Important: Accuracy headways

[farzaneh badii]

*Dear NCSG,*

Sorry to send you so many important emails! As you may know, a small *GNSO
Council working group on accuracy* has recently been launched.

In our first meeting, we discussed a data point from the informal report
which stated:
*“Earlier validation of registrant data can lead to a possible 70%
reduction in maliciousness.”*

It’s important to recognize that registrants are already required to
validate their data or risk domain suspension by their registrar. At the
same time, we want to make clear that *accuracy should not be equated with
identification*, and we should push back against any assumption that
validation necessarily involves revealing the registrant’s identity.

We discussed some potential approaches to improve validation while
preserving *contactability*:

   -

   One idea was *standardizing validation timelines*, such as reducing the
   14-day window to 7 days. Personally, I feel a bit uneasy about increasing
   pressure on registrants through shorter deadlines, so I believe it’s
   important to explore *complementary measures*.
   -

   A stronger focus on *registrant education* could help. Rather than
   relying on generic outreach like webinars, I think *clear, timely
   forewarnings* and explanations of the reasons behind
   validation—communicated directly through the registration process—may be
   more effective and user-friendly.

Let me know what you think—we’re keen to hear your ideas. Apologies for the
short notice, but any feedback would be very welcome and helpful!
Best regards,


Farzaneh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20250528/e6e6caee/attachment.htm>