GAC Statement on the EPDP Addendum
During last week's CPWG meeting, I reported that we might be approached to see if the ALAC would support the GAC submission to the Public Comment on the EPDP Addendum to its Phase 2 Draft Report. I noted that based on a draft I had seen, the GAC comments were fully in line with those in the ALAC draft comment, and were in line with positions that the ALAC had taken in the past. That did happen and I was given permission to distribute the draft GAC statement to the ALAC. With Maureen's support, the ALAC Members were asked if they would be willing to endorse the GAC statement. I have happy to report that the ALAC unanimously gave its support, and the GAC was so informed. I am attaching here a copy of the statement submitted by the GAC. Alan
On 06/05/2020 04:28, Alan Greenberg wrote:
During last week's CPWG meeting, I reported that we might be approached to see if the ALAC would support the GAC submission to the Public Comment on the EPDP Addendum to its Phase 2 Draft Report. I noted that based on a draft I had seen, the GAC comments were fully in line with those in the ALAC draft comment, and were in line with positions that the ALAC had taken in the past.
That did happen and I was given permission to distribute the draft GAC statement to the ALAC. With Maureen's support, the ALAC Members were asked if they would be willing to endorse the GAC statement. I have happy to report that the ALAC unanimously gave its support, and the GAC was so informed.
I am attaching here a copy of the statement submitted by the GAC.
The point about the registration data of legal entities being public is a good one. (The Registration Data of Legal Entities Should Remain Public). I've been doing some research on the global web hosting market (hosters, website counts, usage) and the way that the gTLD WHOIS has been vandalised in a completely moronic fashion destroys trust and creates more risks than it solves. This point is problematic: "Domain Name Registration Data Should be Accurate". Ensuring registration accuracy is difficult and as has been shown in previous studies and de-accreditation by ICANN, some registrars may not have accurate data. The point about "Recommendation Concerning Feasibility of Unique Contacts to have a Uniform Anonymized Email Address" sounds wonderfully buzzwordish. Regards...jmcc -- ********************************************************** John McCormac * e-mail: jmcc@hosterstats.com MC2 * web: http://www.hosterstats.com/ 22 Viewmount * Domain Registrations Statistics Waterford * Domnomics - the business of domain names Ireland * https://amzn.to/2OPtEIO IE * Skype: hosterstats.com **********************************************************
On 06/05/2020 06:15, John McCormac wrote:
This point is problematic: "Domain Name Registration Data Should be Accurate". Ensuring registration accuracy is difficult and as has been shown in previous studies and de-accreditation by ICANN, some registrars may not have accurate data.
Increasingly in recent times, both in the UK and Switzerland, I have had to send a copy of my passport and proof of address for my company when dealing with financial institutions, government services and legal organisations. It looks to me like the world is moving at an increased pace towards KYC (Know Your Customer) and I fail to understand why the Domain Name Industry could continue living in its own bubble especially when it comes to criminal activity and money laundering? Kindest regards, Olivier ps. KYC - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_your_customer
On 06/05/2020 09:16, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote:
On 06/05/2020 06:15, John McCormac wrote:
This point is problematic: "Domain Name Registration Data Should be Accurate". Ensuring registration accuracy is difficult and as has been shown in previous studies and de-accreditation by ICANN, some registrars may not have accurate data.
Increasingly in recent times, both in the UK and Switzerland, I have had to send a copy of my passport and proof of address for my company when dealing with financial institutions, government services and legal organisations. It looks to me like the world is moving at an increased pace towards KYC (Know Your Customer) and I fail to understand why the Domain Name Industry could continue living in its own bubble especially when it comes to criminal activity and money laundering?
GAC, from this statement, assumes that all people will act in a uniform and law-abiding manner. There are multiple jurisdictions involved. There are people who, with good reason, wish to obscure their details from hostile governments and other bad actors. There are people who are registering domain names for criminal purposes. There are registrars who knowingly facilitate iffy activity. The problem isn't the domain name industry living in a bubble. It is the GAC assumption that the real world is perfect that is the problem. Regards...jmcc -- ********************************************************** John McCormac * e-mail: jmcc@hosterstats.com MC2 * web: http://www.hosterstats.com/ 22 Viewmount * Domain Registrations Statistics Waterford * Domnomics - the business of domain names Ireland * https://amzn.to/2OPtEIO IE * Skype: hosterstats.com **********************************************************
I have a different point of view - closer to Olivier’s. I believe that the GAC has indeed a clear view of the situation, that is far than perfect, and it is exactly because of this that they ask for some rules. If there were no people registering for criminal purposes, no “understanding" by some registrars that these criminal activities can be profitable for them, and I can continue… there will be no need for rules. Rules are needed not because the world is imperfect, and GAC knows it. We need a tool to help distinguishing between good and evil behaviour. To go to an extreme example, every jurisdiction that I know has a “rule” against murder. Are they all living in a bubble? Don’t they know that some people will kill anyway? Cheers, R.
