- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Brussels Remote Services
by Joly MacFie June 21, 2010

June 21, 2010

Any further resources beyind the remote schedule? I note http://public.icann.org/remote-participation hasn't been updated since Nairobi. j -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org ---------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten June 18, 2010

June 18, 2010

Total of 1 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Jun 18 00:53:06 EDT 2010 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 1 |100.00% | 5427 | narten at us.ibm.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 1 |100.00% | 5427 | Total

1 0

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten June 11, 2010

June 11, 2010

Total of 3 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Jun 11 00:53:04 EDT 2010 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 33.33% | 1 | 91.06% | 110113 | isolatedn at gmail.com 33.33% | 1 | 4.57% | 5521 | karl at cavebear.com 33.33% | 1 | 4.38% | 5294 | narten at us.ibm.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 3 |100.00% | 120928 | Total

1 0

Comments and Recommendations as a member of the GNSO Post Expiry Domain Name Recovery working group.
by Sivasubramanian M June 7, 2010

June 7, 2010

Hello I have been a part of the GNSO PEDNR working group as a member with affiliation to Isoc India Chennai as an at-Large sturcture. On various problems related to the Domain name renewal / expiry / redemption, some of the positions that I have taken and the comments that I have posted are shown in the attached PDF. Most of my suggestions arise in the average user's interest.I am posting this for comments from the At Large Structures and RALO officers to ask if any of these suggestions must be pressed for inclusion. Apart from the points mentioned in this PDF, I have also tried to argue that at-Large / NCSG as user's organizations may look into the terms of the domain registration contracts as drafted by the Registrars. The rationale is that the average Registrant signs the routine registration agreements without clearly understanding the clauses of these one-sided agreements. At-Large, for instance, which includes Legal Experts as part of its member base could take up this task of negotiating better terms for the benefit of the average Registrant. The email archives of this working group is at the location http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-pednr-dt/ Sivasubramanian M http://isolatednetworks.com http://www.isocmadras.com facebook: http://is.gd/x8Sh LinkedIn: http://is.gd/x8U6 Twitter: http://is.gd/x8Vz

2 1

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten June 4, 2010

June 4, 2010

Total of 1 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Jun 4 00:53:04 EDT 2010 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 1 |100.00% | 5464 | narten at us.ibm.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 1 |100.00% | 5464 | Total

1 0

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten May 28, 2010

May 28, 2010

Total of 3 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri May 28 00:53:07 EDT 2010 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 33.33% | 1 | 39.49% | 7124 | rudi.vansnick at isoc.be 33.33% | 1 | 30.78% | 5552 | evan at telly.org 33.33% | 1 | 29.73% | 5362 | narten at us.ibm.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 3 |100.00% | 18038 | Total

1 0

Fwd: [ccnso-council] APWG report on worldwide phishing
by Rudi Vansnick May 25, 2010

May 25, 2010

Please find herewith the Anti Phishing Working Group report written by Greg Aaron and Rod Rasmussen, which I received on the ccNSO mailinglist. Rudi Vansnick <-------------- Internet Society Belgium ----------------> President - CEO Tel +32/(0)9/329.39.16 rudi.vansnick(a)isoc.be Mobile +32/(0)475/28.16.32 Dendermondesteenweg 143 B-9070 Destelbergen BELGIUM <- http://www.internetsociety.be "The Internet is for everyone"-> Begin doorgestuurd bericht: > Van: Gabriella Schittek <gabriella.schittek(a)icann.org> > Datum: 25 mei 2010 05:46:08 GMT+02:00 > Aan: "cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org" <cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org>, ccNSO Members <ccnso-members(a)icann.org> > Kopie: ccNSO Council <ccnso-council(a)icann.org> > Onderwerp: [ccnso-council] APWG report on worldwide phishing > > Dear all, > > The Anti Phishing Working Group (APWG) has released an update to their phishing survey report. See email below and attachment for more information. > > Kind regards, > > Gabi > > ------ Forwarded Message > From: Rod Rasmussen <rod.rasmussen(a)internetidentity.com> > Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 17:08:57 -0700 > To: Chris Disspain <ceo(a)auda.org.au>, Gabriella Schittek <gabriella.schittek(a)icann.org> > Cc: Greg Aaron <gaaron(a)afilias.info> > Subject: APWG report on worldwide phishing - 2009 recap - one major phisher > > > I wanted to let you know that we have released an update to our Global Phishing Survey in conjunction with the APWG meeting this month in Brazil. We received a great deal of attention on this report due to the prevalence of Avalanche phishing attacks, and have fielded many requests for information and interviews. This single group (Avalanche) accounted for an amazing two-thirds of all phishing in the second half of 2009! There are some valuable lessons learned there, and an important "good news" story from the response that the entire community had in fighting this series of attacks. Please feel free to distribute this to your members and direct any questions to myself and/or Greg Aaron. > > Highlights of the study include: > > 1. The Avalanche phishing gang was responsible for two-thirds of all phishing attacks launched in 2H2009. However, Avalanche changed its activities significantly in November 2009, and now has a different modus operandi and greatly reduced scale. > > 2. In 2H2009, the average uptime of all phishing attacks continued to drop from previous periods. Unfortunately, non-Avalanche phish stayed up noticeably longer in 2H2009 than they did in 1H2009. > > 3. The amount of Internet domain names and numbers used for phishing has remained fairly steady. > > 4. The great majority of phishing continued to be concentrated in certain namespaces -- just five top-level domains (TLDs). > > 5. Phishers are not leveraging the unique characteristics of internationalized domain names (IDNs). > > 6. Phishers continue to use subdomain services to host and manage phishing sites. > > > > Best Regards and Cheers! > > Rod > > > > ------ End of Forwarded Message

