Comment Close Date | Statement Name | Status | Assignee(s) and | Call for Comments | Call for Comments Close | Vote Announcement | Vote Open | Vote Reminder | Vote Close | Date of Submission | Staff Contact and Email | Statement Number |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
27.12.2013 | Study on Whois Misuse | ADOPTED 12Y, 0N, 0A |
| 23.12.2013 | 03.01.2014 | 06.01.2014 | 06.01.2014 | 09.01.2014 | 10.01.2014 | 11.01.2014 | Mary Wong | AL-ALAC-ST-0114-01-00-EN |
FINAL VERSION TO BE SUBMITTED IF RATIFIED
Please click here to download the PDF below.
FINAL DRAFT VERSION TO BE VOTED UPON BY THE ALAC
The ALAC has studied the WHOIS Misuse Study commissioned by ICANN and executed by researchers from Carnegie Mellon University over the period. We note the study has returned findings that align with individual experience of At-Large constituents plus the evidence of widespread occurrence has validated similar research undertaken by At-Large connected researchers. The question for the ALAC has never been whether misuse was factual. Rather, it was whether the level of misuse warranted measures to reduce or eliminate and, what would be appropriate responses from policy or operational perspectives, in context.
The ALAC is aware that sectors in the ICANN community have weighed in on the results of this study, with one or other concerned questions on the methodology, size of dataset, geographic scope of study and/or the analysis of the data, all intended to undermine the findings. Nothing we have seen to date would have shaken our confidence in this baseline fact; WHOIS misuse is factual and widespread, as the evidence from 44% of sampled registrants across the several domains attest. Given the continued threat this poses to the security and confidence in the use of the Internet, the public interest demands measures to address and abate its impact.
The ALAC will support any useful measure to abate misuse, including but not limited to WHOIS data anti-harvesting techniques. And even as the study identifies some gTLDs as more susceptible than others, we believe that adopting the best practices from every domain that have proven and useful anti-harvesting implementations of WHOIS data would be a useful beginning for a coordinated response from registries and registrars.
FIRST DRAFT SUBMITTED
The ALAC has studied the WHOIS Misuse Study commissioned by ICANN and executed by researchers from Carnegie Mellon University over the period. We note the study has returned findings that align with individual experience of At-Large constituents plus the evidence of widespread occurrence has validated similar research executed by At-Large connected researchers. The question for the ALAC has never been whether misuse was factual. Rather, it was whether the level of misuse warranted measures to reduce or eliminate and, what would be appropriate responses from policy or operational perspectives, in context.
The ALAC is aware that sectors in the ICANN community have weighed in on the results of this study, with one or other concerned questions on the methodology, size of dataset, geographic scope of study and/or the analysis of the data, all intended to undermine the findings. Nothing we have seen to date would have shaken our confidence in this baseline fact; WHOIS misuse is factual and widespread, as the evidence from 44% of sampled registrants across the several domains attest. Given the continued threat this poses to the security and confidence in the use of the Internet, the public interest demands measures to address and abate its impact.
The ALAC will support any useful measure to abate misuse, including but not limited to WHOIS data anti-harvesting techniques. And even as the study identifies some gTLDs as more susceptible than others, we believe that adopting the best practices from every domain that have proven and useful anti-harvesting implementations of WHOIS data would be a useful beginning for a coordinated response from registries and registrars.
1 Comment
Holly Raiche
I agree with this statement. The study is very detailed, with long explanations of their methodology, responses received, etc. Therefore, while criticisms of the study are expected, the study itself fully explains how the conclusions were arrived at. In the shorter term, clearly, anti-harvesting techniques such as limiting Port 43, etc should be used. Interestingly, the use of privacy and proxy services is seen as an anti-harvesting methodolgy. In the longer term, however, the study begs the larger question of why all registration data should be available to everyone, and why the EWG approach of a shield against all data being public isn't a better approach - with the proviso that ALL registration data should be verified, and available on reasonable request (yes, that is a bigger dialogue). But those issues are part of the GNSO discussions on the EWG and the privacy/proxy working groups.
Carlton's statement really says enough at this stage - we support the study and its conclusions and we support the use of anti harvesting techniques.