On 06.05.2020, at 19:58, John McCormac <jmcc@hosterstats.com> wrote:
On 06/05/2020 09:16, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote:
On 06/05/2020 06:15, John McCormac wrote:
This point is problematic: "Domain Name Registration Data Should be Accurate". Ensuring registration accuracy is difficult and as has been shown in previous studies and de-accreditation by ICANN, some registrars may not have accurate data. Increasingly in recent times, both in the UK and Switzerland, I have had to send a copy of my passport and proof of address for my company when dealing with financial institutions, government services and legal organisations. It looks to me like the world is moving at an increased pace towards KYC (Know Your Customer) and I fail to understand why the Domain Name Industry could continue living in its own bubble especially when it comes to criminal activity and money laundering?
GAC, from this statement, assumes that all people will act in a uniform and law-abiding manner. There are multiple jurisdictions involved. There are people who, with good reason, wish to obscure their details from hostile governments and other bad actors. There are people who are registering domain names for criminal purposes. There are registrars who knowingly facilitate iffy activity. The problem isn't the domain name industry living in a bubble. It is the GAC assumption that the real world is perfect that is the problem.
Regards...jmcc -- ********************************************************** John McCormac * e-mail: jmcc@hosterstats.com <mailto:jmcc@hosterstats.com> MC2 * web: http://www.hosterstats.com/ <http://www.hosterstats.com/> 22 Viewmount * Domain Registrations Statistics Waterford * Domnomics - the business of domain names Ireland * https://amzn.to/2OPtEIO <https://amzn.to/2OPtEIO> IE * Skype: hosterstats.com <http://hosterstats.com/> ********************************************************** _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear John, thanks for your kind response. Let me opine on each your sentences in turn: On 06/05/2020 19:58, John McCormac wrote:
GAC, from this statement, assumes that all people will act in a uniform and law-abiding manner.
I am not sure I catch this assumption. Let's see:
There are multiple jurisdictions involved.
Yes absolutely - and some democratic and some non democratic countries too.
There are people who, with good reason, wish to obscure their details from hostile governments and other bad actors.
And for this there are a multitude of anonymisation services available, aren't there?
There are people who are registering domain names for criminal purposes.
And this needs to be addressed now.
There are registrars who knowingly facilitate iffy activity.
What is the community doing about shutting these down?
The problem isn't the domain name industry living in a bubble. It is the GAC assumption that the real world is perfect that is the problem.
Quite the contrary, my opinion is that if the world was indeed a perfect world, we would probably not even need any kind of registration directory service. But the world is not perfect and trust rests, at least partly, on identity. Kindest regards, Olivier
On 06/05/2020 21:37, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote:
Dear John,
thanks for your kind response. Let me opine on each your sentences in turn:
On 06/05/2020 19:58, John McCormac wrote:
GAC, from this statement, assumes that all people will act in a uniform and law-abiding manner.
I am not sure I catch this assumption. Let's see:
GAC's statement is more a theoretical approach to a practical problem, Olivier,
There are multiple jurisdictions involved.
Yes absolutely - and some democratic and some non democratic countries too.
And it gets more complex in that there are gTLDs, over which ICANN has some control, and ccTLDs over which ICANN has no real control.
There are people who, with good reason, wish to obscure their details from hostile governments and other bad actors.
And for this there are a multitude of anonymisation services available, aren't there?
There are people who are registering domain names for criminal purposes.
And this needs to be addressed now.
It should be.
There are registrars who knowingly facilitate iffy activity.
What is the community doing about shutting these down?
It generally seems to talk about it on discussion lists but getting ICANN to take action takes time. The time lag involved works in favour of the bad actors. How long is it, typically, from ICANN breach notice to termination?
The problem isn't the domain name industry living in a bubble. It is the GAC assumption that the real world is perfect that is the problem.
Quite the contrary, my opinion is that if the world was indeed a perfect world, we would probably not even need any kind of registration directory service. But the world is not perfect and trust rests, at least partly, on identity.
Being rather cynical, it would appear that the GAC's ideal solution would be to know the identity of every registrant. The domain industry is, as far as gTLDs and ccTLDs are concerned, a distributed network where the only constant is that domain names are paid for with a valid payment method. That's quite different from what GAC seems to want. It comes down to what's doable and what's not. Regards...jmcc -- ********************************************************** John McCormac * e-mail: jmcc@hosterstats.com MC2 * web: http://www.hosterstats.com/ 22 Viewmount * Domain Registrations Statistics Waterford * Domnomics - the business of domain names Ireland * https://amzn.to/2OPtEIO IE * Skype: hosterstats.com **********************************************************
participants (4)
-
Alan Greenberg -
John McCormac -
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond -
Roberto Gaetano