February 2014 - Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg

For review - updated templates Cat B, questions 1 and 2
by Marika Konings March 5, 2014

March 5, 2014

Dear All, Following our call yesterday, please find attached the updated templates for Category B questions 1 & 2. Please review these templates to make sure the WG discussions have been accurately reflected and feel free to share any comments / edits you may have with the mailing list. We've created a page on the wiki where we'll post the templates that have been finalised for now (noting that for some of these the WG will need to come back to the template at a later date), see https://community.icann.org/x/ihLRAg. The WG will continue its deliberations on Category B Question 2 next week. Some of the questions that came up during the conversation yesterday and which you are encouraged to share your views on (and/or add additional questions that need to be considered in this context) are: * What would be the arguments for not using the same standards / requirements for validation and verification as per the 2013 RAA? * Should there be a requirement for re-verification, and if so, what instances would trigger such re-verification? * In case of affliction between the P/P service and the registrar, if the registration information has already been verified by the registrar, should this exempt the P/P provider from doing so? * Should the same requirements apply to privacy and proxy services or is there a reason to distinguish between the two? Best regards, Marika

16 62

TR: Reminder: Request for input: GNSO's Working Group on Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation
by Glen de Saint Géry Feb. 27, 2014

Feb. 27, 2014

FYI De la part de Louie Lee Envoyé : vendredi 28 février 2014 00:06 À : Glen de Saint Géry Cc : Objet : Re: Reminder: Request for input: GNSO's Working Group on Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Dear Glen, Since the Address Council of the ASO is narrowly focused on numbering policy and advice to the ICANN Board, we don't typically offer input into any other ICANN matters. I need to be careful also because while I don't restrict my AC members from offering individual input, that input must never be considered as input from the ASO nor the ASO AC. The other part of the ASO, namely the NRO Executive Council (aka the 5 RIR CEOs) are not so restricted. They may elect to participate individually or as a team as appropriate. And the chair of the ASO itself for 2015 is Adiel Akplogan. The reply from Ray on my other message provides an indication of the care we must take in the ways we participate. Thank you, Louie ASO AC Chair On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org<mailto:Glen@icann.org>> wrote: Dear Louie, This note is a follow up to the request sent on 23 January, on behalf of the GNSO's Working Group on Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation, which is working on a Policy Development Process on the issues relating to the accreditation of such services. The WG had hoped to receive input from your group by Friday 28 February, as the feedback will be very useful to the WG's deliberations. If your group wishes to provide input but will need more time, please let Mary Wong, the policy staff member handling this matter know, at mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>. Please also let Mary know if you would like her to resend the list of questions for which feedback is being sought. Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org<mailto:gnso.secretariat@gnso.icann.org> http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

MP3 PPSAI WG - Tuesday 25 February 2014 at 1500 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine Feb. 25, 2014

Feb. 25, 2014

Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP Working group call held on Tuesday 25 February 2014 at 15:00 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-20140225-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Luc Seufer - RrSG Volker Greimann - RrSG Graeme Bunton - RrSG Tim Ruiz - RrSG Sarah Wyld - RrSG David Heasley - IPC James Bladel - RrSG Steve Metalitz - IPC Osvaldo Novoa - ISPCP Kathy Kleiman - RySGgr Justin Macy - BC Darcy Southwell - RrSG Alex Deacon - IPC Todd Williams - IPC Don Moody - IPC Don Blumenthal - RySG Libby Baney - BC Phil Marano - IPC Jim Bikoff - IPC Tatiana Khramstova - RrSG Griffin Barnett - IPC Roy Balleste - NCUC Tobias Sattler - RrSG Holly Raiche - ALAC Paul McGrady - IPC Amr Elsadr - NCUC Kristina Rosette - IPC Statton Hammock - RySG Kiran Malancharuvil - IPC David Cake - NCSG Valeriya Sherman - IPC Apologies: Susan Prosser - RrSG Maria Farrell - NCUC Marie-Laure Lemineur - NPOC Mary Wong ICANN staff: Marika Konings Margie Milam Amy Bivins Mike Zupke Joe Catapano Glen de St Gery Terri Agnew Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/9iCfAg Thank you. Kind regards, Nathalie Peregrine ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday 25 February 2014: Marika Konings:Welcome to the PPSAI WG Meeting of 25 February 2014 Tobias Sattler:Hi there Graeme Bunton:Good morning all Bladel:(Sinatra hold music) Don Blumenthal:James, would you prefer something else? Tim Ruiz:Loved the hold music! Tim Ruiz:Guess that shows my age :-) Nathalie Peregrine:Noted Nathalie Peregrine:Tatiana Khramtsova and Volker Greimann have joine dthe call Luc Seufer:ON top of being exiled to a cold city, they can't pay Mike a proper headset...ICANN you are cheap! Nathalie Peregrine:David Heasley and Kiran Malancharuvil have joined the audio bridge Luc Seufer: Phase VII (6 months) issuance of a Data Retention Specification waiver is missing. :-p Nathalie Peregrine:Phil Marano has joined the call Phil Marano:Apologies for the delay. A little snow in the DC metro area, and everything shuts down. Nathalie Peregrine:Stephanie Perrin has joined the AC room Volker Greimann:We should also include a maxcimum timeframe in which ICANN staff needs to either approve or deny an application (#lessonslearnedfromthewaiverprocess) Luc Seufer:@Volker agreed Nathalie Peregrine:Paul McGrady has joined the audio bridge Mike Zupke:As promised, here is the Statement of Registrar Accreditation Policy: http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/accreditation/policy-statement Don Blumenthal:Thank, Mike. Nathalie Peregrine:Osvaldo Novoa has joined the AC room Osvaldo Novoa:Hi all, sorry I am late. Nathalie Peregrine:Amr Elsadr and David Cake have joined the call Libby Baney:I aree with Steve - it should be made known in the registration Amr Elsadr:@Steve: If the registrar doesn't control the format of the output, what would value would there be in the proxy/privacy service indicating it is one? Not sure, I understand how this would help? Kiran Malancharuvil:Agree with Libby and Steve. It should be made known. Amr Elsadr:Assuming that the proxy/privacy provider is accredited, wouldn't there be a list of known service providers anyway? steve metalitz:@Amr, registrar does control format of Whois output. Kathy Kleiman:@James, how would have work in terms of labeling? Luc Seufer:repurposing the registrant name field? Bladel:"Service Name, on behalf of Customer (some Customer ID)" Kathy Kleiman:is that a proxy or privacy service? Bladel:That would be a proxy steve metalitz:@Amr #2, no guarantee that Whois info wil match up with name of accredited service. Try this sometime with accredited registrars now. Kathy Kleiman:tx Nathalie Peregrine:Val Sherman has joined the call Luc Seufer:and for proxy? Luc Seufer:sorry privacy? Bladel:Privacy would have the PP Customer name as Registrant Amr Elsadr:@Steve #2: so matching up of whois info with accredited service would settle this, if it becomes an accreditation requirement, right? steve metalitz:@Amr, yes as in James' example. Kiran Malancharuvil:Agree with Kathy. The 2013 RAA requirements are appropriate for this purpose. Justin Macy:+1 to Steve Libby Baney:+1 wto Steve Libby Baney:(to) steve metalitz:Volker, can you provide a reference to the finding that underlying data of privacy service users is more accurate? Thanks Stephanie Perrin:I cannot see why we would insist on reverifying, if (as I suspect) the true criminals are going to fake their data at strategic points anyway...no point in continuing to verify the data. Amr Elsadr:@Volker: if you could dig up that study, it would be appreciated. Marika Konings:@Steve - some of the Whois Studies seemed to indicate that, but it also acknowledged that this is probably not independently verifiable Amr Elsadr:+1 to Volker and James. Graeme Bunton:Also agreeing with Volker and James steve metalitz:Sorry, as indicated, must drop off the call early. Look forward to furthr discussion on this point. Bladel:And when someone loses a name, it's always the bad guy registrar, and not ICANN. Volker Greimann:I think that is the one I had seen as well, thank you Kathy! Marika Konings:I'll have a look - Kathy, any idea what year that study took place? Darcy Southwell:Agree with Volker and James on this issue. Kathy Kleiman:@Marika, let's reach out together to Emily Taylor, chair of Whois REview Team, and General Counsel of Nominet (I think) when this study was conducted Kathy Kleiman:who is speaking now? Kathy Kleiman:I don't think we have proof that people are seeking anything more than privacy in a p/p service Paul McGrady:I have only recently joined the Adobe. I was on the phone before but because this wasn't on the agenda for today, I was not alerted that we needed to review these materials for today. Can we be sure to leave this issue open for next week? val sherman:what types of activities would trigger a reverification of customer data? Holly Raiche:+ Steve Kathy Kleiman:+1 Volker Kristina Rosette:Have to drop for another meeting. Agree with Paul w/r/t carryover to next week, please. Luc Seufer:What Volker said. Double verification/validation would serve no purpose Volker Greimann:same goes for different standards of verification. There is no reason that what is good for one is not good for the other Paul McGrady:Marika, Thank you! Bladel:AGree Tim Ruiz:Agree, and I will be dropping off shortly. Kathy Kleiman:Tx you, Don! Tim Ruiz:Thanks Don. Kiran Malancharuvil:thx! Justin Macy:Thanks! Statton_H (Rightside):Thanks Don Amr Elsadr:thanks. bye. Luc Seufer:bye

1 0

Apologies
by Maria Farrell Feb. 25, 2014

Feb. 25, 2014

Dear WG colleagues, Please accept my apologies as I won't participate in today's call. I'm afraid I have a work deadline I need to hit. All the best, Maria

