Dear SSR2 RT members, Please find below ICANN org’s response to the question asked by Denise in her email below. Question: ICANN reportedly will be adding supplemental questions and criteria on DNS abuse to the registrar accreditation application (sounds promising). Please provide SSR2 with information about this including: the final or draft supplemental text; how ICANN will assess the answers; whether and how the answers will factor into ICANN’s decision to approve or deny an application; how ICANN will track and hold an approved registrar accountable for the registrar’s statements in the application regarding how the applicant intends to address DNS abuse as a registrar; and whether ICANN has plans to add similar supplemental DNS abuse questions and criteria to registrar contract renewals (why, why not). ICANN org response: Given the increased focus by the ICANN Community on DNS abuse and identifying measures to mitigate it, ICANN is in the process of supplementing the Registrar Accreditation Agreement application and criteria with further detail around the mitigation of DNS abuse (Question 35). The expansion of this question aims to elicit the applicant’s understanding of the potential for DNS abuse in a registrar’s sponsored domain names, registrars’ abuse-related responsibilities, and how the applicant intends to address DNS abuse as a registrar. While this multi-part question is still being refined, the focus is more on the applicant’s understanding of its contractual obligations rather than specifics of how the applicant will meet the obligations. The published registrar accreditation application will be updated to when the question has been finalized. Answers to the DNS abuse question will be reviewed and the applicant approved only if ICANN feels they have demonstrated that they will meet their obligations. Approved applicants will be held to the same criteria detailed in the entire Registrar Accreditation Agreement. Best, Jennifer From: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com> Date: Tuesday, May 5, 2020 at 11:43 PM To: Jennifer Bryce <jennifer.bryce@icann.org>, "ssr2-review@icann.org" <ssr2-review@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [Ssr2-review] ICANN Organization Blog on DNS Abuse Hi, Jennifer. Please also include the following addition: ICANN reportedly will be adding supplemental questions and criteria on DNS abuse to the registrar accreditation application (sounds promising). Please provide SSR2 with information about this including: the final or draft supplemental text; how ICANN will assess the answers; whether and how the answers will factor into ICANN’s decision to approve or deny an application; how ICANN will track and hold an approved registrar accountable for the registrar’s statements in the application regarding how the applicant intends to address DNS abuse as a registrar; and whether ICANN has plans to add similar supplemental DNS abuse questions and criteria to registrar contract renewals (why, why not). Thanks, Denise From: Ssr2-review <ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jennifer Bryce <jennifer.bryce@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, May 5, 2020 at 2:41 PM To: SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ssr2-review] ICANN Organization Blog on DNS Abuse Dear Russ, Thanks for your note. We’ll now share the questions with the relevant SMEs within the org and will provide the review team with an expected response delivery date as soon as we have this information. Per the standard process on requests for information, we’ll track the request/response as an action item on the wiki<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_A...>. Best, Jennifer From: Ssr2-review <ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Date: Tuesday, May 5, 2020 at 10:12 AM To: ICANN SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ssr2-review] ICANN Organization Blog on DNS Abuse I would be interested in the answers to these questions. What is needed for staff to get the Q&A process started? Russ From: Ssr2-review <ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> Reply-To: Denise Michel <denisemichel@fb.com<mailto:denisemichel@fb.com>> Date: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 at 1:36 PM To: "danko.jevtovic@board.icann.org<mailto:danko.jevtovic@board.icann.org>" <danko.jevtovic@board.icann.org<mailto:danko.jevtovic@board.icann.org>>, SSR2 <ssr2-review@icann.org<mailto:ssr2-review@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Ssr2-review] ICANN Organization Blog on DNS Abuse Thanks for sharing, the ICANN blog<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_blog...>, Danko. It’s highly relevant to SSR2 work, as well as to what several SSR2 members are doing in our day jobs to stop domain abuse. On the whole, the blog is an expression of intent to act. While welcomed, there are no specifics nor a time table for when the internal and community actions will occur. This raises several questions related to SSR2 work for ICANN Staff to answer (and a couple for the Board), which are listed below. Would SSR2 be able to get expedited answers to these? It would be useful for all concerned if we could factor this into our SSR2 work. Thanks Denise 1) The blog says: " the domain names and the data collected by the system will be shared with parties who are in a position to take action, such as registrars and registries, and in some cases with national and international law enforcement organizations." * What specific actions is ICANN expecting registries and registrars to take? * For example, is ICANN encouraging suspension of name resolution or of the registration, or the registrant account? * Will ICANN ask registrars and registries to report on the efficacy of these actions? If so, when and on what cadence? * ICANN should publicly report per registrar & registry action: * How many names has it identified as suspicious/malicious? * What’s the number of domain names that each registry/registrar has taken action against? And what action was taken? * When can we expect ICANN public reporting and on what cadence? 2) What distinguishes ICANN's participation in the face of the pandemic from how they've participated in the past? * The blog says: “ICANN Compliance uses data collected in audits (described in more detail below) to assess whether registries and registrars are adhering to their DNS security threat obligations.” * What will Compliance do that it has not done until now? * Is Compliance making audit data associated with US-based registrars available to States Attorney Generals and the US Attorney General? 3) The blog states (the obvious) that ICANN isn’t a regulator of Internet content, but it doesn’t address ICANN’s public interest remit. Multiple entities have asked ICANN to better govern the manner in which domain names are registered, and now especially, everyone is asking ICANN to hold contracted parties to greater accountability to prevent domains from being registered by malicious actors, especially for pandemic-related fraud and abuse. This requires greater scrutiny during the registration process. * What actions are ICANN taking that address this? * In addition to high volumes of fraudulent domain names containing pandemic-related strings with which criminals try to fool Internet users, random looking or otherwise auto-generated names that are easy to register in volume and are being used by the hundreds to perpetuate pandemic-related phishing attacks. What actions are ICANN taking that addresses this? * Recommended actions contained in SSR2’s draft report could help mitigate pandemic-related domain name abuse. Is the ICANN Board and staff reconsidering any of these actions? * Recommendations from others over the last few years also would help mitigate pandemic-related domain name abuse – especially the substantially increased phishing attacks that harm users. Is the ICANN Board and staff reconsidering any of these actions? Including: - will ICANN move to ensure domain name registrant data is validated? Or at least implement cross-field validation? - will ICANN put in place an Acceptable Use Policy that applies specifically to parties that register large numbers of domains, that requires registrants to apply for (and be validated for) bulk registration services? Further, will ICANN put in place an obligation to distinguish domain names registered by legal entities from those registered by natural persons, classify parties that use bulk registration services as legal entities, and require unredacted access to the registration data of legal entities? - will ICANN maintain and publish a current list of validated bulk registrants (who are from above defined as not natural persons)? - will ICANN disallow registration transactions that involve large numbers of random-looking algorithmic domain names? - will ICANN disallow, for a period of one year, the re-registration of any bulk-registered domain name that has been used in a criminal cyberattack? On Apr 21, 2020, at 11:44 AM, danko.jevtovic@board.icann.org<mailto:danko.jevtovic@board.icann.org> wrote: ICANN Organization Blog on DNS Abuse https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann-org-s-multifaceted-response-to-dns-abu... [icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_blog...> Danko