Associated domain check (urgent)

[dorothy g]

Dear Farzaneh, I agree with your position. We need greater transparency
before agreeing to adding associated domain checks.

On Sat, 2 Aug 2025 at 04:27, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi PC and NCSG
>
> I know this is late but I want to make a last minute proposal to remove
> our support for associated domain check investigation as a possible dns
> abuse mitigation.
>
>
> I wanted to flag my concern regarding the proposal to include associated
> domain checks as part of DNS abuse mitigation measures.I want to remove
> this support from the small team report but we are late. But weigh in on
> this any way and I see what I can do with the report. Of course if you dont
> share my concern then we go with supporting the investigation on this.
>
>
> At NCSG, we have consistently emphasized the importance of due process in
> DNS abuse mitigation—both at the point of registration and during
> enforcement. Introducing associated domain checks risks enabling overly
> broad or arbitrary enforcement, particularly without robust safeguards to
> ensure that registrants are informed, given an opportunity to respond, and
> protected from collateral harm.
>
>
> Such measures could inadvertently result in disproportionate blocking,
> targeting legitimate registrants through bulk association-based criteria,
> and undermining the principles of fairness, transparency, and
> accountability that we have been advocating for.
>
>
> I recommend that we do not support adding associated domain checks unless
> and until there are clear, transparent, and consistently applied due
> process mechanisms in place.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
>
> Farzaneh
>


-- 

stay well, kind regards
Dorothy Gordon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20250802/ddbafda2/attachment.htm>