Associated domain check (urgent)

[Tapani Tarvainen]

Agreed.

On Sat, Aug 02, 2025 at 11:07:06AM +0600, Hakikur Rahman (email at HAKIK.ORG) wrote:
> 
> "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."- Farzaneh
> 
> 
> 
> +1 I endorse this statement- Hakikur
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---- On Sat, 02 Aug 2025 10:26:59 +0600 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 

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen