If we are going to consider this in the context of ICANN's mission, I thought it would be helpful to have the whole package of ICANN's Mission, Commitments and Core Values in front of us:

ARTICLE 1 MISSION, COMMITMENTS AND CORE VALUES

Section 1.1. MISSION

(a) The mission of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ("ICANN") is to ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet's unique identifier systems as described in this Section 1.1(a) (the "Mission"). Specifically, ICANN:

(i) Coordinates the allocation and assignment of names in the root zone of the Domain Name System ("DNS") and coordinates the development and implementation of policies concerning the registration of second-level domain names in generic top-level domains ("gTLDs"). In this role, ICANN's scope is to coordinate the development and implementation of policies:

  • For which uniform or coordinated resolution is reasonably necessary to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS including, with respect to gTLDregistrars and registries, policies in the areas described in Annex G-1 and Annex G-2; and
  • That are developed through a bottom-up consensus-based multistakeholder process and designed to ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet's unique names systems.

The issues, policies, procedures, and principles addressed in Annex G-1 and Annex G-2 with respect to gTLD registrars and registries shall be deemed to be within ICANN's Mission.

(ii) Facilitates the coordination of the operation and evolution of the DNS root name server system.

(iii) Coordinates the allocation and assignment at the top-most level of Internet Protocol numbers and Autonomous System numbers. In service of its Mission, ICANN (A) provides registration services and open access for global number registries as requested by the Internet Engineering Task Force ("IETF") and the Regional Internet Registries ("RIRs") and (B) facilitates the development of global number registry policies by the affected community and other related tasks as agreed with the RIRs.

(iv) Collaborates with other bodies as appropriate to provide registries needed for the functioning of the Internet as specified by Internet protocol standards development organizations. In service of its Mission, ICANN's scope is to provide registration services and open access for registries in the public domain requested by Internet protocol development organizations.

(b) ICANN shall not act outside its Mission.

(c) ICANN shall not regulate (i.e., impose rules and restrictions on) services that use the Internet's unique identifiers or the content that such services carry or provide, outside the express scope of Section 1.1(a). For the avoidance of doubt, ICANN does not hold any governmentally authorized regulatory authority.

(d) For the avoidance of doubt and notwithstanding the foregoing:

(i) the foregoing prohibitions are not intended to limit ICANN's authority or ability to adopt or implement policies or procedures that take into account the use of domain names as natural-language identifiers;

(ii) Notwithstanding any provision of the Bylaws to the contrary, the terms and conditions of the documents listed in subsections (A) through (C) below, and ICANN's performance of its obligations or duties thereunder, may not be challenged by any party in any proceeding against, or process involving, ICANN (including a request for reconsideration or an independent review process pursuant to Article 4) on the basis that such terms and conditions conflict with, or are in violation of, ICANN's Mission or otherwise exceed the scope of ICANN's authority or powers pursuant to these Bylaws ("Bylaws") or ICANN's Articles of Incorporation ("Articles of Incorporation"):

(A)

(1) all registry agreements and registrar accreditation agreements between ICANN and registry operators or registrars in force on 1 October 2016 [1], including, in each case, any terms or conditions therein that are not contained in the underlying form of registry agreement and registrar accreditation agreement;

(2) any registry agreement or registrar accreditation agreement not encompassed by (1) above to the extent its terms do not vary materially from the form of registry agreement or registrar accreditation agreement that existed on 1 October 2016;

(B)any renewals of agreements described in subsection (A) pursuant to their terms and conditions for renewal; and

(C)ICANN's Five-Year Strategic Plan and Five-Year Operating Plan existing on 10 March 2016.

(iii) Section 1.1(d)(ii) does not limit the ability of a party to any agreement described therein to challenge any provision of such agreement on any other basis, including the other party's interpretation of the provision, in any proceeding or process involving ICANN.

(iv) ICANN shall have the ability to negotiate, enter into and enforce agreements, including public interest commitments, with any party in service of its Mission.

Section 1.2. COMMITMENTS AND CORE VALUES

In performing its Mission, ICANN will act in a manner that complies with and reflects ICANN's Commitments and respects ICANN's Core Values, each as described below.

