[NCSG-PC] Fwd: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] @EXT: RE: IMPORTANT: Invitation for Poll from 9 January Meeting

Mon Jan 22 21:48:39 EET 2018

Thanks Stephanie for raising this issue. We can discuss this and see what
we can propose and which policy comment we should consider to monitor in
the future. I think this has also many links with the GDPR.

Le mar. 16 janv. 2018 à 08:00, Stephanie Perrin <
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> a écrit :

> Normally I would not pester the PC with every twitch and stumble of the
> RDS working group...but we are now in some important discussions as to
> whether law enforcement investigation is a valid reason for the collection
> of information in the RDS.  We just actually got a consensus agreement it
> was NOT....which surprised me.  However, EUROPOL, who was the driving force
> behind the dreadful 2007 LE demand for data, is coming out of their corner,
> and the IP lawyers will be quick to support.  A discussion at our next
> policy meeting might be good....I attach the letter from report which
> contains the 2009 LEA communications  for your perusal, see page 129 .
> Steph
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] @EXT: RE: IMPORTANT: Invitation for Poll from
> 9 January Meeting
> Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 13:30:04 +0000
> From: Mounier, Grégory <gregory.mounier at europol.europa.eu>
> <gregory.mounier at europol.europa.eu>
> To: 'Chuck' <consult at cgomes.com> <consult at cgomes.com>, '
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org' <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> I will not be able to join the call tomorrow so I thought that I should
> drop an email to the list to explain why I voted against the proposed
> possible WG Agreement according to which “*Criminal Activity/DNS Abuse –
> Investigation is NOT a legitimate purpose for requiring collection of
> registration data, but maybe a legitimate purpose of using some data
> collected for other purposes*.”
>
> I think that there are a number of rationales/grounds - including in
> ICANN’s Bylaws - to argue that in fact, investigating criminal activity and
> DNS Abuse *IS* a legitimate purpose for requiring the collection of
> registration data.
>
> Some of these rationales have been mentioned during the discussion on the
> mailing list and during the call on 9th January. Unfortunately, I think
> that the proposed possible WG agreement does not take into consideration
> these rationales. I specifically disagree with the assumption that we
> should make a distinction between 1) the purpose of collecting the data and
> 2) the purpose for using the data collected for other purposes (manage
> domain registrations).
>
> The reason why I disagree with making this distinction is that it leads to
> artificially reduce the importance of a valid and legitimate purpose of the
> WHOIS system, acknowledged by ICANN Bylaws: addressing malicious abuse of
> the DNS and providing a framework to address appropriate law enforcement
> needs. (ICANN’s mandate is to “ensure the stable and secure operation of
> the internet’s unique identifier systems”[1]
> <#m_3009014289960177855__ftn1> + WHOIS data is essential for “the
> legitimate needs of law enforcement” and for “promoting consumer trust.”
> [2] <#m_3009014289960177855__ftn2> ). In its document on the three
> compliance models issued last Friday[3] <#m_3009014289960177855__ftn3>,
> ICANN has explicitly included: addressing the needs of law enforcement,
> investigation of cybercrime and DNS abuse as legitimate purposes of the
> WHOIS system.
>
> If one of the purpose of the WHOIS system is to support a framework to
> address issues involving domain name registrations, including investigation
> of cybercrime and DNS abuse, it can be argued that investigating criminal
> activity and DNS abuse IS a legitimate purpose for requiring the collection
> of registration data. Likewise, I think that requiring collection of
> registration data to prevent crime is NOT beyond ICANN's mandate because
> this data is essential for ICANN to fulfil its mandate.
>
> I have attached a list of relevant references supporting this point of
> view taken from ICANN’s Bylaws and the GDPR.
>
>
>
> I hope that you’ll find this contribution helpful and I’m looking forward
> to reading the transcript of the next call J.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> Gregory Mounier
>
> Europol
>
> European Cybercrime Centre
>
> +31 6 55782743 <+31%206%2055782743>
>
>
>
> *From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
> <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Chuck
> *Sent:* 12 January 2018 15:21
> *To:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] FW: IMPORTANT: Invitation for Poll from 9
> January Meeting
> *Importance:* High
>
>
>
> The response to this week’s poll is particularly low so I strongly
> encourage more members to respond so that we have enough data to help us in
> our meeting next week.  Thanks to those who have already responded.
>
>
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> *From:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
> <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>] *On Behalf Of *Marika Konings
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 10, 2018 7:27 AM
> *To:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> *Subject:* [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] IMPORTANT: Invitation for Poll from 9
> January Meeting
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> In follow-up to this week’s WG meeting, *all RDS PDP WG Members* are
> encouraged to participate in the following poll:
>
>
>
> https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/VM6S8YK
>
>
>
> Responses should be submitted through the above URL. For offline
> reference, a PDF of poll questions can also be found at:
>
>
>
>
> https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/74580034/Poll-from-9January-Call.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1515544361000&api=v2
>
>
>
> *This poll will close at COB Saturday 13 January. *
>
>
>
> Please note that you *must be a WG Member* to participate in polls. If
> you are a WG Observer wishing to participate in polls, you must first
> contact gnso-secs at icann.org to upgrade to WG Member.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Marika
>
>
>
> *Marika Konings*
>
> *Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation
> for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) *
>
> *Email: **marika.konings at icann.org* <marika.konings at icann.org>
>
>
>
> *Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO*
>
> *Find out more about the GNSO by taking our **interactive courses*
> <http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso>* and visiting the **GNSO Newcomer
> pages*
> <http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>
> *. *
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> [1] <#m_3009014289960177855__ftnref1> ICANN Bylaws Article One, Section
> 1.1, Mission.
>
> [2] <#m_3009014289960177855__ftnref2> ICANN Bylaws, Registration
> Directory Services Review, §4.6(e).
>
> [3] <#m_3009014289960177855__ftnref3>
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/interim-models-gdpr-compliance-12jan18-en.pdf
> *******************
>
> DISCLAIMER : This message is sent in confidence and is only intended for
> the named recipient. If you receive this message by mistake, you may not
> use, copy, distribute or forward this message, or any part of its contents
> or rely upon the information contained in it.
> Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete the relevant
> e-mails from any computer. This message does not constitute a commitment by
> Europol unless otherwise indicated.
>
> *******************
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>

-- 
Regards
@__f_f__
https://www.linkedin.com/in/farellf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180122/6a4e27a3/attachment.htm>