October 2020 - Ssr2-review - lists.icann.org

SSR2 action item: Review rec 29 markup
by Jennifer Bryce Nov. 5, 2020

Nov. 5, 2020

Dear SSR2 RT members, As discussed on the call today, please review the proposed markup of rec 29 (see page 59) here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WTnaEk2pW0V85FRXk1uUN4O-co7DcDIXb_9_-1M…. Please share any comments/feedback ahead of the meeting next week. Best, Jennifer -- Jennifer Bryce Associate Project Manager, Review Support and Accountability Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Skype: jennifer.bryce.icann Email: jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org

5 8

Abuse section redesign
by Weissinger, Laurin Nov. 2, 2020

Nov. 2, 2020

Dear all, Please see here for the reworked abuse section, to be discussed on tomorrow’s call: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PdjkR6i_FdXuFTomxptVpLVVtORRTgrrnVQ-vSp… (suggest only) You can see the new structure involves a longer, general findings section, followed by a section with recommendations, interspersed with some specific findings and our (proposed) outlook and expectations. Please comment and suggest changes, as always use suggest mode only. Heather is still actively working in this document because the subteam did a lot of work that took some time. Thus, please excuse white spaces, etc Tomorrow, we can discuss the broader changes and agree if this makes sense, and get some discussion and maybe consensus on how to move forward. All the best Laurin

2 2

Update on Recommendation 28
by Naveed Bin Rais Oct. 31, 2020

Oct. 31, 2020

Dear Team, I have updated the recommendation 28 findings text and the updated document is available on google drive at the following link: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1B3EoUdJPbW0AaHxCMaexhRAAgA80IDzB I am also attaching that with this email. Best, Naveed -

3 2

Board update on pending CCT recs
by k claffy Oct. 30, 2020

Oct. 30, 2020

https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2020-10-22-en#2.… worth reading but an excerpt: Recommendation 16 calls for "further studying of the relationship between specific registry operators, registrars, and DNS Security Abuse by commissioning ongoing data collection including but not limited to, ICANN Domain Abuse Activity Reporting (DAAR) initiatives". The Board notes support in the public comment proceeding for this recommendation. The IPC, for instance, comments that it: "strongly supports this recommendation and has long been interested in more in-depth and frequent collection and publication of such data and actionable responses to problems identified". The Board notes that ICANN org will continue to collect data and generate monthly reports on an ongoing basis. Moreover, the Board wishes to highlight that DAAR itself is not and cannot be a compliance/enforcement tool. Rather, it is a tool that monitors third party reputation lists to indicate possible concentration of DNS security threats. When outliers appear in DAAR data, it merely suggests further investigation is needed, not that compliance/enforcement is warranted. Based on this, the Board approves Recommendation 16. Recommendation 18 calls for the gathering of data to inform the "WHOIS Review Team" on "whether additional steps are needed to improve WHOIS accuracy, and whether to proceed with the identity phase of the Accuracy Reporting System (ARS) project". As explained in the Detailed Assessment, the Board notes that this recommendation has already been fulfilled and that the request for anonymized WHOIS inaccuracy complaint data from "registrars, registry operators, ISPs, etc." appears to be the only element that was not made available to the Registration Directory Service Review Team (RDS-WHOIS2-RT). As reported in the Detailed Assessment, while ICANN org does not have this data, the RDS-WHOIS2-RT completed its work in September 2019 and did not request the data prior to issuing its Final Report. The Board notes should future RDS reviews request that data, ICANN org will provide the information to help inform work, as appropriate. The Board approves this recommendation and notes that no further action is required at this time. etc https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/cct-pending-recs-informing-boar…

1 0

geoff huston on dns abuse
by k claffy Oct. 30, 2020

Oct. 30, 2020

These days "DNS Abuse" is a current topic, particularly in the ICANN world. The phrase describes an effort to engender a level of self-regulation in the DNS supply industry, where behaviors are mainly governed by contractual provisions between the registrant and the registrar and between the registrar and a common registry. It allows various forms of abusive behaviors, including criminal activities, that leverage the DNS to be sanctioned by contractual enforcement, including the takedown of the DNS names. It's a lot like the self-regulatory measures that are common in the finance industry, but without the reporting framework, without any common legal framework for enforcement, and without any penalties for breaches. My suspicion is that it will turn out to be no more effective than the similar measures to undertake self-regulation in the finance sector and probably even more ineffectual than the rather unimpressive results that the banking sector has posted. It's unlikely to be successful in reducing the levels of abusive and criminal behavior that leverage the DNS and the Internet. http://www.circleid.com/posts/20201028-a-look-at-dns-trends-and-what-the-fu…

1 0

Call summary: SSR2 Plenary - 29 October 2020
by Brenda Brewer Oct. 30, 2020

Oct. 30, 2020

Dear SSR2 RT members, Please find attached the plenary call report for SSR2 plenary #126, 29 October 2020 at 14:00 UTC. These high-level notes are designed to help SSR2 Review Team members navigate through the content of the call. They are not meant to be a substitute for the recording or transcript, which are posted on the wiki here: https://community.icann.org/x/swfQC. The transcript usually becomes available 5 - 7 business days after the meeting. With kind regards, Brenda --- Brenda Brewer Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Skype: brenda.brewer.icann

1 0

SSR2 plenary agenda | 29 October 2020 @ 14:00 UTC
by Jennifer Bryce Oct. 26, 2020

Oct. 26, 2020

Dear SSR2 RT members, Below is the agenda for the next SSR2 plenary call, scheduled for Thursday 29 October @ 14:00 - 15:00 UTC. 1. Welcome, roll call, SOI updates 2. End of daylight savings time – discuss if UTC call time should change for plenary meetings 3. Subteam updates (subteam status spreadsheet [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1cOZ1lPXq…> here * Abuse subteam – text will be shared ahead of the meeting * Recommendation 28 – Naveed to provide an update (see document here [drive.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/drive.google.com/file/d/111tFALhqpUbzlIk…>) 4. AOB * Reminder – provide feedback on Appendix D ‘Findings Related to SSR2 Recommendations’ (see Google doc here<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hgz9Zd2A7TLoc1UjDNZ4W756YqCP8JrPNLrGeNj…>) 5. Confirm action items, decisions reached Additional reference documents: * Response to public comments spreadsheet here [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DQpPA0aL…> * SSR2 final report draft here [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1myG9dtYYiL8l…> Please let Brenda know in advance whether any other documents need to be projected. Best, Jennifer -- Jennifer Bryce Project Manager, Review Support and Accountability Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Skype: jennifer.bryce.icann Email: jennifer.bryce(a)icann.org

1 0

Please Review Appendix D - Findings Related to SSR1 Recommendations
by Russ Housley Oct. 26, 2020

Oct. 26, 2020

Reminder! Heather has made a lot of edits to this part of the report. Please review. Please put comments and suggestions (not edits) in the document. Russ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Oct 19, 2020, 6:51 PM -0700 > > Hello all, > > I’ve done some significant editing on the SSR1 Recommendation section, removing all the embedded recommendations (except for SSR1 Rec 6, but more on that below) and putting in pointers to the relevant SSR2 Recommendations that cover the topic of the SSR1 Recommendation. > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hgz9Zd2A7TLoc1UjDNZ4W756YqCP8JrPNLrGeNj… <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hgz9Zd2A7TLoc1UjDNZ4W756YqCP8JrPNLrGeNj…> > > There are still some significant flaws, in particular: > > There is a systemic assumption that if the recommendation is relevant but only partially implemented, then it did not achieve its intended effect. I have no idea if that’s always true or not, because I don’t know what SSR2 thinks the intended effect was supposed to be. > There are not enough citations for many of the statements made in the rationale. > > > Regarding SSR1 Recommendation 6, that’s the only one I was unable to determine which SSR2 Recommendation was supposed to cover that topic (roles and responsibilities for SSAC/RSSAC). I have sent Russ an email asking for clarification on what I should do with this one. > > I know that members of the Abuse sub team are not likely to have time to review this right now, but hopefully others on this ReviewTeam will be able to put some time in this week on this section. This section is a necessary part of our report; your feedback is necessary to make sure we have consensus on the text. > > Thanks! > > Heather Flanagan — Translator of Geek to Human > sphericalcowconsulting.com <https://sphericalcowconsulting.com/>

1 0

FYI - Updated data on access to WHOIS for cybersecurity, DNS abuse etc. needs
by Denise Michel Oct. 19, 2020

Oct. 19, 2020

Data summary attached. Some low-lights: * 79% of WHOIS requests to registrars - 60% of WHOIS requests to thick registries were not fulfilled -- for an aggregate of 25% success rates. * Of the small percentage of contracted parties that fulfill the requests, it takes an average of 7 days, ignoring the time-limited nature of many DNS abuse threats * 91% of Proxy requests for the customer’s contact data were unfulfilled * Phishing-related requests or obviously fraudulent domains (including COVID ones) are rarely fulfilled even for signatories of the (“best practices”) Domain Abuse Framework. Best, Denise

1 0

Request for feedback: Appendix D - Findings Related to SSR1 Recommendations
by Heather Flanagan Oct. 19, 2020

Oct. 19, 2020

Hello all, I’ve done some significant editing on the SSR1 Recommendation section, removing all the embedded recommendations (except for SSR1 Rec 6, but more on that below) and putting in pointers to the relevant SSR2 Recommendations that cover the topic of the SSR1 Recommendation. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hgz9Zd2A7TLoc1UjDNZ4W756YqCP8JrPNLrGeNj… There are still some significant flaws, in particular: 1. There is a systemic assumption that if the recommendation is relevant but only partially implemented, then it did not achieve its intended effect. I have no idea if that’s always true or not, because I don’t know what SSR2 thinks the intended effect was supposed to be. 2. There are not enough citations for many of the statements made in the rationale. Regarding SSR1 Recommendation 6, that’s the only one I was unable to determine which SSR2 Recommendation was supposed to cover that topic (roles and responsibilities for SSAC/RSSAC). I have sent Russ an email asking for clarification on what I should do with this one. I know that members of the Abuse sub team are not likely to have time to review this right now, but hopefully others on this ReviewTeam will be able to put some time in this week on this section. This section is a necessary part of our report; your feedback is necessary to make sure we have consensus on the text. Thanks! Heather Flanagan — Translator of Geek to Human https://sphericalcowconsulting.com

1 0