(a) COMMITMENTS

In performing its Mission, ICANN must operate in a manner consistent with these Bylaws for the benefit of the Internet community as a whole, carrying out its activities in conformity with relevant principles of international law and international conventions and applicable local law, through open and transparent processes that enable competition and open entry in Internet-related markets. Specifically, ICANN commits to do the following (each, a "Commitment," and collectively, the "Commitments"):

(i) Preserve and enhance the administration of the DNS and the operational stability, reliability, security, global interoperability, resilience, and openness of the DNS and the Internet;

(ii) Maintain the capacity and ability to coordinate the DNS at the overall level and work for the maintenance of a single, interoperable Internet;

(iii) Respect the creativity, innovation, and flow of information made possible by the Internet by limiting ICANN's activities to matters that are within ICANN's Mission and require or significantly benefit from global coordination;

(iv) Employ open, transparent and bottom-up, multistakeholder policy development processes that are led by the private sector (including business stakeholders, civil society, the technical community, academia, and end users), while duly taking into account the public policy advice of governments and public authorities. These processes shall (A) seek input from the public, for whose benefit ICANN in all events shall act, (B) promote well-informed decisions based on expert advice, and (C) ensure that those entities most affected can assist in the policy development process;

(v) Make decisions by applying documented policies consistently, neutrally, objectively, and fairly, without singling out any particular party for discriminatory treatment (i.e., making an unjustified prejudicial distinction between or among different parties); and

(vi) Remain accountable to the Internet community through mechanisms defined in these Bylaws that enhance ICANN's effectiveness.

(b) CORE VALUES

In performing its Mission, the following "Core Values" should also guide the decisions and actions of ICANN:

(i) To the extent feasible and appropriate, delegating coordination functions to or recognizing the policy role of, other responsible entities that reflect the interests of affected parties and the roles of bodies internal to ICANN and relevant external expert bodies;

(ii) Seeking and supporting broad, informed participation reflecting the functional, geographic, and cultural diversity of the Internet at all levels of policy development and decision-making to ensure that the bottom-up, multistakeholder policy development process is used to ascertain the global public interest and that those processes are accountable and transparent;

(iii) Where feasible and appropriate, depending on market mechanisms to promote and sustain a competitive environment in the DNS market;

(iv) Introducing and promoting competition in the registration of domain names where practicable and beneficial to the public interest as identified through the bottom-up, multistakeholder policy development process;

(v) Operating with efficiency and excellence, in a fiscally responsible and accountable manner and, where practicable and not inconsistent with ICANN's other obligations under these Bylaws, at a speed that is responsive to the needs of the global Internet community;

(vi) While remaining rooted in the private sector (including business stakeholders, civil society, the technical community, academia, and end users), recognizing that governments and public authorities are responsible for public policy and duly taking into account the public policy advice of governments and public authorities;

(vii) Striving to achieve a reasonable balance between the interests of different stakeholders, while also avoiding capture; and

(viii) Subject to the limitations set forth in Section 27.2, within the scope of its Mission and other Core Values, respecting internationally recognized human rights as required by applicable law. This Core Value does not create, and shall not be interpreted to create, any obligation on ICANN outside its Mission, or beyond obligations found in applicable law. This Core Value does not obligate ICANN to enforce its human rights obligations, or the human rights obligations of other parties, against other parties.

(c) The Commitments and Core Values are intended to apply in the broadest possible range of circumstances. The Commitments reflect ICANN's fundamental compact with the global Internet community and are intended to apply consistently and comprehensively to ICANN's activities. The specific way in which Core Values are applied, individually and collectively, to any given situation may depend on many factors that cannot be fully anticipated or enumerated. Situations may arise in which perfect fidelity to all Core Values simultaneously is not possible. Accordingly, in any situation where one Core Value must be balanced with another, potentially competing Core Value, the result of the balancing must serve a policy developed through the bottom-up multistakeholder process or otherwise best serve ICANN's Mission.


On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 11:26 PM, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:

I am not sure how we get to this discussion.  What I am saying, is that the purpose of collecting data has to be linked to ICANN's core mission.  AS Peter said a while ago, is the core mission to enable law enforcement investigations? No.  It is a legitimate purpose to use or disclose limited sets of data as required in accordance with law, but it is not the reason we collect or generate thin data.  This distinction is important in data protection law.  Nobody is saying we should not disclose the thin data, including name servers.  What we are trying to say, and obviously with very little success, is that several of the purposes for collecting thin data which were in the last poll, were not related to ICANN's core mission.  They might be legitimate disclosures of data, but they are not legitimate purposes to collect.

