The Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management has published a new article by IGP's Michel van Eeten and Johnannes Bauer, Emerging Threats to Internet Security: Incentives, Externalities and Policy Implications. The paper, based in part on numerous interviews conducted with network operators, is particularly useful for cutting through the often analytically empty cybersecurity dialogue. Using a marginal security (law enforcement) vs. precluded-event security (national security) framework, the authors identify why the issue of botnets leads to such controversy when it comes to policy responses.
China's government is using its control of domain names to impose more strict controls over the Internet. In a recent announcement of China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC), individuals can no longer register .cn domain names unless they can provide business registration information in paper. The documents include: domain name registration form (with enterprise official seal), a copy of the business license of the enterprise or corporate code certificate and copy of the national ID card of the applicant.
In response to a motion from Noncommercial Users, ICANN has released a staff issues report about the topic of registry-registrar separation. The NCUC motion asked the staff whether contracts that liberalized cross-ownership restrictions among registries and registrars of new top level domains constituted a policy change that required a new policy development process, or were merely minor implementation issues that could be developed by staff within existing policy parameters. Forget about the substantive issue for a moment. The staff report contains one whale of a process issue. Here is the paragraph that caught my eye:
The law firm representing ICM Registry in its pioneering Independent Review of the ICANN decision on the .xxx top level domain has issued a call for ICANN to wait until the process is concluded and the community can assess the results before making any changes to the Independent Review Process (IRP). We think that is a reasonable request. Changing the IRP before one can take into account the only experience we have with it is like modifying the design of an airplane before it has gone on its first test flight.
IGP Scientific Committee members were prominent in all phases of this year’s Internet Governance Forum meeting in Sharm-el-Sheik, Egypt. The IGP brought expertise in political science, economics, sociology and other disciples to bear on discussions ranging from cyber security and critical Internet resources to institutional governance.