2 1

Agenda for Tuesday and template for next question
by Mary Wong Feb. 24, 2014

Feb. 24, 2014

Dear all, Please find attached a proposed template for the next two Charter questions slated for WG discussion (ie. Questions B-1 and B-2). The proposed agenda for the 25 February call on Tuesday is as follows: 1. Roll Call/Updates to SOIs 2. Overview of how the Registrar Accreditation Program works (briefing by ICANN staff) 3. WG Finalization of template for Charter Question A-2 4. Discussion of Charter Question B-1 5. Planning for Singapore Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org * One World. One Internet. *

2 1

MP3 PPSAI WG - Tuesday 18 February 2014 at 1500 UTC
by Nathalie Peregrine Feb. 24, 2014

Feb. 24, 2014

Dear all, Our sincerest apologies for the delay. This email was sent on the day of the PPSAI WG call, but we discovered today that there had been issues with Terri's email address, and so this did not get through. These issues have now been resolved, and we are terribly sorry for the inconvenience. Kind regards Nathalie Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP Working group call held on Tuesday 18 February 2014 at 15:00 UTC at: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-20140218-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#feb The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Luc Seufer - RrSG Volker Greimann - RrSG Maria Farrell - NCUC Graeme Bunton - RrSG Tim Ruiz - RrSG Sarah Wyld - no SOI as of yet David Heasley - IPC James Bladel - RrSG Steve Metalitz - IPC Osvaldo Novoa - ISPCP Valeriya Sherman - IPC Kathy Kleiman - RySGgr Justin Macey - BC Darcy Southwell - RrSG Carlton Samuels - ALAC Alex Deacon - IPC Ben Anderson - RrSG Todd Williams - IPC Don Moody - IPC Theo Geurts - RrSG Susan Prosser - RrSG Don Blumenthal - RySG Libby Baney - BC Michael Shoukry - BC Phil Marano - IPC Jim Bikoff - IPC Tatiana Khramstova - RrSG Griffin Barnett - IPC Apologies: Amr Elsadr - NCUC Tobias Sattler - RrSG Holly Raiche - ALAC Paul McGrady - IPC Gema Campillos - GAC Roy Balleste - NCUC ICANN staff: Marika Konings Mary Wong Margie Milam Amy Bivins Mike Zupke Joe Catapano Terri Agnew Nathalie Peregrine ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/9iCfAg Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Agnew ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday 18 February 2014: Nathalie Peregrine:Dear all, welcome to the PPSAI WG call on February 18th 2014 at 1500 UTC Graeme Bunton:g'morning all Theo Geurts:gáfternoon ;) Maria Farrell 2:hi all Val Sherman:Griffin Barnett is also on call Mary Wong:We will announce more people joining the call in Adobe chat. Nathalie Peregrine:Libby Barnett has joined the call Nathalie Peregrine:Libby Baney, apologies Nathalie Peregrine:Don Moody and Carlton Samuels are also inn the AC room Carlton Samuels:Hi everybody Nathalie Peregrine:Susan Prosser is on the audio bridge Don Moody:Greetings Nathalie Peregrine:Tim Ruiz has joined the Ac room Nathalie Peregrine:Justin macy has joined the AC room Nathalie Peregrine:Osvaldo Novoa has joined the call Osvaldo Novoa:Hi everyone Terri Agnew:carlton samuels has joined the AC room steve metalitz:Template looks good to me, thanks staff. Don Blumenthal:Agreed Carlton Samuels:Not sure what happened but enabling audio seem to lose me audio, go figure. Can only restore by restarting Nathalie Peregrine:@ Carlton, we can dial out to you if you prefer Nathalie Peregrine:Michael Shoukry has joined the AC room Nathalie Peregrine:Phil Marano has joined the AC room Carlton Samuels:@Nathalie: No worry. If I need to say something I will make a specific request on chat Volker Greimann:how big was the sample and how were domain names selected for the study? Maria Farrell 2:there's quite an echo on steve's line Bladel:@maria: I don't hear it...maybe just on your line? Maria Farrell 2:oh, maybe so. I'm on the adobe connect. Maria Farrell 2:it's gone now in any case Tim Ruiz:Which of questions does Staff propose that this study helps to inform us? Maria Farrell 2:I'd support hearing about the misuse of whois, as long as we keep on track, time wise. Carlton Samuels:@Kathy: +1 to the CM Study. That would be much more useful to this part of the conversation Tim Ruiz:Did the full report give actual percentages instead of just "significant?" And does it compare that with the percentages of the universe of all domains as a whole? steve metalitz:Mary, the Whois Registrant ID study is the one that has teherelevant information. Tim Ruiz:The CMU study gets to why users may choose to use P/P services. Kathy Kleiman:Mary: I think the Misue of Whois Data study findings will be very useful to our work... Libby Baney:regarding the cited surveys and studies, could Staff send around links to each so WG members may read if desired? Carlton Samuels:@James: I agree that conserving the terms and condition of the RAA aso far as required. P/P Services are exit loops for alternate processing that must rejoin the main process