[Igf-team] Global IGF 2017 - NCSG

Sat Apr 29 20:30:19 EEST 2017

Bill,

As I mentioned on the google doc - I polled th ssac and heard back th
following:

* there's an interest and willingness to collaborate on this proposal .
Special ally, there's an interest to bring a Security , operations and
technical perspective (if that is of interest)
* ssac members available

I polled the ssac and At least 2 members got back to me who would be happy
to participate on the panel (in person or virtually)

- the two persons are -
1. Ben Butler from GoDaddy who likely would be able to speak to RDS/Whois ,
domain hijacking and takedown
2. Jeff Bedser , who is more a cyber investigations expert who can speak to
law enforcement , takedown as well as cooperation that's needed when doing
investigations for ip takedowns and cybercrime

* if a DNS operations , DNSSEC or registry operations is also desired, let
me know and I'll teach out directly to others on the ssac who have, in the
past, participated such as Merike Kaeo

* ssac has contacts with law enforcement community . If that perspective is
desired and can be added , let me know to see if I can get the FBI contact
I mentioned earlier to confirm (who likely will attend anyway)

Let me know so I can follow-up accordingly

Regards

Robert

-- 
Robert Guerra

From: Martin Pablo Silva Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>
<mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>
Date: April 29, 2017 at 12:27:48 PM
To: Farell Folly <farellfolly at gmail.com> <farellfolly at gmail.com>
CC: Kuerbis, Brenden N <brenden.kuerbis at pubpolicy.gatech.edu>
<brenden.kuerbis at pubpolicy.gatech.edu>, Robert Guerra
<rguerra at privaterra.org> <rguerra at privaterra.org>, igf-team at lists.ncsg.is
<igf-team at lists.ncsg.is> <igf-team at lists.ncsg.is>, William Drake
<wjdrake at gmail.com> <wjdrake at gmail.com>
Subject:  Re: [Igf-team] Global IGF 2017 - NCSG

Agree 100% on with Bill, unless someone has something already cooked that
> we can go behind, let's reach out to those experts, and hope some others
> ncsg experts follow, thanks James !!! I am not an expert but I think the
> topic is something different, new and concrete compared to other panels and
> our usual work, worth for a try. So even if it is not my field I am more
> than willing to fully support and engage.
>
> If by the end of today we don't have any new opinions I say let's bring
> the experts we have in our contacts. I know there is a civil society
> cibersecurity approach to DNS!
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
>
>
> On 29 Apr 2017 8:37 a.m., "Farell Folly" <farellfolly at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 Martin and William.
>>
>> Best Regards
>> @__f_f__
>> about.me/farell
>> ________________________________.
>> Mail sent from my mobile phone. Excuse for brievety.
>> Le 29 avr. 2017 07:45, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> So if time pressures and switching costs mean that NCSG wants to to
>>> stick with the blue skies idea of DNS security issues for its IGF proposal
>>> this year, we’re going to need some engagement from people who know these
>>> issues well.  James Gannon is here in the group and can certainly help a
>>> lot if he has the bandwidth, not sure who else feels close enough to the
>>> topic.  Folks please speak up if you’re feel you’re in a position to help
>>> lead.
>>>
>>> I would also suggest we try to get some guidance from friendly folks we
>>> know who are subject experts on the issues.  Here’s some suggestions of
>>> people who could a) be speakers if they’re coming to Geneva and willing and
>>> b) either way could help craft a session description and agenda if they’re
>>> inclined:
>>>
>>> 1. Brenden Kuerbis from NCUC/SG (who I’m taking the liberty of Ccing
>>> without asking him first, sorry)
>>>
>>> From the SSAC https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/ssac-biographies-
>>> 2017-02-16-en
>>>
>>> 2. Robert Guerra (also on the Cc as he expressed interest in talking
>>> about security @ IGF in another convo)
>>> 3. Patrik Fältström (SSAC Chair)
>>> 4. Mark Seiden
>>> 5. Suzanne Woolf
>>> 6. Ram Mohan
>>> 7. Don Blumenthal
>>>
>>> If we could get these folks engaged we’d have good guidance and (if
>>> they’re coming and willing) the start of a good panel, with private
>>> sector/technical community/civil society.  It would need geo/gender balance
>>> as well.
>>>
>>> If people agree with this approach we could write to them and try to get
>>> something going.  Choice of format would depend how many bodies we have etc.
>>>
>>> In the meanwhile, Brenden and Robert, your thoughts please.  Martin’s
>>> place holder description would obviously need to be built out and specified
>>> in keeping with the IGF proposal form which asks for agenda and description
>>> of the convo flow etc:
>>>
>>> *The workshop will look at cybersecurity specifically in relation to
>>> DNS, including management interfaces, owner authentication processes,
>>> RDS/whois and related problems like domain hijacking, privacy endangerment,
>>> spam etc, not from purely technical perspective but also in how they should
>>> affect ICANN policy. The idea is that even non-technical people developing
>>> policy should acquire an understanding on how and what kind of security
>>> issues they should consider when making policy decisions.*
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>> On Apr 28, 2017, at 19:27, Martin Pablo Silva Valent <
>>> mpsilvavalent at GMAIL.COM <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>> Because of time we cannot go into detail on each subject, I would
>>> suggest to choose one and just work with it. We may not all be experts but
>>> we should be able to bring them. We can change it to other besides Security
>>> as long as you have already something sort out.  To save time I suggest we
>>> use all the same setting we used last year that was successful. If we can
>>> agree on the subject, the more time consuming and difficult will be to get
>>> the speakers, although her ewe might need Bill guidance, I think we can
>>> change this a little bit later in order to submit it on time. If you
>>> already have a subject to do that we can write down and work around this is
>>> your time to talk. All ideas are welcomed, have always been.
>>>
>>> Here I summarize the question we need to answer so you can just answer
>>> this email instead of going to the doc, I will then consolidate things on
>>> the doc.
>>>
>>> *1) ¿Session Format?**
>>> We can go for the 60 Min Break-out Group Discussions, we can also go for
>>> the 90 minutes it really depends on what we have to do. We could use the
>>> same format that we used last year here.
>>>
>>> *2) Session Format Description: *
>>> The easiest way it to have multi-stakeholder balanced roundtable with
>>> the basic subjects of the agenda and open the floor for in-site/remote
>>> participation. Again, if anyone have in mind an already thought idea for
>>> this just bring it in.
>>>
>>> *3) Proposer and co-proposer: *
>>> NCSG chair, Tapani and who ever is co-hosting the workshop, if we are
>>> going for cybersecurity then it should be someone with an organization
>>> regarding that.
>>>
>>> *4) Speakers*
>>> *Depending on the subject. If you have names for the cybersecurity let’s
>>> start listing that, we can maybe find that co-host there if it is not
>>> already in this list.*
>>>
>>>
>>> *5) Content of the Session * (we outlined ciber security, but you
>>> can use this space if you have an alternative) 5.1) outline for the session*
