[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] IMPORTANT: Invitation for Poll from 20 September Meeting

[Paul Keating]

I am seeking to expand upon my responses in the poll.

Question 1. There must be at least one purpose for collecting each data
element in the MPDS, and that purpose must be sufficient for making that
data element public.

I am concerned that the use of ³purpose² here is somewhat misleading.  While
each Data element must be linked to some purpose, the data element itself
does not need to solve or satisfy the purpose.  It can be one aspect of the
solution.  An example would be name, address, phone, email.  They are all
linkable to the purpose of identification (which in turn is important for
enforcement of rights, etc).  However no one of those elements are acting
alone sufficient.  Rather, they all work together (as do other elements in
the RDS (e.g. IP address) to further the goal of identification.

Question 2. Are the WG agreements on purpose(s) thus far - see WG agreements
#5 through #13 listed in the 20 September meeting handout
<https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/66086756/RDSPDP-Handout-Fo
r20SeptCall-v2.pdf>  - sufficient to meet the requirement stated in Q2
above? In other words, have we defined at least one purpose for collecting
every data element in the MPDS, sufficient for making all data elements in
the MPDS public? Why or why not?
 
I do not believe the list is sufficient in stating all potential purposes.
For example:

Legal action is listed. This is a specific term used to indicate the
commencement of formal legal proceedings.  It does not incorporate equitable
or contractual processes (e.g. Arbitration, injunction, etc).  Nor does it
incorporate investigation.

Criminal investigations.  This also is insufficient as it does not include
civil investigations (e.g. Infringement, fraud, etc).

It is also important to include purposes that would reach historical data
that has already been collected.  Thus, historical WHOIS research is
important for those items listed in the linked list (and those noted above).
For example domain  highjacking can be traced only via use of historical
data.  Confirmation of title for the purposes of domain name acquisitions
and dispositions ­ particularly as domain names become more and more
valuable.

We need (IMO) to expand the identifiable listing.

We also need to allow for the adoption of additional purposes in the future.
As an example, 4 years ago WHOIS was not commonly used in cyber security
research.  Today it is one of the more important tools used by all
investigators.

Thank you,

Paul

From:  <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Lisa Phifer
<lisa at corecom.com>
Reply-To:  <lisa at corecom.com>
Date:  Thursday, September 21, 2017 at 5:42 AM
To:  <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
Subject:  [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] IMPORTANT: Invitation for Poll from 20 September
Meeting

> Dear all,
>  
> In follow-up to this week¹s WG meeting, all RDS PDP WG Members are encouraged
> to participate in the following poll:
>  
> https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/V7WVBPY
>  
> 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/66086756/Poll-from-20Septembe
> rCall.pdf
>  
> This poll will close at COB Saturday 23 September.  Poll results will be
> discussed in a future WG meeting.
>  
> 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 to upgrade to WG Member.
>  
> Regards,
> Lisa
> _______________________________________________ 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/20170921/310eafd0/attachment.html>