to be useful. Hence the need for accreditation, the key requirement being a trust relationship Don Blumenthal:Links are on the wiki page Bladel:But that could change with market condidtions. Or if a large player (e.g. DomainsByProxy) changed its service model. Luc Seufer:How does one distinguish between a proxy and a privacy registration? Luc Seufer:(if you are netither the registrant nor the p/p provider) Carlton Samuels:@Luc: Apparently the steps in the "reveal " process Volker Greimann:privacy: hides some details but not others: Volker Greimann:proxy: hides all details Don Blumenthal:We can hear you Volker Volker Greimann:bloddy heck Tim Ruiz:Did we ask for a review of this study? Could we hold off on any more of these types of reviews until the WG decides what it needs to review and inform its work? Carlton Samuels:@Volker: To me its like po-tato and po-taa-to. Its the resulyts that matter. So for me, all that is a black box. I'm prepared to accept all so long as 1. The provider is accredited. 2. The provider accepts strict liability. All the details can be determined by the business moidel the provider adopts. Nathalie Peregrine:David Heasley is on the audio bridge Tim Ruiz:I think Privacy Services are harder to identify and usage is likely higher than any study has noted. Volker Greimann:agreed Carlton Samuels:I'm actually running a seminar so I'm back and forth...going forth now Kathy Kleiman:@Tim, do you think there is an issue/question of trying to figure out and find Privacy Service providers? Maria Farrell 2:Apart from the difference in the 'Reveal' side, is there any difference in how the two services are marketed? i.e. are proxy services sold as means to protect privacy, but we (ICANN) classify them as proxy services? Kathy Kleiman:@Tim, cont: are they (privacy service providers) likely to be more informal? Volker Greimann:ok, sounds good Tim Ruiz:@Kathy, they often use the actual beneficial user's name as the registrant but use other info for address, email, phone, etc. And even that info may be somewhat different for each name registered. Maria Farrell 2:that would be great, thanks Mary Volker Greimann:also: what is a "significant percentage"? 1%? 5%? 10? More? Volker Greimann:apologies, old hand Kathy Kleiman:@Tim, tx! Mary Wong:@Tim, staff was requested to present a short summary of the relevant Whois studies; based on comments on the charter questions it seemed that this particular study - despite its ultimate findiings - was of interest to the WG. Apologies that the prevalance question was not directly answered - as mentioned we will pull out the various studies and try to give a more prcecise report on the list. Don Blumenthal:Hmm. I'm not on mute Don Blumenthal:That's what was saying. steve metalitz 2:Of the 320 domain registrants coded as Privacy/Proxy service providers, only 10 were determined to beprivacy service providers. In other words, about 3 percent of domain registrants using a privacy or proxyservice used a privacy service steve metalitz 2:Source: http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/registrant-identification-summary-06f… That was the draft report (on which cmments were filed) but the firgues might have changed in final? Tim Ruiz:@Steve, what was the methodology used? It can be very difficult to identify Privacy Service domains. Kathy Kleiman:Can we wait until there is more feedback?? Kathy Kleiman:I don't see a diversity of sources at this time. Mary Wong:@Steve, the final report states 20 privacy service providers out of 320. Mary Wong:The main figure, though, is that 6% of registrants using either Privacy pr Proxy services used a privacy service. Mary Wong:The dataset was based on a random sampling of 1600 domains across the top 5 gTLDs (with some adjustment for the .info and .biz domains) Graeme Bunton:only 1600! Mary Wong:Yes - that may be something for the WG to bear in mind. Mary Wong:@Graeme I'm happy to explain why we ended up at 1600 (has to do with earlier studies) Marika Konings:Also note that in certain cases comments may need to be redirected to other templates if deemed not specific to the question at hand Tim Ruiz:Perhaps we proceed with the concept that it is one accreditation for P/P providers. When we address something that should clearly warrant distinguishing a difference between them, we do. What I don't want to do is to just ignore the fact that Privacy type services exist. Nathalie Peregrine:Roy Balleste sends his apology for today's call Justin Macy:Sure I can talk about it. Justin Macy:Please give me a moment to cal in the audio bridg Don Blumenthal:Justin, jump in when you are on and someone has finished speaking. Kathy Kleiman:It seems to be me that privacy and proxy services are different. If anything, privacy services provide MORE information and therefore should probably have fewer obligations Maria Farrell 2:it may be taking justin some time to get on. I just did and was on hold for 3 mins Nathalie Peregrine:Justin ois not on the bridge yet steve metalitz 2:+1 @ Tim Tim Ruiz:In other words, this question will answer itself as we go. Marika Konings:Please send any proposed additions to the mailing list and specify to which charter question or sub-queston these relate so we can include it in the right palce. Val Sherman:+1 @Tim Bladel:Sorry, need to drop the call. Thanks everyone. Marika Konings:also, please include a link to your source so we can add that as well Justin Macy:Could we resend out the link for the Survey, for those who have not yet responded? steve metalitz 2:Perhaps add a question at the end of all future templates -- should the same standard apply to proxy srvices and privacy services? Marika Konings:https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/86N33WX Justin Macy:Thanks! Tim Ruiz:+1 Steve Maria Farrell 2:+1 steve, thanks Marika Konings:@Steve - noted. I'll add this to the next iteration. Kathy Kleiman:Good question, Steve -- with a "and why" added to the question Val Sherman:+1 @Steve and Kathy Maria Farrell 2:great call. thanks everyone. Tim Ruiz:Thx Don Graeme Bunton:thanks don Volker Greimann:prtfrct don Michael Shoukry:thanks everyone Phil Marano:Thanks everyone! Kathy Kleiman:Bye All! Luc Seufer:thank you Don Alex Deacon:bye! Theo Geurts:gáfternoon ;) Maria Farrell 2:hi all Val Sherman:Griffin Barnett is also on call Mary Wong:We will announce more people joining the call in Adobe chat. Nathalie Peregrine:Libby Barnett has joined the call Nathalie Peregrine:Libby Baney, apologies Nathalie Peregrine:Don Moody and Carlton Samuels are also inn the AC room Carlton Samuels:Hi everybody Nathalie Peregrine:Susan Prosser is on the audio bridge Don Moody:Greetings Nathalie Peregrine:Tim Ruiz has joined the Ac room Nathalie Peregrine:Justin macy has joined the AC room Nathalie Peregrine:Osvaldo Novoa has joined the call Osvaldo Novoa:Hi everyone Terri Agnew:carlton samuels has joined the AC room steve metalitz:Template looks good to me, thanks staff. Don Blumenthal:Agreed Carlton Samuels:Not sure what happened but enabling audio seem to lose me audio, go figure. Can only restore by restarting Nathalie Peregrine:@ Carlton, we can dial out to you if you prefer Nathalie Peregrine:Michael Shoukry has joined the AC room Nathalie Peregrine:Phil Marano has joined the AC room Carlton Samuels:@Nathalie: No worry. If I need to say something I will make a specific request on chat Volker Greimann:how big was the sample and how were domain names selected for the study? Maria Farrell 2:there's quite an echo on steve's line Bladel:@maria: I don't hear it...maybe just on your line? Maria Farrell 2:oh, maybe so. I'm on the adobe connect. Maria Farrell 2:it's gone now in any case Tim Ruiz:Which of questions does Staff propose that this study helps to inform us? Maria Farrell 2:I'd support hearing about the misuse of whois, as long as we keep on track, time wise. Carlton Samuels:@Kathy: +1 to the CM Study. That would be much more useful to this part of the conversation Tim Ruiz:Did the full report give actual percentages instead of just "significant?" And does it compare that with the percentages of the universe of all domains as a whole? steve metalitz:Mary, the Whois Registrant ID study is the one that has teherelevant information. Tim Ruiz:The CMU study gets to why users may choose to use P/P services. Kathy Kleiman:Mary: I think the Misue of Whois Data study findings will be very useful to our work... Libby Baney:regarding the cited surveys and studies, could Staff send around links to each so WG members may read if desired? Carlton Samuels:@James: I agree that conserving the terms and condition of the RAA aso far as required. P/P Services are exit loops for alternate processing that must rejoin the main process to be useful. Hence the need for accreditation, the key requirement being a trust relationship Don Blumenthal:Links are on the wiki page Bladel:But that could change with market condidtions. Or if a large player (e.g. DomainsByProxy) changed its service model. Luc Seufer:How does one distinguish between a proxy and a privacy registration? Luc Seufer:(if you are netither the registrant nor the p/p provider) Carlton Samuels:@Luc: Apparently the steps in the "reveal " process Volker Greimann:privacy: hides some details but not others: Volker Greimann:proxy: hides all details Don Blumenthal:We can hear you Volker Volker Greimann:bloddy heck Tim Ruiz:Did we ask for a review of this study? Could we hold off on any more of these types of reviews until the WG decides what it needs to review and inform its work? Carlton Samuels:@Volker: To me its like po-tato and po-taa-to. Its the resulyts that matter. So for me, all that is a black box. I'm prepared to accept all so long as 1. The provider is accredited. 