>>> A workshop in Internet Governance Forum on cybersecurity and DNS.
>>> *5.2) description of the intended agenda for the session and the issues
>>> that will be discussed.*
>>> The workshop will look at cybersecurity specifically in relation to DNS,
>>> including management interfaces, owner authentication processes, RDS/whois
>>> and related problems like domain hijacking, privacy endangerment, spam etc,
>>> not from purely technical perspective but also in how they should affect
>>> ICANN policy. The idea is that even non-technical people developing policy
>>> should acquire an understanding on how and what kind of security issues
>>> they should consider when making policy decisions.
>>>
>>> *6) Relevance of the Issue **
>>> Please provide a concise description of the Internet Governance issue
>>> that your session will explore, including how this issue relates to
>>> Internet governance broadly, as well as to the main theme of IGF 2017:
>>> “Shape Your Digital Future!” In other words, please tell us why this
>>> workshop is important to include in the IGF programme.
>>>
>>>
>>> *7) Interventions *Same model as last year
>>>
>>> *8) Diversity*
>>>
>>> *9) Here we need people that are going to be in the IGF already:*
>>>
>>>
>>> *9.1) Onsite Moderator  9.2) Online Moderator  9.3) Rapporteur*
>>>
>>>
>>> *10) Online Participation * Yes, we will have remote acces and
>>> moderators to que any on-line participation into the room.*
>>>
>>> *11) Discussion facilitation *We can use the same model as last year
>>>
>>>
>>> *Past IGF Participation*
>>> *History in IGF :* How many other workshop has the NCSG and
>>> Co-organziers have? Report Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *VOLUNTARY INFORMATION / RESOURCES FOR PROPOSERS*
>>> XVIII. Sustainable Development Goals
>>>
>>> If your workshop proposal is based upon one or more of the UN
>>> Sustainable Development Goals, please indicate which numbers here. Note
>>> that this information is voluntary and collected for programming purposes
>>> only; this item has no bearing on the MAG’s evaluation of your workshop
>>> proposal.
>>>
>>> XIX. Connecting with IGF Intersessional Groups & NRIs
>>>
>>> If you would like to incorporate content/speakers related to the IGF’s
>>> intersessional work or the National and Regional Initiatives (NRIs) into
>>> your workshop, please indicate which of the following would be of interest.
>>> To the extent possible, the MAG/IGF Secretariat will provide contacts for
>>> your outreach to pertinent points of contact.
>>>
>>> Best Practice Forums
>>>
>>> Information
>>>
>>> Dynamic Coalitions
>>>
>>> Information
>>>
>>> National and Regional Initiatives
>>>
>>> Information
>>>
>>> XX. Connecting with International or Other Relevant Organizations
>>>
>>> If you are interested in involving in your workshop any of the numerous
>>> organizations or subject matter experts based in Geneva (UN Agencies, NGOs,
>>> academia, think tanks, etc.), please indicate your interest above. Please
>>> find a selection of such organizations at: http://dig.watch/igf2017 For
>>> comprehensive information on “International Geneva” please consult:
>>> http://www.genIGF <http://www.genigf/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 28, 2017, at 4:42 AM, Farell Folly <farellfolly at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> So what do we decide? Regarding the short deadline, we should take a
>>> decision  today  whether we do the initial proposal or not (and quickly
>>> vote for another, if not).
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>> @__f_f__
>>> about.me/farell
>>> ________________________________.
>>> Mail sent from my mobile phone. Excuse for brievety.
>>> Le 26 avr. 2017 2:43 PM, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> Well, I didn't mean to upset the apple cart here, especially since at
>>>> the outset I’d suggested we might consider security.  But I’m looking now
>>>> at a multi-person consensus process that has to finish a week from today,
>>>> coupled with a topic on which many of us may not be subject matter experts,
>>>> and I’m just wondering if this is sensible or we should try something that
>>>> would come a lot easier to us?  I organized I think seven approved workshop
>>>> proposals for NCUC and NCSG between 2013-2015 and they were each time
>>>> consuming. So I’m inclined to say that if NCSG is going to get something
>>>> out quickly that meets the MAG’s criteria there’s no time for navel
>>>> gazing.  Take a topic we know well and can populate easily and start doing
>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> We’ve done a number of these on civil society experiences in ICANN and
>>>> their wider implications so that might be a bit tired by now.  But maybe a
>>>> hot substantive issue, like ICANN jurisdiction, or CS @ ICANN as a model
>>>> for other IG, or development aspects of ICANN, etc…?
>>>>
>>>> BD
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 26, 2017, at 15:22, Louise Marie Hurel <
>>>> louise.marie.hsd at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> Agree with Bill when he says that it is challenging to pin down
>>>> security @ ICANN. We should keep in mind that not all people who attend the
>>>> IGF are familiar with discussions at ICANN -- and if it is challenging for
>>>> us (at least for me) to understand what are the borderlines
>>>> of cybersecurity within ICANN, imagine for people outside it. However, I do
>>>> believe that this session could contribute to a broader discussion about
>>>> cybersecurity governance (and thus the identification of overlapping spaces
>>>> for collaboration and interaction with other actors/institutions within
>>>> this field).
>>>> If the breakout session is the desired format, I'd suggest that we need
>>>> to think about how we are going to make it more inclusive in the sense of
>>>> leveraging between "going deeper into DNS security" (for example) and
>>>> "interacting with a wider public" -- as Martin suggested: "The idea is
>>>> that even non-technical people developing policy should acquire an
>>>> understanding of how and what kind of security issues they should consider
>>>> when making policy decisions."
>>>>
>>>> I know most of our agendas are loaded with calls, but perhaps
>>>> scheduling a one might help us in tackling some of these points more
>>>> rapidly.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Louise
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2017-04-26 5:23 GMT-03:00 AbdulRasheed Tamton <rasheedt.c at stc.com.sa>:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Happy to be part of the list.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Can anyone put some pointers for the subject so that it would be more
>>>>> easier for us to start with. I have already read mail from Martin and
>>>>> others but still would like to get the above, if anyone can really do it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> BR,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rasheed Tamton.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> * From:* Igf-team [mailto:igf-team-bounces at lists.ncsg.is] *On Behalf
>>>>> Of* Farell Folly
>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 26, 2017 10:56 AM
>>>>> *To:* William Drake
>>>>> *Cc:* igf-team at lists.ncsg.is
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Igf-team] Global IGF 2017 - NCSG
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks  Martins for reaching. @William is right about how to choose
>>>>> the topic and what are the reasons behind the choice of Security and DNS.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suggest we give today (NLT tomorrow) as deadline for anyone who
>>>>> would like to make any other suggestion. Otherwise, me must try and
>>>>> increase our chance to  win application  for this one.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>> @__f_f__
>>>>> about.me/farell
>>>>> ________________________________.
>>>>> Mail sent from my mobile phone. Excuse for brievety.
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 25 avr. 2017 15:53, "William Drake" <wjdrake at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the boot-up Martin.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I’m in the middle of organizing another IGF workshop proposal at the
>>>>> moment so I thought I’d flag a couple things. It looks like we have over 30
>>>>> people in this group, which is great. I don’t know if everyone is equally
>>>>> familiar with how the IGF workshop proposal process works, or how the
>>>>> Multistakeholder Advisory Committee (MAG) evaluates proposals.  But it is
>>>>> an increasingly competitive and difficult business, they usually get well
>>>>> over 200 proposals for under 100 workshop slots, so it’s important to
>>>>> maximize the fit with their multiple and increasingly time-consuming
>>>>> guidelines.  There are about five documents at the URL Martin shared one
>>>>> could look at in this regard.  Bottom line, the proposal needs to be crisp
>>>>> and provocative in content; it needs co-sponsors from other organizations
>>>>> (preferably not civil society); the speakers need to be very
>>>>> multistakeholder and diverse (geo/gender/perspective/etc), and we have to
>>>>> have full contact and other details on them; there needs to be a plan for
>>>>> remote participation; all the roles must be filled, so we need names of
>>>>> people we know will come to Geneva in December; and so on.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  All a reasonably tall order given that the deadline for submission is
>>>>> a week from tomorrow.  This being the case, it will be important to reach
>>>>> agreement quickly on things like text so that outreach to potential
>>>>> speakers, co-sponsors etc. can begin in earnest.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I see Martin has indicated on the Google doc the choice of format as
>>>>> 60 minute break out session.  I’ve organized workshops at every IGF except
>>>>> last year (including a number of them for NCUC and NCSG) and have never
>>>>> done one of these, I’ve always done 90 minute panels or large roundtables.
>>>>> Maybe first we should talk about the format we want?  Also, are we set on
>>>>> security? I suggested it on the list when we were chatting about
>>>>> possibilities, but I’m not sure how easy it will be for us to organize
>>>>> something on security @ ICANN in the time available, what are the
>>>>> overarching questions we want to explore, what kinds of people could we
>>>>> get, etc.  So maybe it’d make sense to sort such threshold issues up front?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bill
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 16:28, Martin Pablo Silva Valent <
>>>>> mpsilvavalent at GMAIL.COM <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I sent this email wrong on sunday to the igf-team-request@ email.
>>>>> Here goes right, sorry for that.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Welcome to the email-list that Tapani so thoughtfully created for us
>>>>> to work on the NCSG Global IGF 2017 Workshop Proposal. A few month ago,
>>>>> after a very successful workshop in the Global IGF 2016, we lunched once
