[NCSG-PC] GNSO Council Accuracy Assignment - Questions to be answered by NCSG

Wed Jan 8 03:58:38 EET 2025

Hi all,

If you recall, Registration data accuracy has been a topic of contention in
the community now for a while. Those who follow the the topic know that the
Accuracy Scoping team was paused by the council due to challenges of
pursuing further work on accuracy, including that

   1. It is unclear whether [the scenarios] would provide useful data to
   inform the Accuracy Scoping Team’s efforts;
   2. The scenarios are not expected to provide data as it relates to
   identity verification of the registrant or veracity of the contact
   information (i.e., the data belongs to the data subject);
   3. The costs associated with a full-scale registrar audit [Scoping Team
   Recommendation #2] may be prohibitive when taking into account the
   relatively low level of insight the audit may yield;
   4. ICANN does not have the authority to mandate collection of nonpublic
   registration data necessary to conduct reviews outside of auditing current
   contractual requirements; and
   5. ICANN may not be able to demonstrate the purpose of some of the data
   processing outweighs the rights of the impacted data subject.

As a result, deliberations on this topic on the council was deferred till
February and an assignment to ask ICANN Org some clarifying legal
questions, and thereafter ask each SG/C to respond to a set of threshold
questions that will help guide the way forward on this topic was agreed by
the council. ICANN Org came back with their response
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/us-east-1.secure-attach.amazon.com/da78dbeb-dd4d-4f3f-96c2-1d5abfe7810b/d3fd2bca-021f-494b-957c-0c800d63f333__;!!PtGJab4!5ebsdR0WRUrjpIzUO8HekPbjqckThf0GWEiIM_7eVuzWwd4NAuc_-nt2-GqtwpE87UIulB_KPGxmS00M_1a2SSvlTw$>
just before the December holidays.

Now therefore, each SG/C is required to respond to the threshold questions
<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/draft/draft-concept-proposal-accuracy-12sep24.pdf>
by Friday 31 January 2025. We forgot to include it for discussion in our
Policy meeting earlier this week. However, I request that members provide
their input via this email thread. Once agreed, we'll forward our response
to the Council. The questions we have to answer are in the link above but
for convenience, I'll list them here below:

   1. *What are concrete and articulable examples of what inaccurate data
   DOES prevent or inhibit, and how does it do so?*
   2. *What are concrete and articulable examples of what inaccurate data
   does NOT prevent?*
   3. *Are there specific stakeholders, industries, or sectors particularly
   vulnerable to the effects of inaccurate registration data? If so, what are
   they and why?*
   4. *Given the examples provided in response to the three questions above
   (if any), please articulate a short problem statement for accuracy. The
   problem statement should consider:*
      - *What is the current problem or challenge?*
      - *What are the consequences of this problem or challenge?*
      - *What is the ultimate objective of working on this problem or
      challenge?*
      - *Considering the limitations of data processing, how do you propose
      to address this problem?*
   5. *Is now the appropriate time to address the problem? For example,
   some stakeholders have mentioned the implementation of NIS2 as an important
   precursor to understanding new accuracy requirements. Should this or other
   examples be considered prior to engaging in potential policy work?*
   6. *Are the ICANN org alternatives proposals worth exploring, such as:*
      - *Provision of historical audit data that measures registrars’
      compliance with accuracy-related provisions in the RAA.*
      - *Engagement with contracted parties and ccTLD operators on
      developments in European policymaking regarding registration
data accuracy.*
   7. *What are the limitations of the ICANN proposals? Why should or
   should they not be pursued?*
   8. *What other possibilities can be explored to move our work on
   Accuracy forward?*

I look forward to your contribution to these questions.

Warmly,
Tomslin

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Feodora Hamza via council <council at icann.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 at 23:11
Subject: [council] Re: Follow-up GNSO Council Accuracy Assignment
To: DiBiase, Gregory <dibiase at amazon.com>, council at gnso.icann.org <
council at gnso.icann.org>

Dear Councilors,

due to technical issues, please see accuracy assignment attached and linked
below.

Accuracy Assignment:
https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2024/draft/draft-concept-proposal-accuracy-12sep24.pdf

Kind regards,

Feodora Hamza

*From: *"DiBiase, Gregory via council" <council at icann.org>
*Reply to: *"DiBiase, Gregory" <dibiase at amazon.com>
*Date: *Thursday, 12 December 2024 at 20:57
*To: *"council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
*Subject: *[council] Follow-up GNSO Council Accuracy Assignment

   - *Attachments protected by Amazon: *
   - Answer to the GNSO questions on accuracy.pdf
   [us-east-1.secure-attach.amazon.com]
   <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/us-east-1.secure-attach.amazon.com/da78dbeb-dd4d-4f3f-96c2-1d5abfe7810b/d3fd2bca-021f-494b-957c-0c800d63f333__;!!PtGJab4!5ebsdR0WRUrjpIzUO8HekPbjqckThf0GWEiIM_7eVuzWwd4NAuc_-nt2-GqtwpE87UIulB_KPGxmS00M_1a2SSvlTw$>
|

   - ATT00001.txt [us-east-1.secure-attach.amazon.com]
   <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/us-east-1.secure-attach.amazon.com/da78dbeb-dd4d-4f3f-96c2-1d5abfe7810b/94d6cb3e-3ab2-446c-a385-9c201a9cffc9__;!!PtGJab4!5ebsdR0WRUrjpIzUO8HekPbjqckThf0GWEiIM_7eVuzWwd4NAuc_-nt2-GqtwpE87UIulB_KPGxmS00M_1ZAKmAJaA$>
|

Amazon has replaced the attachments in this email with download links.
Downloads will be available until January 11, 2025, 19:56 (UTC+00:00). Tell
us what you think [amazonexteu.qualtrics.com]
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/amazonexteu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_ehuz6zGo8YnsRKK__;!!PtGJab4!5ebsdR0WRUrjpIzUO8HekPbjqckThf0GWEiIM_7eVuzWwd4NAuc_-nt2-GqtwpE87UIulB_KPGxmS00M_1Zzdd6ztA$>

For more information click here [docs.secure-attach.amazon.com]
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.secure-attach.amazon.com/guide__;!!PtGJab4!5ebsdR0WRUrjpIzUO8HekPbjqckThf0GWEiIM_7eVuzWwd4NAuc_-nt2-GqtwpE87UIulB_KPGxmS00M_1ZzNkqBbQ$>

Dear Councilors,

I am following up on the attached email from ICANN Org in which they
provided their input on the accuracy assignment.  On 25 October, we shared
the proposed accuracy assignment, which included questions for ICANN org
and the community.

Now that ICANN org has provided responses to the Council’s questions, we
are now sending the remaining questions in the attached proposal to
interested SG/C/ACs for their input. Given the proximity to the holidays,
we propose giving groups until Friday, 31 January 2025 to provide their
input to the Council.

As noted during the Council’s previous discussions on the topic of
accuracy, the Council recognizes the importance of accuracy and is
committed to making progress on this issue. Your group’s responses to these
questions are very important for the Council’s future discussion, and we
strongly encourage your groups to think about these questions and provide
candid responses.

Thank you in advance for your input.

Thanks,

Greg
_______________________________________________
council mailing list -- council at icann.org
To unsubscribe send an email to council-leave at icann.org

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20250108/8fc9a4fc/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: draft-concept-proposal-accuracy-12sep24 (2).pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 50780 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20250108/8fc9a4fc/attachment-0001.pdf>