Re: [ga] DAG3: VeriSign Concerns

["Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Danny and all,

  These concerns from/by Verisign are perfictly reasonable and deserve
direct and concise answers.  I share several of these concerns from
Verisign.  ICANN has not come even close to demonstrating it has
any significant IT security acumen and in fact has demonstrated
the contrary far too often to even count accurately, however I have
reported some 432 different ICANN responsible security issues to
DHS accordingly.

  Conversly Versign has some rather embarasing IT security incidences,
one recently reported regarding their signature database being hacked,
exposing hundreds of thousands of customers to potential great risk
accordingly.  Such makes one wonder why DOC/NTIA signed a significant
contract with Verisign accordingly not long ago now and just prior to
the before mentioned security breach.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Oct 22, 2009 11:44 AM
>To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [ga] DAG3:  VeriSign Concerns
>
>
>Presented below are a series of questions put forth by VeriSign in their 
>comments to DAG3:
>
>
>Registry/Registrar Separation
>
>VeriSign participated in the "ICANN Interactive Conference Call Regarding 
>Registry/Registrar Separation Models" that was held on October 19, 2009.  We 
>noticed that a number of questions submitted by us and by other participants 
>online were not read by the moderator or directed to the presenters during the 
>session.  Given that the session ended 30 minutes early, it is unclear why the 
>various questions were not addressed.
>
>Accordingly, VeriSign submits the following questions, and requests that ICANN 
>answer them in advance of the October 26, 2009 "Registry/Registrar Separation 
>Discussion" forum to be held in Seoul.
>
>1.  How did ICANN choose only the "four options for community discussion and 
>consideration with respect to registry/registrar separation" that are set 
>forth in DAG3?
>2.  What (and where) is the economic data to support these options and not 
>others?
>3.  If the community wishes to add options for consideration, how should we do 
>this prior to November 22, 2009, when formal comments on DAG3 are due?
>4.  What is the process for deciding on the final menu of options that will be 
>considered?
>5.  What is the process and timeline that ICANN will use to make final 
>decisions on the Registry/Registrar separation issue?
>6.  How will ICANN apply the construct that is finally decided upon to 
>existing TLDs as opposed to new TLDs?
>
>
>High Security Zones
>
>VeriSign further requests that ICANN answer the following questions with 
>regard to High Security Zones to clarify the issues in advance of the Seoul 
>meeting.
>
>1.  Where did this issue come from and why was it introduced now?
>2.  Why is ICANN looking to compete with commercial entities in the security 
>field and with registries and registrars?
>3.  How can ICANN offer this without expanding the scope of its charter?
>4.  How much will this cost, and where will ICANN get the budget to do this?
>5.  How can ICANN do this and remain neutral on issues of security and 
>stability, especially with respect to RSEP and Consensus Policies?
> 
>Thank you for answering these questions.
>
>http://forum.icann.org/lists/3gtld-guide/msg00004.html
>
>
>
>
>      
>
Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Phone: 214-244-4827