>>>>> again the idea to do a workshop for the 2017 IGF, after a few rounds of
>>>>> ideas in discussions we submitted the request to ICANN and they approved
>>>>> our project.At the end of this email I copy the details that outline the
>>>>> idea that we shared with ICANN, originally given by William Drake (a.k.a
>>>>> Bill) in the NCSG list among other good ones.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> For those who might be new to the process, we now have to draft and
>>>>> present a Workshop proposal to the MAG in order to get approved and be able
>>>>> to do it in the IGF meeting. Since the deadline to submit is May 3, we
>>>>> thought it would be wise to have our final draft for April 30 (which is end
>>>>> of next week). The time is very tight, but it is what it is.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Here you can visit the terms and basic information for the proposal:
>>>>> https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/i
>>>>> gf-2017-call-for-workshop-proposals
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I created a googledoc with the official template of the proposal we
>>>>> have to submit, I propose we work on it as we move forward:
>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/10YJE8rT_yXNgtMD
>>>>> ONb8tf4GMYMdmCIdcBIN6XOQSwo0/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I propose that the we try to channel the edits trough me on this list
>>>>> and just do comments on the google doc to not overwrite things.
>>>>>
>>>>> What we need to do now:
>>>>>
>>>>> *First: *Defining the substantive focus more precisely and linking it
>>>>> clearly to ICANN stuff so it’s not redundant with all the other
>>>>> cybersecurity proposals the MAG will be reviewing.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Second*: Identifying speakers;
>>>>>
>>>>> So, based on what we already outlined, we need to tackle that *First* task.
>>>>> I encourage you to read the outline below, the form in the google doc and
>>>>> the resources in the IGF web I link above. Once we finish that we can start
>>>>> making a pool of speakers to contact. I will be filling the draft as we
>>>>> move forward and you can comment the doc if you see something wrong or want
>>>>> to propose an answer or writing.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Each day I will try push the work so sorry in advanced if I spam a
>>>>> little this email list, but we only have a few days to draft this out.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards to all,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Martín Silva
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Outline of the Workshop Idea:*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *1)Activity: Please describe your proposed activity in detail*
>>>>> A workshop in Internet Governance Forum on cybersecurity and DNS.
>>>>>
>>>>> The workshop will look at cybersecurity specifically in relation to
>>>>> DNS, including management interfaces, owner authentication
>>>>> processes, RDS/whois and related problems like domain hijacking, privacy
>>>>> endangerment, spam etc, not from purely technical perspective but also
>>>>> in how they should affect ICANN policy. The idea is that even non-technical
>>>>> people developing policy should acquire an understanding on how and what
>>>>> kind of security issues they should consider when making policy decisions.
>>>>>
>>>>> *2) Strategic Alignment. Which area of ICANN’s Strategic Plan does
>>>>> this request support?*
>>>>>
>>>>> Support a healthy, stable and resilient unique identifier ecosystem.
>>>>>
>>>>> *3) Demographics. What audience(s), in which geographies, does your
>>>>> request target?*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> All ICANN regional groups (NCSG has members in more than
>>>>> 100 countries).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *4) Deliverables. What arethe desired outcomes of your proposed
>>>>> activity?*
>>>>> Raised awareness about cybersecurity issues related to DNS and their
>>>>> policy implications; increased engagement in security work; report feeding
>>>>> into ICANN processes as well as other cybersecurity discussions.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *5) Metrics. What measurements will you use to determine whether your
>>>>> activity achieves its desired outcomes?*
>>>>> Attendance, both onsite and online; increased participation on related
>>>>> working groups in ICANN and elsewhere; outcome document (report) that's
>>>>> useful as input to other fora like IGF Cybersecurity Best Practices forum.
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Igf-team mailing list
>>>>> Igf-team at lists.ncsg.is
>>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/igf-team
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Igf-team mailing list
>>> Igf-team at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/igf-team
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ***********************************************
>>> William J. Drake
>>> International Fellow & Lecturer
>>>   Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
>>>   University of Zurich, Switzerland
>>> william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists),
>>>   www.williamdrake.org
>>> ************************************************
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Igf-team mailing list
>>> Igf-team at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/igf-team
>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/igf-team/attachments/20170429/c962db99/attachment-0001.html>