2. The provider accepts strict liability. All the details can be determined by the business moidel the provider adopts. Nathalie Peregrine:David Heasley is on the audio bridge Tim Ruiz:I think Privacy Services are harder to identify and usage is likely higher than any study has noted. Volker Greimann:agreed Carlton Samuels:I'm actually running a seminar so I'm back and forth...going forth now Kathy Kleiman:@Tim, do you think there is an issue/question of trying to figure out and find Privacy Service providers? Maria Farrell 2:Apart from the difference in the 'Reveal' side, is there any difference in how the two services are marketed? i.e. are proxy services sold as means to protect privacy, but we (ICANN) classify them as proxy services? Kathy Kleiman:@Tim, cont: are they (privacy service providers) likely to be more informal? Volker Greimann:ok, sounds good Tim Ruiz:@Kathy, they often use the actual beneficial user's name as the registrant but use other info for address, email, phone, etc. And even that info may be somewhat different for each name registered. Maria Farrell 2:that would be great, thanks Mary Volker Greimann:also: what is a "significant percentage"? 1%? 5%? 10? More? Volker Greimann:apologies, old hand Kathy Kleiman:@Tim, tx! Mary Wong:@Tim, staff was requested to present a short summary of the relevant Whois studies; based on comments on the charter questions it seemed that this particular study - despite its ultimate findiings - was of interest to the WG. Apologies that the prevalance question was not directly answered - as mentioned we will pull out the various studies and try to give a more prcecise report on the list. Don Blumenthal:Hmm. I'm not on mute Don Blumenthal:That's what was saying. steve metalitz 2:Of the 320 domain registrants coded as Privacy/Proxy service providers, only 10 were determined to beprivacy service providers. In other words, about 3 percent of domain registrants using a privacy or proxyservice used a privacy service steve metalitz 2:Source: http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/whois/registrant-identification-summary-06f… That was the draft report (on which cmments were filed) but the firgues might have changed in final? Tim Ruiz:@Steve, what was the methodology used? It can be very difficult to identify Privacy Service domains. Kathy Kleiman:Can we wait until there is more feedback?? Kathy Kleiman:I don't see a diversity of sources at this time. Mary Wong:@Steve, the final report states 20 privacy service providers out of 320. Mary Wong:The main figure, though, is that 6% of registrants using either Privacy pr Proxy services used a privacy service. Mary Wong:The dataset was based on a random sampling of 1600 domains across the top 5 gTLDs (with some adjustment for the .info and .biz domains) Graeme Bunton:only 1600! Mary Wong:Yes - that may be something for the WG to bear in mind. Mary Wong:@Graeme I'm happy to explain why we ended up at 1600 (has to do with earlier studies) Marika Konings:Also note that in certain cases comments may need to be redirected to other templates if deemed not specific to the question at hand Tim Ruiz:Perhaps we proceed with the concept that it is one accreditation for P/P providers. When we address something that should clearly warrant distinguishing a difference between them, we do. What I don't want to do is to just ignore the fact that Privacy type services exist. Nathalie Peregrine:Roy Balleste sends his apology for today's call Justin Macy:Sure I can talk about it. Justin Macy:Please give me a moment to cal in the audio bridg Don Blumenthal:Justin, jump in when you are on and someone has finished speaking. Kathy Kleiman:It seems to be me that privacy and proxy services are different. If anything, privacy services provide MORE information and therefore should probably have fewer obligations Maria Farrell 2:it may be taking justin some time to get on. I just did and was on hold for 3 mins Nathalie Peregrine:Justin ois not on the bridge yet steve metalitz 2:+1 @ Tim Tim Ruiz:In other words, this question will answer itself as we go. Marika Konings:Please send any proposed additions to the mailing list and specify to which charter question or sub-queston these relate so we can include it in the right palce. Val Sherman:+1 @Tim Bladel:Sorry, need to drop the call. Thanks everyone. Marika Konings:also, please include a link to your source so we can add that as well Justin Macy:Could we resend out the link for the Survey, for those who have not yet responded? steve metalitz 2:Perhaps add a question at the end of all future templates -- should the same standard apply to proxy srvices and privacy services? Marika Konings:https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/86N33WX Justin Macy:Thanks! Tim Ruiz:+1 Steve Maria Farrell 2:+1 steve, thanks Marika Konings:@Steve - noted. I'll add this to the next iteration. Kathy Kleiman:Good question, Steve -- with a "and why" added to the question Val Sherman:+1 @Steve and Kathy Maria Farrell 2:great call. thanks everyone. Tim Ruiz:Thx Don Graeme Bunton:thanks don Volker Greimann:prtfrct don Michael Shoukry:thanks everyone Phil Marano:Thanks everyone! Kathy Kleiman:Bye All! Luc Seufer:thank you Don Alex Deacon:bye!

