"We therefore need to model our approach on the worst possible actors, not the best." If this is the prism through which we view the "actors" involved here, that would need to apply to all the actors -- so we need to view registrants as a motley crew of phishers, malware providers, cybersquatters, counterfeiters, child porn purveyors, illegal online pharmacies, and other assorted malfeasors. That would make WHOIS/RDS the rough equivalent of a sex offender registry, and our requirements regarding availability, contactability, accuracy, validation, etc., would need to be ratcheted up very significantly. We may even need a system to track registrants, if we follow this thinking to its logical conclusion. As fascinating as this dystopian worldview might be, I reject the idea that this is an appropriate approach to our work. Greg Shatan On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 4:05 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> wrote:
I share the same view, Carlton. +1 to your comment.
Ayden
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] @EXT: RE: Use cases: Fundamental, Incidental, and Theoretical Local Time: August 22, 2016 5:02 PM UTC Time: August 22, 2016 4:02 PM From: carlton.samuels@gmail.com To: vgreimann@key-systems.net gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 2:19 AM, Volker Greimann < vgreimann@key-systems.net> wrote:
Simply put: Anything that can be abused, will be abuse. We therefore need to model our approach on the worst possible actors, not the best.
+1
I cannot see how any other model makes sense in this context.
-Carlton
============================== *Carlton A Samuels*
*Mobile: 876-818-1799 <876-818-1799>Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg