RecommendeD resources
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Complementary Resources
A Brief But Spectacular take on the future of the internet
Vint Cerf is known for his pioneering work as one of the fathers of the internet. He now serves as the vice president and chief internet evangelist for Google where he furthers global policy development and accessibility of the internet. He shares his Brief But Spectacular take on the future of the internet.
Dr. Jovan Kurbalija. 2017, DiploFoundation
The seventh edition of An Introduction to Internet Governance by Dr. Jovan Kurbalija provides an update based on the most recent dynamic period in the history of Internet governance. It was officially launched at the 11th IGF in Mexico in December 2016, and Spanish translation is also available. Read more: English | Spanish
Useful Internet governance Glossary of Acronym
Diplo - Useful Internet governance Glossary of Acronym (2019)
ICANN - Maintained by ICANN
Established in 1865 as the International Telegraph Union, the ITU was initially created to develop international standards and rules for telegraphy, which was the primary means of electronic communication at the time. Today, the ITU is engaged in discussions and setting standards on a range of technological and communications-related subjects that have the potential to impact a range of human rights.
It's clear that human rights defenders urgently need to engage with the ITU. However, we've heard from many civil society organizations that they find its structure and processes challenging to understand and follow, making engagement difficult.
Diplo Foundation: Texts and Articles
Research Papers and Publications: Articles, research papers, and reports on current issues in diplomacy and global affairs. https://www.diplomacy.edu/resources/general
It is a multidisciplinary book that takes internet governance research as a research subject in its own right, discussing methods and conceptual approaches. [Available as an OPEN ACCESS by MIT Press]
The open access edition of this book was published with the support of a generous grant from the Hewlett Foundation Cyber Initiative to the Internet Governance Lab at American University design and governance of the Internet has become one of the most pressing geopolitical issues of our era. The stability of the economy, democracy, and the public sphere depends on the stability and security of the Internet. Revelations about election hacking, facial recognition technology, and government surveillance have gotten the public's attention and made clear the need for scholarly research that examines internet governance both empirically and conceptually. In this volume, scholars from a range of disciplines consider research methods, theories, and conceptual approaches in the study of Internet governance.
The contributors show that Internet governance is not only about governments; it is enacted through technical design, resource coordination, and conflicts at various invisible control points. They discuss such topics as the emergence of “internet governance” as an area of academic study and a real-world policy arena; the scholarly perspectives of STS, the law, computer science, and political science; the use of big data and text mining in internet governance studies; and cybersecurity.
Contributors Farzaneh Badiei, Davide Beraldo, Sandra Braman, Ronald J. Deibert, Dame Wendy Hall, Jeanette Hofmann, Eric Jardine, Rikke Frank Jørgensen, Aastha Madaan, Stefania Milan, Milton Mueller, Kieron O'Hara, Niels ten Oever, Rolf H. Weber
ContentGovernance Dilemma.pdfThis open-access book is one of the first academic works to comprehensively analyze the dilemma concerning global content governance on social media. To date, no single human rights standard exists across all social media platforms, allowing private companies to set their own rules, values, and parameters. On the one hand, this normative autonomy raises serious concerns, primarily around whether companies should be permitted to establish the rules governing free speech online. On the other hand, if social media platforms simply adopted international law standards, they would be compelled to make a choice on which model to follow, and put in place mechanisms to uphold these general standards. This book examines this topic from a multidisciplinary perspective, drawing from the expertise of the authors in law, political science, and communication studies. It provides a carefully reconstructed theory of the content governance dilemma, as well as pragmatic solutions for companies and policymakers. In this way, the book not only benefits academics by advancing the debate on content moderation issues but also informs new policies and regulatory strategies by offering an up-to-date overview of rules and tools for content moderation, as well as an evaluation of their current level of compliance with standards emerged in international human rights law and digital constitutionalism initiatives.
Day 1: Understanding and Upholding Truth in Internet Governance
The Domain Name System (DNS) is a component of the system of unique identifiers ICANN helps to coordinate. It is the primary naming system for the Internet. It is not the only one. Some naming systems predate the DNS, and others have been recently proposed in the wake of the blockchain approach of decentralized systems.