1 0

For your review - Revised A-2 Template & survey information
by Marika Konings Feb. 20, 2014

Feb. 20, 2014

Dear All, Following our call yesterday, please find attached an updated version of the template for question A 2 in which I've attempted to capture our discussion as well as some of the additional information shared by Mary yesterday. Please also note that I've added an additional section at the end to capture the preliminary WG conclusion as well as section that is intended to specify whether the preliminary conclusions apply to both privacy and proxy services, or whether these need to be distinguished (not necessarily applicable to this question, but as suggested on the call, of relevance to some of the upcoming questions). If I've missed anything, or there is any additional information you would like to see added to the 'background information relevant to this question' section, please share this with the mailing list. For those of you that are still interested to participate in the WG survey, please go to: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/86N33WX. For your convenience, you will find attached the responses received to date. It may be of particular interest to complete the survey if your view point is not already represented by one of the other responses. Best regards, Marika

2 1

Summary of Whois studies: findings on prevalence of P/P service usage
by Mary Wong Feb. 18, 2014

Feb. 18, 2014

Dear all, Attached please find a document that attempts to summarize the various studies that have been done by/for ICANN to date concerning the rate of usage of privacy and/or proxy services. We have included links to all the studies, which we will also upload to the WG wiki. The document highlights the specific findings of each study on the topic (as requested by Steve and others), and includes a section summarizing the percentage rates found by NPL in its recently-concluded Privacy & Proxy Abuse Study (as requested by Volker). We have also noted the sample sizes and methodology used for each study, where available. We hope this is useful and answers some of the queries raised on the call earlier today. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org * One World. One Internet. *

1 0

Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] [Ntfy-gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] REMINDER: Meeting invitation: Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP WG - Tuesday 18 February 2014 - 15:00 UTC
by Amr Elsadr Feb. 18, 2014

Feb. 18, 2014

Hi, Regrettably, I will be unable to join today’s call. Good luck today. Thanks. Amr On Feb 17, 2014, at 5:14 PM, Nathalie Peregrine <nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org> wrote: > Dear All, > > The next Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP WG teleconference is scheduled for Tuesday 18th February 2014 at 1500 UTC > > 07:00 PST, 10:00 EST, 15:00 London, 16:00 CET > > > Adobe Connect WITH AUDIO enabled: https://icann.adobeconnect.com/ppsai/ > > > For those of you using the Adobe Connect audio, you may do so by activating your computer microphone via the Adobe room (Using a headset is preferable here). > Make sure your speakers and microphone are not on mute. > > - Select the TELEPHONE ICON at the top of the AC toolbar and choose CONNECT MY AUDIO (only option). > - Select USING COMPUTER twice > - Select ALLOW access to the ICANN adobe room > - the TELEPHONE ICON at the top of the toolbar should then have changed into a MICROPHONE ICON > - You may click on this MICROPHONE ICON to mute yourself (Icon will then have a line through it) and to unmute yourself (Line disappears) > Participants must ALWAYS have their microphone or telephone on MUTE as default setting. You are requested to RAISE YOUR HAND if you wish to participate to avoid disruption. > > Dial-in details are below. > If you require a dial-out, please let me know. > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > Participant passcode: PPSAI > > Dial in numbers: > Country > > Toll Numbers > Freephone/ > Toll Free Number > ARGENTINA > > > > > > 0800-777-0519 > > AUSTRALIA > > ADELAIDE: > > 61-8-8121-4842 > > 1-800-657-260 > > AUSTRALIA > > BRISBANE: > > 61-7-3102-0944 > > 1-800-657-260 > > AUSTRALIA > > CANBERRA: > > 61-2-6100-1944 > > 1-800-657-260 > > AUSTRALIA > > MELBOURNE: > > 61-3-9010-7713 > > 1-800-657-260 > > AUSTRALIA > > PERTH: > > 61-8-9467-5223 > > 1-800-657-260 > > AUSTRALIA > > SYDNEY: > > 61-2-8205-8129 > > 1-800-657-260 > > AUSTRIA > > > > 43-1-92-81-113 > > 0800-005-259 > > BELGIUM > > > > 32-2-400-9861 > > 0800-3-8795 > > BRAZIL > > > > 55-11-3958-0779 > > 0800-7610651 > > CHILE > > > > > > 1230-020-2863 > > CHINA > > CHINA A: > > 86-400-810-4789 > > 10800-712-1670 > > CHINA > > CHINA B: > > 86-400-810-4789 > > 10800-120-1670 > > COLOMBIA > > > > > > 01800-9-156474 > > CROATIA > > > > > > 080-08-06-309 > > CZECH REPUBLIC > > > > 420-2-25-98-56-64 > > 800-700-177 > > DENMARK > > > > 45-7014-0284 > > 8088-8324 > > ESTONIA > > > > > > 800-011-1093 > > FINLAND > > > > 358-9-5424-7162 > > 0-800-9-14610 > > FRANCE > > LYON: > > 33-4-26-69-12-85 > > 080-511-1496 > > FRANCE > > MARSEILLE: > > 33-4-86-06-00-85 > > 080-511-1496 > > FRANCE > > PARIS: > > 33-1-70-70-60-72 > > 080-511-1496 > > GERMANY > > > > 49-69-2222-20362 > > 0800-664-4247 > > GREECE > > > > 30-80-1-100-0687 > > 00800-12-7312 > > HONG KONG > > > > 852-3001-3863 > > 800-962-856 > > HUNGARY > > > > 36-1-700-8856 > > 06-800-12755 > > INDIA > > BANGALORE: > > 91-80-61275204 > > INDIA > > MUMBAI: > > 91-22-61501629 > > INDIA > > INDIA A: > > > > 000-800-852-1268 > > INDIA > > INDIA B: > > > > 000-800-001-6305 > > INDIA > > INDIA C: > > > > 1800-300-00491 > > INDONESIA > > > > > > 001-803-011-3982 > > IRELAND > > > > 353-1-246-7646 > > 1800-992-368 > > ISRAEL > > > > > > 1-80-9216162 > > ITALY > > MILAN: > > 39-02-3600-6007 > > 800-986-383 > > ITALY > > ROME: > > 39-06-8751-6018 > > 800-986-383 > > ITALY > > TORINO: > > 39-011-510-0118 > > 800-986-383 > > JAPAN > > OSAKA: > > 81-6-7739-4799 > > 0066-33-132439 > > JAPAN > > TOKYO: > > 81-3-5539-5191 > > 0066-33-132439 > > LATVIA > > > > > > 8000-3185 > > LUXEMBOURG > > > > 352-27-000-1364 > > 8002-9246 > > MALAYSIA > > > > > > 1-800-81-3065 > > MEXICO > > GUADALAJARA (JAL): > > 52-33-3208-7310 > > 001-866-376-9696 > > MEXICO > > MEXICO CITY: > > 52-55-5062-9110 > > 001-866-376-9696 > > MEXICO > > MONTERREY: > > 52-81-2482-0610 > > 001-866-376-9696 > > NETHERLANDS > > > > 31-20-718-8588 > > 0800-023-4378 > > NEW ZEALAND > > > > 64-9-970-4771 > > 0800-447-722 > > NORWAY > > > > 47-21-590-062 > > 800-15157 > > PANAMA > > > > > > 011-001-800-5072065 > > PERU > > > > > > 0800-53713 > > PHILIPPINES > > > > 63-2-858-3716 > > 1800-111-42453 > > POLAND > > > > > > 00-800-1212572 > > PORTUGAL > > > > > > 8008-14052 > > ROMANIA > > > > 40-31-630-01-79 > > RUSSIA > > > > > > 8-10-8002-0144011 > > SAUDI ARABIA > > > > > > 800-8-110087 > > SINGAPORE > > > > 65-6883-9230 > > 800-120-4663 > > SLOVAK REPUBLIC > > > > 421-2-322-422-25 > > 0800-002066 > > SLOVENIA > > > > > > 0-800-81310 > > SOUTH AFRICA > > > > > > 080-09-80414 > > SOUTH KOREA > > > > 82-2-6744-1083 > > 00798-14800-7352 > > SPAIN > > > > 34-91-414-25-33 > > 800-300-053 > > SWEDEN > > > > 46-8-566-19-348 > > 0200-884-622 > > SWITZERLAND > > > > 41-44-580-6398 > > 0800-120-032 > > TAIWAN > > > > 886-2-2795-7379 > > 00801-137-797 > > THAILAND > > > > > > 001-800-1206-66056 > > TURKEY > > > > > > 00-800-151-0516 > > UNITED ARAB EMIRATES > > > > > > 8000-35702370 > > UNITED KINGDOM > > BIRMINGHAM: > > 44-121-210-9025 > > 0808-238-6029 > > UNITED KINGDOM > > GLASGOW: > > 44-141-202-3225 > > 0808-238-6029 > > UNITED KINGDOM > > LEEDS: > > 44-113-301-2125 > > 0808-238-6029 > > UNITED KINGDOM > > LONDON: > > 44-20-7108-6370 > > 0808-238-6029 > > UNITED KINGDOM > > MANCHESTER: > > 44-161-601-1425 > > 0808-238-6029 > > URUGUAY > > > > > > 000-413-598-3421 > > USA > > > > 1-517-345-9004 > > 866-692-5726 > > VENEZUELA > > > > > > 0800-1-00-3702 > > > > > Thank you. > Kind regards, > Nathalie Peregrine > For GNSO Secretariat > > _______________________________________________ > Ntfy-gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list > Ntfy-gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ntfy-gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg

1 0

Documents & Proposed Agenda for the next PPSAI WG Meeting
by Marika Konings Feb. 13, 2014

Feb. 13, 2014

Dear All, As mentioned by Don, please find attached the updated charter questions grouping document both in redline and clean version as well as the revised work plan. Below you will find the proposed agenda for the next PPSAI WG meeting which is scheduled for Tuesday 18 February at 15.00 UTC. To facilitate the discussions on the charter questions, staff has developed the attached template which aims to incorporate all information relevant to the specific charter question up front, followed by an overview of the views expressed to date both through the WG survey as well as email conversations. The template would later be completed with any feedback / input received from SG/C/SO/ACs. The completed template can then eventually be incorporated in the Initial Report and serve as a record of the WG deliberations and information considered. If you have any comments or suggestions on the use and/or lay-out of the template, please let us know. Best regards, Marika Proposed Agenda PPSAI WG Meeting 18 February 2014 1. Roll Call / SOI Update 2. WG Discussion of Category A, Question 2 (as reflected in approved Groupings of the Charter Questions document) > 1. Findings of Whois studies re prevalence of proxy and privacy services > 2. Discussion of Cat. A, Q.2 3. Planning for Singapore 4. Confirm next steps / next meeting

1 0