1 0

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten May 21, 2010

May 21, 2010

Total of 1 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri May 21 00:53:08 EDT 2010 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 1 |100.00% | 6225 | narten at us.ibm.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 1 |100.00% | 6225 | Total

2 1

Weekly posting summary for alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by Thomas Narten May 14, 2010

May 14, 2010

Total of 20 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri May 14 00:53:07 EDT 2010 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 10.00% | 2 | 11.68% | 19869 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 10.00% | 2 | 10.80% | 18380 | baptista at publicroot.org 10.00% | 2 | 8.87% | 15091 | evan at telly.org 10.00% | 2 | 8.12% | 13821 | cdel at firsthand.net 5.00% | 1 | 12.33% | 20981 | dthompson at gov.nu.ca 10.00% | 2 | 6.73% | 11445 | franck.martin at gmail.com 5.00% | 1 | 7.25% | 12336 | langdonorr at gmail.com 5.00% | 1 | 7.23% | 12297 | vanda at uol.com.br 5.00% | 1 | 5.99% | 10184 | jipshida at gmail.com 5.00% | 1 | 4.68% | 7968 | patrick at vande-walle.eu 5.00% | 1 | 3.61% | 6145 | karl at cavebear.com 5.00% | 1 | 3.51% | 5967 | lutz at iks-jena.de 5.00% | 1 | 3.15% | 5356 | narten at us.ibm.com 5.00% | 1 | 3.12% | 5299 | sebastien at bachollet.com 5.00% | 1 | 2.92% | 4970 | johnl at iecc.com --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 20 |100.00% | 170109 | Total

1 0

ICANN and .XXX -- the story behind the story
by Evan Leibovitch May 13, 2010

May 13, 2010

Longtime advocate and NARALO member John Levine has written a concise and elequent piece<http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100508_the_real_issue_about_icann_and_xxx/>on the real problems behind ICANN's handling of .XXX. I don't think I've read anything that I could more recommend to someone working within ICANN's policy process. In the context of this I must express my utter disgust at the way ALAC has let down its community on this issue. Its position on .XXX was "we don't care how you resolve it, but please do it quickly". Such a position agonises about the speed of the process, not how it was done nor in what direction to take it moving forward. NARALO took a strong position in favour of accepting the application for .XXX, but ALAC rejected that for its own and left the NARALO statement dangling as an appendix rather than putting forth the divergent approaches within its own position. This is not only sad, but it is the first complete direliction of duty by ALAC that I've witnessed since I've become involved in ICANN. I was told that ALAC members jumped on the part of the NARALO statement that many considered this to be a freedom of speech issue, and it seemed that this was a convenient excuse to ignore all of the other valid reasons why ALAC should have demanded ICANN follow its own rules and allow the domain. I understand that the term "freedom of speech" is a non-starter in many places around the world, and ALAC is a global body. But striking that element, there are the fundamental points that: 1) The role of governing content lies with the registry, not ICANN 2) Porn will exist on the Internet, in much the same amount, with or without .XXX 3) XXX is a euphemism anyway (amongst other things it's the name of beers in Canada and Australia, a 2002 non-porn action movie, and an American brand of soda) 4) (MOST IMPORTANTLY) ICM did everything that ICANN asked it to and played by the rules By not taking ICANN to task for its treatment of ICM, ALAC has shirked its responsibility to hold ICANN accountable for not following its own painfully-crafted rules, in one of the few really important things it's mandated to do. The new Accountability and Transparency working group -- of which Cheryl is the lone voice for the billions of Internet users -- met this past week amidst much hype. The ALAC Skype chat vacuumed in anyone with a skype account whose name anyone knew, willing or not, even many who'd never spend a nanosecond working with At-Large before. (I received private Skype messages from people asking "why the hell am I here"). Everyone was being asked to hang on every word of the meeting audio stream as if ICANN's very existence depended upon it. This was a lurking blitz of unprecedented proportion -- if only such engagement happened for ALAC processes! Yet I have serious concerns that it's all for show. We have many, many examples in our own experiences of how ICANN just tends to go its own way -- it finds a constituency that agrees with what it wanted to do and latches on to that. How many of the clear and specific requests coming out of the At-Large Summit have been responded to at all, let alone in a manner that satisfies the needs of ICANN's global community of users? Who has followed up? Is there any reason to believe that ICANN will do anything besides look at the list of recommendations of this over-hyped A&T committee, loudly enable the ones that don't really affect operations, while briefly acknowledging -- and then mangling or deferring or silently forgetting about -- the others? There have been accusations that ICANN staff drives the show and generally does what it wants regardless of public good. Many of these accusations have merit. But the ICANN Board has the ability to reign this in and has never had the courage to do so. So I don't fully blame staff for just doing what it can get away with. ALAC had, for one brief moment here, the chance to stand up and beg the ICANN Board to show such courage for once -- instead it offered a(nother) free pass, a bland motion that begs to be ignored. It's a tacit statement that not only does ICANN have nothing to to atone for in breaking its own rules, but that it did nothing wrong. One comment on the wiki even admonished against "rushing into a pro-.XXX stance". All ALAC seems to care about is that the mess -- regardless of how it got there or how it's resolved -- is cleaned up quickly. It's one thing for ICANN to ignore its community -- sometimes I just think of that as "ICANN being ICANN". But it's truly distressing when ALAC mimics the ICANN Board by itself showing cowardice in the face of challenge. We're better than that, I like to think. - Evan

9 10