Proposing a new naming system is one thing. Making sure everybody on the Internet can use it is another. Alternative naming systems face a considerable deployment challenge. Several solutions exist to bridge the DNS to those parallel worlds, but they all come with their drawbacks. Furthermore, the lack of namespace coordination, either between those alternative naming systems and the DNS or simply among those alternative naming systems, will result in unworkable name collisions. This could lead to entirely separate ecosystems, one for each alternative naming system, further fragmenting the Internet. This is the opposite of the vision of “one world, one Internet.” This document is part of ICANN’s Office of the Chief Technical Officer (OCTO) document series. Please see the OCTO publication page for a list of records in the series. If you have questions or suggestions on these documents, please send them to octo@icann.org.
The DNS Research Federation was founded in 2021 by Oxford Information Labs - a small consultancy based in Oxford, UK specializing in Cyber Intelligence.
Founders Emily Taylor, Lucien Taylor, and Mark Robertshaw bring 60+ years of experience working in the DNS Industry to build a new organization with technical, policy, and business expertise.
The project has gained the support of several key industry players and academic institutes and is gaining traction every day.
The Internet's success can be attributed, in large part, to its unique model of shared global ownership, open standards development, and freely accessible processes for technology and policy development. This open, transparent, and collaborative model has enabled the Internet to enjoy unprecedented success. The model relies on local, bottom-up processes that are accessible to users around the world.
Are you curious about how the Internet is governed? Who are the different actors and stakeholders involved in Internet governance? How did this system emerge, and where is it headed in the future? By enrolling in this course, you will gain a comprehensive understanding of Internet governance and the ecosystem of organizations and issues shaping the Internet's future.
Day 1: Understanding Internet Governance
William J. Drake. 2016. “Introduction: Why the WGIG Still Matters.”
The article delves into the complexities of Internet governance and development, particularly in the context of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). It identifies 13 critical issues including the administration of root zone files, domain name allocation, IP addressing, multilingualism, and aspects of Internet security such as cybercrime and spam. The document also touches on the challenges posed by the restrictive interpretation of "public policy" in global Internet governance discussions, particularly within multistakeholder settings like ICANN. A significant focus is placed on the Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG), which is recognized as a pivotal entity in advocating for multistakeholder processes in Internet governance. The WGIG's contributions include proposing a broad definition of Internet governance, addressing a range of policy issues, and suggesting the establishment of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). The role of academic participants in these discussions is highlighted, noting their substantial influence in promoting openness and multistakeholder cooperation in the WSIS preparatory process. Additionally, the document discusses the concept of "critical Internet resources," a term used broadly during the WGIG discussions, primarily focusing on infrastructure-related issues. The summary concludes by emphasizing the fundamental importance of enhanced multistakeholder cooperation for the future of Internet governance.
William_J_Drake_2004_Reframing_Internet.pdf
The Internet Governance Project engages in joint policy analysis, collaborating with individuals on specific outputs including guest commentaries and jointly authorized publications.
Image: Courtesy of Georgia Tech - School of Public Policy
Read the complete article at - https://circleid.com/posts/20230410-icann-governance-authority
Day 1: Multistakeholder Model
Internet governance refers to the processes that determine how the Internet is managed. As policymakers and technical experts work towards connecting the remaining two-thirds of the world's nations, how the Internet is governed will significantly impact how we use it and how it evolves.
Institutional Sources of Legitimacy in Multistakeholder Global Governance at ICANN (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rego.12565)
This article provides a novel systematic exploration of ways and extents that institutional characteristics shape legitimacy beliefs toward multi-stakeholder global governance. Multistakeholderism is often argued to offer institutional advantages over intergovernmental multilateralism in handling global problems. This study examines whether, in practice, perceptions of institutional purpose, procedure, and performance affect legitimacy assessments regarding this form of global governance. The analysis focuses on the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), one of the largest and most institutionally developed global multistakeholder arrangements. Evidence comes from a mixed-methods survey of 467 participants in ICANN. We find that this representative sample accords high importance in principle to many institutional features, and also rates the actual institutional operations of ICANN quite highly on various counts. Moreover, many institutional characteristics are associated significantly with participants' legitimacy beliefs toward ICANN. However, not all institutional qualities have this significance, and the relevance of individual- and societal-level circumstances indicates that institutional sources do not provide a full explanation of legitimacy. The article contributes refinements to the theory of legitimacy in global governance; demonstrates the value of mixed-methods survey work in this field; supplies unique original data and analysis; and identifies implications for the politics of (de)legitimation around multistakeholderism.
