Questions to Board

[Stephanie Perrin]

+1 Amr

Stephanie

On 2018-10-05 06:45, Amr Elsadr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don’t believe that combating cybercrime is within the scope of 
> ICANN’s mandate, nor do I believe it should be. There are responsible 
> authorities out there who are meant to do this. ICANN is a 
> private-sector not-for-profit corp. meant to be coordinating the 
> Internet’s unique identifiers, not hunting down cybercriminals.
>
> There are some who interpret ICANN’s mission of ensuring a stable, 
> secure and reliable DNS to include issues such as cybercrime, however, 
> I find this to be an expansive interpretation.
>
> I’m not saying cybercrime is a good thing that we don’t need to worry 
> about. I’m just saying that we shouldn’t encourage ICANN to play the 
> role of cyber-cops. I generally agree with the approach briefly 
> described by Ayden below. There may be times when LEAs may need access 
> to redacted gTLD registration data. Under the right circumstances, 
> this access may be allowed in order to facilitate investigations. As 
> Ayden said, this requires accountability of the actors involved, and 
> needs to be specifically proportionate to their needs.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Amr
>
>> On Oct 5, 2018, at 12:02 PM, Ade Bo <adebodea at GMAIL.COM 
>> <mailto:adebodea at GMAIL.COM>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Ayden,
>>
>> I totally agree on the balance necessary i am just wondering how we 
>> could help improve or what could we suggest to be done better or in a 
>> different manner so we can tackle somehow the civil liberties and at 
>> the same time think of the cybercrime issue that is on the rise.
>> I totally agree with your statement Ayden, although just because one 
>> cop or maybe a few are doing or have done unspeakable things it does 
>> not mean that we can do justice without them. Its sad to see such 
>> cases but i am sure great people are out there fighting crime so what 
>> would be the best solution?
>>
>> Kind Regards
>>
>> Adela
>>
>>> On 5 Oct 2018, at 10:59, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com 
>>> <mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi there,
>>>
>>> We do need to strike the right balance between privacy and security; 
>>> it doesn’t have to be an either/or situation. We can protect civil 
>>> liberties while also addressing cybercrime that may exist in the 
>>> Domain Name System.
>>>
>>> Indeed, when we have talked about the future availability of domain 
>>> name registration data, the NCSG has acknowledged that law 
>>> enforcement may have a need to access these records, because they do 
>>> have a need to tackle cybercrime. But they should do so in a 
>>> proportionate and accountable manner.
>>>
>>> Just yesterday we learned of a French police officer 
>>> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/french-police-officer-caught-selling-confidential-police-data-on-the-dark-web/> who 
>>> was selling confidential police data on the dark web. This is not a 
>>> common occurrence, but it goes to show why we cannot blindly trust 
>>> law enforcement to do ‘the right thing’ and to use their access for 
>>> ‘good’ purposes.
>>>
>>> We want people to have the freedom to use the DNS to express their 
>>> thoughts and to assemble freely, and while some people might abuse 
>>> it from time to time, that alone is not reason enough to allow 
>>> governments or others to trample over our civil and personal liberties.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Ayden
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 5 Oct 2018, at 09:38, Ade Bo <adebodea at gmail.com 
>>>> <mailto:adebodea at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello Johan,
>>>>
>>>> I guess you might be right in some why, but lets just say it’s not 
>>>> just about the rights of the good people registering genuine 
>>>> businesses and doing good. Lets just say people register domains 
>>>> not just for the good but also for harming others, like children.
>>>> In that case till now even if they were not the ones that were 
>>>> supposed to take care of these issues they tried to help.
>>>> If we think that ICANN changed and switched so have businesses, 
>>>> criminals and other things together with the technological 
>>>> evolution. Furthermore if we think that if ICANN would not have 
>>>> hands on the domain name registration others will not either we are 
>>>> really far from the truth.
>>>>
>>>> Sometimes we want to do good and be free of surveil but we also do 
>>>> harm for those who have no protection from the criminals. This 
>>>> brings me to the see that there is a huge gap between what we want 
>>>> and what people are capable of doing. We want total freedom but are 
>>>> we ready to fight the crime online as well?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 5 Oct 2018, at 09:22, Johan Helsingius <julf at JULF.COM 
>>>>> <mailto:julf at JULF.COM>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 05-10-18 00:46, Kathy Kleiman wrote:
>>>>>> I hope I'm not too late too.  /I would like to know why ICANN has
>>>>>> decided to re-make itself from being a manager and custodian of the
>>>>>> Internet infrastructure to being the data miner of the domain name
>>>>>> registration data of 140+ million gTLD domain name registrants? 
>>>>>> When and
>>>>>> why did our priorities and goals so radically change and how can we
>>>>>> change them back?/
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess it happened at the same time enforcement of intellectual
>>>>> property become one of the core purposes of ICANN.
>>>>>
>>>>> Julf
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20181015/6698fe97/attachment.htm>