Page History

Staff to update the work plan based on the review team’s new completion date.

Q: It would be great if we could get updates on SSAC recommendations in SAC101v2, SAC097,  and the 4 suggestions in :

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system_files_files_ssac2019-2D02-2D03may19-2Den.pdf&d=DwICAg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=VuRMFw6YascG5ysc1jEHBZgGTtD6QSLrFmqdvMx5FM8&m=BbASPz11QOHrRR5GgjJOp5C9L51Y_6k_tF1cLAskF2Y&s=FnnX_E-dhahAAb2ZkNVh9WqJvF14cFkJXQ2WR8XQXx4&e=

1. "ICANN Org issue guidance to all registry operators, clarifying expectations for reporting port 43 queries and RDAP queries. The guidance should make clear the purposes and goals of the data collection and the contractual obligations.
2. SSAC believes that a purpose of gathering the data is to document queries made by the users (consumers) of the registration data service. Registry  operators should exclude the queries they make to their own systems.
3. It is vital that ICANN collect valid, accurate data regarding RDAP queries. The WHOIS query data is unreliable, but the move to RDAP offers an opportunity to get things right.
4. ICANN Org's Global Domains Division and Compliance Department should examine the reporting of other metrics per the registry contracts. In  SAC097, the SSAC pointed out irregularities in the reporting of other registry metrics, such as web-based WHOIS queries. The current issue raises the question of whether metrics such as DNS queries are being reported accurately, if they too involve the reporting of self-queries, etc.

3) The blog states (the obvious) that ICANN isn’t a regulator of Internet content, but it doesn’t address ICANN’s public interest remit. Multiple entities have asked ICANN to better govern the manner in which domain names are registered, and now especially, everyone is asking ICANN to hold contracted parties to greater accountability to prevent domains from being registered by malicious actors, especially for pandemic-related fraud and abuse. This requires greater scrutiny during the registration process.

> What actions are ICANN taking that address this?

> In addition to high volumes of fraudulent domain names containing pandemic-related strings with which criminals try to fool Internet users, random looking or otherwise auto-generated names that are easy to register in volume and are being used by the hundreds to perpetuate pandemic-related phishing attacks. What actions are ICANN taking that addresses this?

> Recommended actions contained in SSR2’s draft report could help mitigate pandemic-related domain name abuse. Is the ICANN Board and staff reconsidering any of these actions?

> Recommendations from others over the last few years also would help mitigate pandemic-related domain name abuse – especially the substantially increased phishing attacks that harm users. Is the ICANN Board and staff reconsidering any of these actions?

Including:

> - will ICANN move to ensure domain name registrant data is validated? Or at least implement cross-field validation?

> - will ICANN put in place an Acceptable Use Policy that applies specifically to parties that register large numbers of domains, that requires registrants to apply for (and be validated for) bulk registration services? Further, will ICANN put in place an obligation to distinguish domain names registered by legal entities from those registered by > natural persons, classify parties that use bulk registration services as legal entities, and require unredacted access to the registration data of legal entities?

> - will ICANN maintain and publish a current list of validated bulk registrants (who are from above defined as not natural persons)?

> - will ICANN disallow registration transactions that involve large numbers of random-looking algorithmic domain names? > - will ICANN disallow, for a period of one year, the re-registration of any bulk-registered domain name that has been used in a criminal cyberattack?

2) What distinguishes ICANN's participation in the face of the pandemic from how they've participated in the past?

> The blog says: “ICANN Compliance uses data collected in audits (described in more detail below) to assess whether registries and registrars are adhering to their DNS security threat obligations.”

> What will Compliance do that it has not done until now?

> Is Compliance making audit data associated with US-based registrars available to States Attorney Generals and the US Attorney General?

1) The blog says: " the domain names and the data collected by the system will be shared with parties
who are in a position to take action, such as registrars and registries, and in some cases with national and international law enforcement organizations."

> What specific actions is ICANN expecting registries and registrars to take? > For example, is ICANN encouraging suspension of name resolution or of the registration, or the registrant account?

> Will ICANN ask registrars and registries to report on the efficacy of these actions? If so, when and on what cadence?

> ICANN should publicly report per registrar & registry action: > How many names has it identified as suspicious/malicious?

> What’s the number of domain names that each registry/registrar has taken action against? And what action was taken? > When can we expect ICANN public reporting and on what cadence?