The internet represents a fundamental shift in how Americans connect with one another, gather information and conduct their day-to-day lives. For more than 15 years, Pew Research Center has documented its growth and distribution in the United States. Explore the patterns of internet and home broadband adoption.
Community networks are rooted in the idea that people who need the Internet should have a say in how it's built and maintained. These networks are often built and run by local residents, community groups, and small businesses in areas where commercial Internet service providers (ISPs) may not see profit potential. By taking a bottom-up approach, community networks empower people to take control of their own connectivity and create their own solutions for digital inclusion.
Community networks can take many forms, from mesh networks that rely on interconnected nodes to provide coverage to an entire community, to community-owned ISPs that provide affordable Internet access. These networks can also provide opportunities for local businesses to grow and for community members to gain digital skills and access online resources. As the need for reliable and affordable Internet access continues to grow, community networks offer a promising solution for bringing connectivity to underserved areas and communities.
New Technologies and Inclusion.pdfNew Technologies and Inclusion
This article compiles the insights shared by the panelists during the "New Technology and Inclusion" discussion at the "VARIOUS INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGICAL EXPERIENCES (VITE I)" conference. This event was centered on the use of Virtual and Augmented Reality as tools for promoting science, exploring new boundaries, and overcoming challenges. The article covers a diverse range of topics, including the participation of individuals with disabilities in creating devices for better access to scientific knowledge, the state of Virtual and Augmented Reality experiences with respect to equality and inclusion, the role and accountability of these emerging technologies in contemporary scientific discourse, and several instances of utilizing inclusive AR/VR technologies for scientific investigation and public involvement.
Recent data highlights a significant disparity in the actual internet speeds between households in rural and urban areas of Canada. The gap is substantial, with rural download speeds being almost 12 times slower than those in urban areas, according to measurements taken in April. The COVID-19 pandemic has only worsened the divide, with rural users experiencing further decreases in internet speeds while urban users have seen increases. This growing digital divide underscores the need for targeted solutions to ensure equitable access to the internet across Canada. (Updated May 8, 2020)
State of Digital Inequity: Civil Society Perspectives on Barriers to Progress in our Digitizing World
Based on survey responses from 7500+ participants across 136 countries, this report provides the largest -ever mapping of the digital barriers facing civil society organizations — and those faced by the communities they serve.
It provides data across a range of issues, including access, affordability, digital skills, policy, and funding for digital equity efforts.
Click on the image to download document.
Will AI Chatbots Raise Digital Equity Concerns for Students?
Some ed-tech experts say the need to close the digital divide will only grow more urgent as Internet-based artificial intelligence tools become commonplace in schools and universities. (March 08, 2023 • Brandon Paykamian)
According to Pete Just, executive director of the Indiana Chief Technology Officer’s Council and board member of the ed-tech advocacy group Consortium for School Networking, student access to AI generative text technologies could be considered part of a larger national conversation around digital equity amid local, state and federal efforts to expand access to broadband and make devices available to students for digital learning. Rather than considering banning AI tools like ChatGPT as some schools and institutions have done, he said, educators should encourage the use of and access to AI chatbots as supplemental to enhance lessons. More ...