Displaying data in WHOIS is a disclosure.  We are not supposed to be talking about that yet.  We keep conflating the legitimacy of collection, and why we gather or generate data elements about a domain name, and disclosure. 

Sorry to keep hammering on this, but it is a very simple concept that is fundamental to data protection.  No wonder we have been arguing about this for 18 years.....

cheers Stephanie


On 2017-01-25 21:06, John Bambenek wrote:
Regardless of the privacy implications, if someone who wants to look up a hostname and can't find can't figure out what the authoritative nameservers are for the domain, DNS quite simply will not work and with it the internet is down; go home. 

Unless someone is suggesting we completely re-architect DNS, having nameservers tied to domain records is absolutely essential.

You could deprecate displaying it in whois but any DNS client would easily be able to retrieve the data because the resolver still has to know what to ask for. 

J

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 25, 2017, at 16:08, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> wrote:

Stephanie

 

Do you have any links to any legislation / regulations etc., that are this broad?

 

And honestly I don’t see how a set of nameserver is “personally identifiable” unless you’re using your own name in the hostname (which you could, but then I’d see that as your choice and not a technical requirement)

 

Regards


Michele

 

 

--

Mr Michele Neylon

Blacknight Solutions

Hosting, Colocation & Domains

http://www.blacknight.host/

http://blacknight.blog/

http://ceo.hosting/

Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072

Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090

-------------------------------

Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty

Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,

Ireland  Company No.: 370845

 

From: Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca>
Date: Wednesday 25 January 2017 at 19:40
To: Michele Neylon <michele@blacknight.com>, Scott Hollenbeck <shollenbeck@verisign.com>, Sam Lanfranco <sam@lanfranco.net>, "dave@davecake.net" <dave@davecake.net>
Cc: "gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Now open: 18 January Poll on Purpose

 

Unfortunately, in a world where the Internet of things is taking off, privacy advocates and authorities have to insist that data generated by or as a result of the actions of an individual or his devices(eg metadata, timestamping, etc) has to be considered as personal information.  If it is used to describe processes pertaining to that information, if it could be used to incriminate that individual, it is important that it be recognized as information for which individuals have rights.  Otherwise, we have a situation where the individual has no right to access information that may impact him, may incriminate him, but to which he may be utterly oblivious.  Sorry it is such a pain in the neck, but there we are.

Stephanie

 

On 2017-01-25 12:32, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:

Scott

 

Sure, but if we go down that route we could make cases for a lot of things J

My main problem with this entire debacle is that the data we’re dealing with is pretty much useless and isn’t personally identifiable.

 

Regards

 

Michele

 

 

--

Mr Michele Neylon

Blacknight Solutions

Hosting, Colocation & Domains

https://www.blacknight.com/

http://blacknight.blog/

Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072

Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090

Social: http://mneylon.social

Some thoughts: http://ceo.hosting/

-------------------------------

Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty

Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

 

From: Scott Hollenbeck <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
Date: Wednesday 25 January 2017 at 17:15
To: Michele Neylon <michele@blacknight.com>, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca>, Sam Lanfranco <sam@lanfranco.net>, "dave@davecake.net" <dave@davecake.net>
Cc: "gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org>
Subject: RE: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Now open: 18 January Poll on Purpose

 

From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Michele Neylon - Blacknight
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 12:09 PM
To: Stephanie Perrin; Sam Lanfranco; David Cake
Cc: gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Now open: 18 January Poll on Purpose

 

Stephanie

 

Sorry, but policy + the technology go hand in hand. You cannot completely separate them and any policy that this (or any other) group produces needs to be technically possible to implement.

 

As to the specifics ..

 

I would argue that generated data is NOT collected, as it’s generated.

 

If you register stephanieperrin.com with us the only elements we are “collecting” that end up in in the “thin” data are:

the domain name string

the nameservers you’re using (and if you don’t specify any we’ll use our own)

All the other elements are NOT collected by the registrar or even the registry from the registrant, they are generated as part of the process of the domain being registered.

 

[SAH] Michele, some might argue that the registration period is also collected from the registrant and is then used to generate the expiration date at the registry. A case might also be made for status values like clientTransferProhibited etc. I agree completely that generated data is just that – generated.

 

Scott



_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg


_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg