<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Agreed.<br>
<br>
Nicolas<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2015-10-11 10:54 AM, James Gannon
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:C25AA424-3B26-490B-8D31-D3E4EC3D10EC@cyberinvasion.net"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">I reached out to some of
the registrars and they are not aware of any formal process
that LEAs would go through on the ICANN side, the process
appears to be to merely forward straight to the </font><font
face="Calibri,sans-serif">registrar with no direct
engagement with the LEA in question. We can/should put this
question to Allan Grogan when he visits us as I think its an
interesting one.</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">-Jaes</font></div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri,
sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
</div>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;
font-size: 14px;">
<br>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">
<div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:12pt;
text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none;
BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT:
0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid;
BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span>NCSG-Discuss on
behalf of Rafik Dammak<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Reply-To: </span>Rafik Dammak<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span>Sunday 11 October
2015 at 2:49 p.m.<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span>"<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a></a>"<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span>Re: DIDP
Analysis<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">Hi Tamir,<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2015-10-11 4:10 GMT+09:00 Tamir
Israel <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:tisrael@cippic.ca" target="_blank">tisrael@cippic.ca</a>></span>:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">Thanks Rafik,<br>
<br>
On second though, I think you are probably right.
I know for .CA, LEA requests go directly to CIRA
but now that I think about it, it must be because
of the way our WHOIS is setup. It would make sense
for LEA requests to go to registrars rather than
ICANN.<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>ccTLD space is another world, even more diverse
and unknwon :)</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">If that's the
case though then, as you say, it might still be
worth exploring transparency reports, even if
these end up coming from the GAC or are imposed
onto registrars via ICANN policy. As an
accountability mechanism, these reports are
becoming fairly standard to have in the
telecommunications context..<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>ICANN sounds receiving requests and it happened
that its teams get involved in some operations which
raised the issue about the expansion of ICANN remit
.</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><br>
Not sure if the DIDP process is the most
appropriate mechanism for it though. Any thoughts
on how something like that could be moved forward
(or reasons why it should not be moved forward)
would be appreciated.. There might be a clearer
picture of how to design such a thing after the
dublin meeting (which, regrettably, I cannot
attend).<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>maybe not but the transparency report seems a
good framework to start with if we talk about
compliance and abuse reports. I won't think that
ICANN should push the registrars and registries for
a specific way to do it , but if we can work the
contracted parties on that matter it will be worthy
to explore. there are already some
guidelines/principles/ framework that we can suggest
here to registries and registrars. such transparency
would protect more users interests.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Rafik </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div>
<div class="h5"><br>
<div>On 10/10/2015 9:28 AM, Rafik Dammak
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">Hi Tamir,<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2015-10-10 2:11
GMT+09:00 Tamir Israel <span
dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:tisrael@cippic.ca"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tisrael@cippic.ca">tisrael@cippic.ca</a></a>></span>:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">Perhaps
a single independent
commissioner-type may make the most
sense.<br>
The trick I think would be to ensure
independence. That tends to be<br>
easier to do if there are more than
one, because you can allocate one<br>
per stakeholder group. Still, I
think by encoding some criteria (no<br>
strong industry or ICANN affil for 2
years back or something; nomination<br>
committee w/CS representation;
dedicated funding for independence)
it<br>
can be done.<br>
<br>
Another quick thought here: I did
not see a proactive disclosure
section<br>
in the document. Would it be worth
adding?<br>
<br>
Related, does anyone know if ICANN
handles law enforcement requests or<br>
whether these are handled by the
registrars? If so, it would seem
that<br>
including the obligation to issue
annual LEA transparency reports
would<br>
not be out of line.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>to be honest, it is unclear how
ICANN handle direct requests from
LEA, while we may get more
information from registrars on the
type of requests they get.</div>
<div> there is some work going with
the new Compliance Chief Officer
regarding how to handle requests or
abuse reports (but not necessarily
LEA) . here a blog post with some
updates <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.icann.org/news/blog/update-on-steps-to-combat-abuse-and-illegal-activity"
target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/news/blog/update-on-steps-to-combat-abuse-and-illegal-activity</a>
(there are 2 sessions at ICANN
meeting in wednesday 21st Oct <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://dublin54.icann.org/en/dublin54/schedule/wed-practices-combating-abuse"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://dublin54.icann.org/en/dublin54/schedule/wed-practices-combating-abuse">https://dublin54.icann.org/en/dublin54/schedule/wed-practices-combating-abuse</a></a>
& <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://dublin54.icann.org/en/dublin54/schedule/wed-compliance"
target="_blank">https://dublin54.icann.org/en/dublin54/schedule/wed-compliance</a>
. I invited weeks ago The Compliance
Chief Officer to come to NCSG
meeting in Tuesday 20th Oct so we
can discuss with him.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I would highlight that LEAs have
their GAC Public Safety working
group and it has several sessions in
Dublin meeting too. that was shared
by the LEAs representatives who came
to NCSG meeting in Buenos Aires. it
will be interesting to see what they
are planning to do and push for.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>definitely, the idea of LEA
transparency reports should be
suggested .</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Rafik</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
<div>
<div><br>
On 10/7/2015 8:46 AM, Michael
Karanicolas wrote:<br>
> That's a very interesting
idea. I feel like the structure
of appeals<br>
> is probably the trickiest
conceptual aspect of improving
the DIDP, so<br>
> good to consider
alternatives. I think in part it
would depend on the<br>
> level of demand for
information that ICANN gets, and
how often appeals<br>
> go forward. It's also
important to bear in mind that,
whoever is<br>
> deciding these things, they
need to have access to
absolutely<br>
> everything ICANN has, and a
high level of familiarity with
the inner<br>
> workings of ICANN, so that
they could determine, for
example, whether<br>
> particular information
would compromise the integrity
of ICANN's<br>
> deliberative and
decision-making process in line
with the second<br>
> defined condition for
nondisclosure.<br>
><br>
> This is in addition to the
qualities Karel mentions
(robust, cost<br>
> effective, timely appeals)
- which I also fully agree with.<br>
><br>
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 2:12
PM, Tamir Israel <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:tisrael@cippic.ca"
target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tisrael@cippic.ca">tisrael@cippic.ca</a></a>>
wrote:<br>
>> On 10/6/2015 1:02 PM,
Michael Karanicolas wrote:<br>
>>> This sort of brings
us back to a fundamental
challenge with reforming ICANN's<br>
>>> access to
information system, which is the
need for some sort of analogous
independent branch (I'm not
completely certain the Ombudsman
fits the bill).<br>
>> On this point, I'm not
sure how far we dare go here,
but would it be<br>
>> unreasonable to set up
an arb panel comparable to the
ones private ones<br>
>> used for the UDRP
(only, of course, appointed by a
cross-stakeholder<br>
>> nomination committee
and with strict independence
criteria) for<br>
>> evaluating such things?<br>
>><br>
>> Best,<br>
>> Tamir<br>
>><br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</span>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>