Day 1: Case study presentations: Examples of successful initiatives in promoting truth and transparency online
policyreview-2021-4-1584.pdfEU policy considers disinformation to be harmful content, rather than illegal content. However, EU member states have recently been making disinformation illegal. This article discusses the definitions that form the basis of EU disinformation policy and analyses national legislation in EU member states applicable to the definitions of disinformation, in light of freedom of expression and the proposed Digital Services Act. The article discusses the perils of defining disinformation in EU legislation. It includes provisions on online platforms being required to remove illegal content, which may end up applying to overbroad national laws criminalizing false news and false information. [Ó Fathaigh, R. & Helberger, N. & Appelman, N. (2021). The perils of legally defining disinformation. Internet Policy Review, 10(4). https://doi.org/10.14763/2021.4.1584
Day 2: Trust as the Bedrock of Internet Interaction
Day 2: Panel discussion: Data Privacy and User Trust
Data Privacy.pdfSafeguarding Data and Student Privacy: A handbook for higher education
Educational institutions, such as colleges and universities, are increasingly adopting data analytics, artificial intelligence (AI), and other advanced technologies to enhance student success and optimize their operational efficiency. This progressive shift involves the substantial utilization of various data types, including financial records, demographic details of students and staff, personally identifiable information (PII), and data about student engagement derived from institutional services and programs. These technological advancements are transforming the landscape of higher education. However, the expanded reliance on digital services and the extensive use of data also render these institutions highly susceptible to cyberattacks. Source: Government Technology
Day 2: Best Practices for Cybersecurity
Building. an International Cybersecurity Regime.pdf
Providing a much-needed study on cybersecurity regime building, this comprehensive book is a detailed analysis of cybersecurity norm-making processes and country positions, through the lens of multi-stakeholder diplomacy. Multidisciplinary and multinational scholars and practitioners use insights drawn from high-level discussion groups to provide a rigorous analysis of how major cyber powers view multi-stakeholder diplomacy.
Downloaded from https://www.elgaronline.com/ at 12/22/2023 01:38:18PM via Open Access. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons, Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Cybersecurity governance is a comprehensive cybersecurity strategy that integrates with organizational operations and prevents the interruption of activities due to cyber threats or attacks. Features of cybersecurity governance include:
Accountability frameworks
Decision-making hierarchies
Defined risks related to business objectives
Mitigation plans and strategies
Oversight processes and procedures
Cyber Hygiene Best Practices for your Organization: ITSAP.10.102
Ensuring your organization is implementing, promoting, and monitoring good cyber hygiene practices is a critical component of your cyber security posture. The following table provides a list of actions your organization can take to strengthen your cyber security foundation with enhanced protective measures for your networks, systems, and data. Although your organization may not be able to implement all the actions provided below, you should implement the actions that are obtainable and sustainable to better enhance you cyber security posture. From: Canadian Centre for Cyber Security
ITSAP10102-e.pdfCyber diplomacy defining the opportunities for cybersecurity and risks from Artificial Intelligence IoT Blockchains and Quantum Computing.pdfCyber diplomacy: defining the opportunities for cybersecurity and risks from Artificial Intelligence, IoT, Blockchains, and Quantum Computing
Cyber diplomacy is critical in dealing with the digital era’s evolving cybersecurity dangers and possibilities. This article investigates the impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI), the Internet of Things (IoT), Blockchains, and Quantum Computing on cyber diplomacy. AI holds the potential for proactive threat identification and response, while IoT enables international information sharing. Blockchains enable secure data sharing and document verification, but they also pose new threats, such as AI-driven cyber-attacks, IoT privacy breaches, blockchain vulnerabilities, and the potential for quantum computing to break encryption. This article conducts case study reviews in combination with secondary data analysis and emphasises the value of international cooperation in developing global norms and frameworks to control responsible technology adoption. Cyber diplomacy can promote cybersecurity, protect national interests, and foster mutual trust among nations in the digital sphere by capitalising on possibilities and reducing threats. [Retrieved: 11 February 2024. Petar Radanliev (2024) Cyber diplomacy: defining the opportunities for cybersecurity and risks from Artificial Intelligence, IoT, Blockchains, and Quantum Computing, Journal of Cyber Security Technology, DOI: 10.1080/23742917.2024.2312671]
Day 2: Can we survive digital fragmentation?
EU Dimensions of the ‘Splinternet’ Question
The success of the Internet lies in large part with the fact that when we open a web browser and type in a Uniform Resource Locator (URL), the page that comes up is the page we intended to visit. Moreover, generally speaking, it is the same page for me as it is for you, as it is for each user. That is the unity of today’s global Internet. Yet what would happen if a domain name meant one thing in my network, but something else in your network, and we couldn’t get to the same site using the same domain name? Such inconsistency would seriously undermine the utility of the Internet. This potential incoherence is the technical basis of the Internet fragmentation question. Quarterly Magazine: Special Issue: Unity and Diversity in Global Internet Governance
A few months before the COVID-19 pandemic hit the world, the global Internet Governance Forum (IGF) convened in Berlin under the overarching theme, ‘One World. One Net. One Vision’. Referring to this motto, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, António Guterres, remarked that while he was certain that ‘we live in one world’, it was less sure that ‘we live with only one Net’.
Looking back three years later, it is clear that the existing Internet – the global interoperable network of networks – made huge contributions during the pandemic. Despite the surge in demand for connectivity as people’s lives moved more online (OECD 2020; Damas 2020), the Internet’s technical layer remains robust and stable. It has kept connecting people and communities, enabled remote working, and facilitated online communication with loved ones when aeroplanes were grounded and national borders were closed.
When looking ahead, however, can we take this ‘One Net’ for granted, as our ‘One World’ becomes increasingly fragmented with social and geopolitical tensions? If the global interoperable network is indeed under the threat of fragmentation, what is at stake? Quarterly Magazine: Special Issue: Unity and Diversity in Global Internet Governance
The document "Internet Fragmentation: An Overview" by the World Economic Forum (Edited by: Drake, William J ; Vinton, Cerf G ; Kleinwächter, W., 2016) provides a comprehensive analysis of the various aspects and causes of Internet fragmentation. It delves into technical, governmental, and commercial fragmentation, highlighting how each contributes to the broader issue. Technical fragmentation involves conditions in the infrastructure that impede system interoperability and consistent internet functionality. Governmental fragmentation refers to policies and actions by governments that restrict or prevent certain internet uses, often for controlling information distribution or access. Commercial fragmentation is about business practices that similarly restrict or prevent certain internet uses, particularly in content creation, distribution, or access.
The report also discusses the role of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) in developing standards and mechanisms to resist fragmentation, such as DNSSECs for securing domain name-to-IP address mappings. It examines the complex system of private peering and transit contracts among ISPs, which historically ensured a stable, integrated global public internet. The document touches upon various other aspects, including network neutrality, walled gardens, geo-localization, geo-blocking, and infrastructure-related intellectual property protection.
Furthermore, the document provides insights into the historical context and evolution of Internet governance and policies, including the distinction between governance 'of' the Internet and governance 'on' the Internet. It also mentions the role of various organizations and agreements in shaping internet policies and standards globally.
Overall, the report offers a detailed overview of the multifaceted nature of internet fragmentation, its causes, and the efforts being made to address these challenges. It underscores the importance of maintaining an open, interoperable, and unified global internet in the face of various fragmenting forces.
The (Geoff Huston) text explores the nuanced aspects of Internet fragmentation, considering its historical roots, current manifestations, and the delicate balance between openness, security, and centralization. The discussion underscores the complexity of managing a global, interoperable Internet in the face of diverse technological, political, and economic pressures.
It delves into the historical background of computing and the Internet, the evolution of open standards, and the current state of Internet fragmentation, addressing both its causes and implications.
Key points include:
1. Historical Context: In the 1980s, computing was dominated by mainframes and peripherals from specific vendors, leading to customer lock-in and a lack of interoperability. This situation prompted a push for open standards, allowing for multi-vendor environments and interoperability.
2. Internet Development: The Internet emerged from this movement towards open standards. It operates without strict rules or enforcement mechanisms, driven by market discipline and consumer preferences, aiming for universal access.
3. Fragmentation Issues: Internet fragmentation refers to scenarios where access to services is inconsistent or blocked. This can be due to intentional disruptions, regulatory blocks by national regimes, or cybersecurity measures. Fragmentation can be disruptive and is often linked to geopolitical tensions and national strategic concerns.
4. DNS and Cybersecurity: The text discusses the role of DNS resolvers like QUAD9 in selectively blocking harmful websites, raising questions about the balance between protection and universal access.
5. Geopolitical Considerations: The debate over Internet fragmentation also includes geopolitical aspects, such as nation-states' control over their digital spaces and the influence of large tech companies.
6. IPv4 and IPv6 Fragmentation: The limited IPv4 address space has led to a fragmented environment, somewhat mitigated by IPv6. However, IPv6 itself is not fully coherent due to issues like privacy addresses and incomplete adoption.
