/5/7/1/0/57104281/cipl_comments_on_the_proposal_for_an_eprivacy_regulation_final_draft_11_september_2017.pdf
>
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:05 PM Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com
> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Please remember that there is a difference between a Regulation
> (which GDPR is) and a Directive (which is what e-Privacy is). I
> think this distinction is important in this conversation. Thanks
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Ayden Férdeline
> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 8:59 pm, jonathan matkowsky
> <jonathan.matkowsky at riskiq.net
> <mailto:jonathan.matkowsky at riskiq.net>> wrote:
>> So I am trying to piece this all together. It seems like there
>> may be a possibility that the eprivacy directive will eventually
>> be updated by the regulation but that there is still intense
>> debates over the regulation, that GDPR doesn’t trump the
>> directive itself, and that there may be exceptions in the
>> directive for a public database when GDPR comes into effect.
>>
>> If the above is true than GDPR may not actually cover the public
>> Whois when it comes into effect unless and until the regulation
>> comes into effect (which is still being debated and likely won’t
>> be resolved by the time GDPR comes into effect) reconciling
>> inconsistencies between GDPR and the applicable privacy directive
>> that has some kind of exception for a public directory?
>>
>> Again, it’s imperative we get clarity around this issue to do our
>> work properly.
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:29 AM theo geurts <gtheo at xs4all.nl
>> <mailto:gtheo at xs4all.nl>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> https://www.privacytrust.com/guidance/gdpr-vs-eprivacy-regulation.html
>>
>>
>> Eprivacy seems to be delayed though
>> https://iapp.org/news/a/libe-eprivacy-vote-delayed-juri-itre-and-edps-weigh-in/
>>
>>
>>
>> Theo
>>
>>
>> On 13-10-2017 20:22, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
>>>
>>> I believe the Art 29 group has commented on this matter,
>>> please check their website for the relevant documents, as I
>>> don't believe we have included them in our document
>>> respository.
>>>
>>> Stephanie Perrin
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2017-10-13 14:16, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
>>>> Hi Jonathan,
>>>>
>>>>> the Privacy Directive, as I understand it is not
>>>>> superseded by GDPR
>>>>
>>>> I presume you are referring to the European Union's
>>>> e-Privacy Directive (2002/58/EC). If so, from what I
>>>> understand it is currently being updated so to be
>>>> consistent with the GDPR. As of last month the proposed
>>>> revisions were with the Council of the European Union. I'm
>>>> not sure what movement there has been since then.
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>
>>>> Ayden Férdeline
>>>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline
>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] FW: IMPORTANT
>>>>> Local Time: 13 October 2017 1:51 PM
>>>>> UTC Time: 13 October 2017 12:51
>>>>> From: jonathan.matkowsky at riskiq.net
>>>>> <mailto:jonathan.matkowsky at riskiq.net>
>>>>> To: Chuck <consult at cgomes.com>
>>>>> <mailto:consult at cgomes.com>, gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>>> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> Chuck, I don’t understand how anyone can share government
>>>>> perspective, and not represent a group in doing so.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wanted to know whether leadership team has decided to
>>>>> conduct a DPIA, and if so, whether you are using the UK’s
>>>>> guide. I would think while it makes sense to be looking at
>>>>> the purposes of collection, what is primary and secondary
>>>>> cannot be the focus because that presupposes knowing who
>>>>> the controller is. We have not yet decided that as a
>>>>> working group. The memo did not necessarily take into
>>>>> account the role of offering accreditation services and
>>>>> ICANN’s mission.
>>>>>
>>>>> But it appears whether it’s primary or secondary doesn’t
>>>>> matter for purposes of defining purposes of collecting
>>>>> each data element.
>>>>>
>>>>> We are not defining the purposes of collecting Whois data
>>>>> but the data elements of the next generation of Whois.
>>>>> That’s what I meant the other day regarding RDS.
>>>>>
>>>>> To do that, we are not limited to the data elements that
>>>>> currently exist as when we go through this exercise to
>>>>> fulfill ICANN’s mission from ICANN’s perspective including
>>>>> all those involved in cybersecurity, or to offer
>>>>> accredited registration services. The primary purpose of
>>>>> accredited services is to fulfill the mission, and to
>>>>> provide that staple of a service to those that register
>>>>> names with an accredited registrar. It seems we need to
>>>>> carefully consider not only Spec 3 to the 2013 RAA but
>>>>> also Paragraph 14 to the 2017 global amendment to the
>>>>> registry agreement which says unique DNS records may be
>>>>> supportable in the RDS if RDAP supports it. We therefore
>>>>> need to know what RDAP can support, and at the very least
>>>>> need to consider all elements from RFC 7485. This is not a
>>>>> simple exercise, and will take **significant** time.
>>>>>
>>>>> As we undertake this, we must know from WS law firm what
>>>>> role the public directory service plays in the Privacy
>>>>> Directive, as I understand it is not superseded by GDPR,
>>>>> and Whois is a public directory. This is critical analysis
>>>>> we are possibly missing. Can you ask them to address this
>>>>> ASAP please?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Jonathan
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:35 AM Chuck <consult at cgomes.com
>>>>> <mailto:consult at cgomes.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> We have 34 volunteers at present; it would help a lot
>>>>> if we could get a lot more so that teams will not have
>>>>> to cover more than one of the nine purposes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks much to the 34 of you who have volunteered. I
>>>>> hope many more will complete the poll and volunteer in
>>>>> the remaining 6 or so hours of the poll.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We are particularly low for the government
>>>>> perspective. Remember, team members are not being
>>>>> asked to represent any group but rather to share their
>>>>> understanding of the perspective.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Chuck
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
>>>>> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:
>>>>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
>>>>> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf
>>>>> Of *Lisa Phifer
>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 10, 2017 10:19 AM
>>>>> *To:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>>> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>>>>> *Subject:* [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] IMPORTANT: Invitation for
>>>>> Poll from 10 October Meeting
>>>>> *Importance:* High
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In follow-up to this week’s WG meeting, *all RDS PDP
>>>>> WG Members* are encouraged to participate in the
>>>>> following poll:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/5LXJRF3
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Responses should be submitted through the above URL.
>>>>> For offline reference, a PDF of poll questions can
>>>>> also be found at:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086772/Poll-from-10OctoberCall.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *This poll will close at COB Wednesday 11 October.
>>>>> Expressions of interest gathered through this poll
>>>>> will be used form drafting teams.*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that you _must be a WG Member_ to
>>>>> participate in polls. If you are a WG Observer wishing
>>>>> to participate in polls, you must first contact
>>>>> gnso-secs at icann.org <mailto:gnso-secs at icann.org> to
>>>>> upgrade to WG Member.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Lisa
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jonathan Matkowsky
>>>>>
>>>>> ******************************
>>>>> ****************************** *******
>>>>> This message was sent from RiskIQ, and is intended only
>>>>> for the designated recipient(s). It may contain
>>>>> confidential or proprietary information and may be subject
>>>>> to confidentiality protections. If you are not a
>>>>> designated recipient, you may not review, copy or
>>>>> distribute this message. If you receive this in error,
>>>>> please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this
>>>>> message. Thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ******************************
>>>>> ****************************** *******
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>> --
>> Jonathan Matkowsky
>>
>> ************************************************************ *******
>> This message was sent from RiskIQ, and is intended only for the
>> designated recipient(s). It may contain confidential or
>> proprietary information and may be subject to confidentiality
>> protections. If you are not a designated recipient, you may not
>> review, copy or distribute this message. If you receive this in
>> error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this
>> message. Thank you.
>> ************************************************************ *******
>
> --
> Jonathan Matkowsky
>
> *******************************************************************
> This message was sent from RiskIQ, and is intended only for the
> designated recipient(s). It may contain confidential or proprietary
> information and may be subject to confidentiality protections. If you
> are not a designated recipient, you may not review, copy or distribute
> this message. If you receive this in error, please notify the sender
> by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank
> you.*******************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20171013/7e215027/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg
mailing list