DNS Abuse Responses

From ICANNWiki
Revision as of 14:39, 14 July 2021 by Jessica (talk | contribs) (Created page with "'''DNS Abuse Responses''' are the various tools, methods, collaboration, and philosophies spawning from DNS Abuse itself. ==Overview== There are four time-related categor...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

DNS Abuse Responses are the various tools, methods, collaboration, and philosophies spawning from DNS Abuse itself.

Overview

There are four time-related categories of responses to DNS Abuse:

  1. reactionary detection and removal of sources of abuse (necessarily after the fact),
  2. cotemporal efforts to mitigate the amount and likelihood of abuse or its impact,
  3. future-focused work on stopping abuse before it can happen, and
  4. ongoing allowance of abuse for ideological or jurisdictional reasons.

Reactionary Removal

Cotemporal Mitigation

Future Prevention

Intentional Inaction

Points of View

Every type of Internet user has worries over DNS Abuse and the responses to it.

Social Scientists

Governments/Intergovernmental Organizations

Pro-Mitigation

Budapest Convention Domestic Legislation

Pro-Privacy=

Pro-privacy legislation

Technical Community

Internet Governance Organizations

ICANN

So far, ICANN has been steadfast in its focus on technical DNS abuse and avoidance of policymaking around content abuse. As recently as ICANN 71, the organization was criticized by [[____]] and [[ ___]] for not doing enough to steward contracted parties and non-contracted parties toward involvement in reducing abuse. However, ICANN and SSAC, in particular, can point to SAC115.

IGF

DNS Abuse Institute

This newcomer is entirely focused on

Private Sector

Registars

Registries

BC

The business community wants

IP

Intellectual property lawyers

ISPCP

Internet Service and Connectivity providers

Reputation Industry

End Users

End users, even those who work in the DNS industry, need help managing DNS Abuse mainly because of the timeless effectiveness of Social Engineering attacks. For instance, at the end of 2020, GoDaddy notoriously tested its workers to see if they would share sensitive information after clicking on dubious links from a spoofed email.[1]