7. Namespace Fragmentation: The Internet relies on a common namespace (DNS), which is essential for universal communication. While alternative namespaces exist, they face challenges in adoption and utility. Efforts to integrate Unicode into DNS to support non-Latin scripts highlight the challenges in maintaining a cohesive, unfragmented namespace.
8. Centralization vs. Fragmentation: The resistance to fragmentation has led to a centralized DNS infrastructure, dominated by a few large entities. This centralization poses its own challenges, including resistance to change and increased dominance by incumbents.
Data-Governance.pdfData: Governance and geopolitics
by Gregory F Treverton and Pari Esfandiari
The report from the Global TechnoPolitics Forum Policy on Intellectual Independence discusses the critical importance of data governance in the modern world, where data is likened to the "black gold" of the 21st century. It highlights the challenges open societies, particularly in North America and Europe, face in coordinating approaches to data governance amidst varying visions of internet and data use across different regions, including Silicon Valley's open internet, Washington's market-based approach, the EU's regulated environment, Beijing's authoritarian control, and Moscow's disruptive tactics.
The piece delves into the complexities of governing the digital domain, which intersects with various policy areas and often presents conflicting objectives. It emphasizes the importance of privacy and data use legislation, such as the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). It discusses the challenges in regulating content, policing data monopolies through antitrust laws, and the role of self-regulation and digital trade.
The report also touches on the significance of intellectual property rights in the digital age, the impact of digital technologies on diplomacy, and the overarching challenge of reimagining a global architecture that can accommodate the dynamic and disruptive nature of big data, AI, and machine learning. It calls for a global agreement on balancing open data flows with national interests, cybersecurity, and privacy to maintain trust in the digital world and sustain international trade. The need for a comprehensive approach that engages innovators, thought leaders, and legislators in discussions beyond current divisions is underscored to shape a common future in the face of the transformative technologies of our time.
"Framing Conversation: What Would Internet Fragmentation Mean for the Digital Economy?" by William J. Drake, prepared for the 2017 Global Digital Futures Forum, delves into the concept of Internet fragmentation and its potential impact on the digital economy. The paper discusses the idea of the Internet as a free and open system, and how actions or conditions that impede its seamless functioning can lead to fragmentation. Drake uses the analogy of an international telephone network to illustrate how fragmentation might occur in different countries, highlighting that Internet fragmentation is not a singular phenomenon but varies in its sources and manifestations.
The paper identifies three types of fragmentation: technical, governmental, and commercial. Technical fragmentation involves issues that engineers can often address with fixes, whereas governmental and commercial fragmentation are more challenging to navigate and can have lasting effects. For instance, governmental actions like censorship can lead to the use of virtual private networks, which governments then attempt to block, creating a cycle of evasion and countermeasures.
Drake's paper emphasizes the importance of understanding the different forms of Internet fragmentation, their sources, and their potential long-term impacts on the digital economy. The document underscores the complexity of the issue and the need for ongoing attention to the evolving nature of Internet fragmentation.
William_J_Drake_2017_What_Would_Internet.pdfDay 2: Is DNS Abuse a concern for a trustworthy Internet?
In today's interconnected world, where our lives are significantly shaped by all things digital, it's crucial to understand the various threats lurking in cyberspace. In GoDaddy’s September 2023 blog post on the roles of registrars and hosting providers, we defined the Domain Name System (DNS) and DNS abuse, and how the latter can disrupt the very foundation that all internet users rely upon daily.
The study on Domain Name System (DNS) abuse conducted by the European Union provides a comprehensive assessment of the scope, magnitude, and impact of DNS abuse, crucial for shaping future policy measures. The DNS, a key part of the Internet's core as highlighted in the EU’s Cybersecurity Strategy and the Proposal for NIS 2 Directive, translates domain names into IP addresses, essential for internet traffic routing. The study addresses the persistent issue of DNS abuse, which encompasses a range of malicious activities including cybersecurity threats and the distribution of illegal content. Despite various responses ranging from technical measures to regulatory actions, there's a lack of consensus on defining DNS abuse and effective collective measures to combat it. The study's findings reveal that EU country code TLDs are the least abused, while newer generic TLDs are more frequently targeted. Based on these insights, the study proposes a set of recommendations aimed at different internet stakeholders, focusing on aspects like DNS metadata, WHOIS information, and abuse reporting. These recommendations are intended to enhance prevention, detection, and mitigation of DNS abuse. The study also raises questions about the sufficiency of voluntary measures in addressing DNS abuse, suggesting a need for a new blend of policies and practices. This research offers valuable insights for shaping EU policies regarding the DNS, underlining its significance in maintaining the integrity of the Internet.
Corporate author(s): Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology (European Commission) , Fasano Paulovics Società tra Avvocati , Grenoble INP-UGA Institute of Engineering
One of the best things about the .ORG domain is that it consistently ranks highest from a quality standpoint, especially when it comes to abuse. PIR works hard to make sure that the .ORG name space is the cleanest domain space in the industry. When you choose a .ORG domain, you know you’re getting the highest quality domain possible. "Check out our metrics and you’ll see how we rank and compare with other domains."
To facilitate and inform ICANN community discussions, ICANN publishes trends related to DNS security threat concentrations through the Domain Abuse Activity Reporting (DAAR) project, based on security threat domains listed in Reputation Block Lists (RBLs). DAAR tracks security threat data for phishing, malware, botnet command and control domains and spam. To learn more about the DAAR project click here.
Using DAAR data, ICANN recently published a report on DNS abuse. In contrast to many existing industry white papers and general discussions published on DNS abuse, this new report relies on four years of data. Typically, similar studies use data with a much shorter time span such as half a year. As a result, the report demonstrates that when discussing DNS abuse trends in general, we should be cautious because depending on the question asked, the data used, and the data timeframe, we will receive different results.
No one organization or data provider has a comprehensive overview of all security threats that are listed on the Internet. Nonetheless, ICANN's DAAR datasets are another source of reliable and unbiased data and another source of possible research.
Day 2: Encrypting the Internet: Building User Trust
Encryption involves converting data into a coded form that can only be deciphered and returned to its original state by those who have the necessary means. This process is essential for maintaining a secure and reliable Internet. It plays a key role in safeguarding sensitive information by ensuring data security.
Widely utilized for securing data stored on computer systems and transmitted across computer networks, including the Internet, encryption is a critical tool. It is especially prevalent in securing financial transactions and private messaging, enhancing their security. Encryption's significance extends to verifying the integrity of data, ensuring that it hasn't been altered (data integrity). It also boosts confidence in the authenticity of communication partners (authentication) and confirms the sending and receipt of messages (non-repudiation). More details at - ISOC.org
The "Policy Framework for an Open and Trusted Internet" by the Internet Society addresses the growing challenge of diminishing trust in the Internet, emphasizing the need for a balance between embracing digital innovation and ensuring user safety and security. The framework highlights the importance of trust as a foundational element for realizing the Internet's full potential, achievable through collective responsibility and collaboration. It defines an 'open and trusted Internet' as one that is globally interoperable, fostering innovation and offering opportunities for all, grounded in user trust, reliable technologies, trusted networks, and a trustworthy ecosystem. The document outlines four interrelated dimensions of trust necessary for policy development: user trust, technologies for trust, trusted networks, and a trustworthy ecosystem. It stresses the importance of collaborative security principles and the role of all stakeholders in nurturing a trusted Internet environment. The framework also delves into specific policy principles for enhancing user trust, such as human rights, privacy, consumer protection, and support for encryption and other trust technologies. It underscores the need for trusted networks and a multi-stakeholder approach to Internet governance, focusing on inclusiveness, transparency, and effective decision-making. In conclusion, the document advocates for a collaborative effort to build an open and trusted Internet, which is vital for the success of the digital economy, urging policymakers to consider these trust dimensions in their Internet-related policies.
See more at - Building Trust ... is the key issue in defining the future value of the Internet.
Day 3: Governing the Global Digital Economy
Day 3: Digital Literacy and Inclusive Internet Access
Derrick L. Cogburn (School of Communication, American University, Washington, DC, USA and School of International Service and Kogod School of Business, American University, Washington, DC, US)
Purpose
International organizations are working on an unprecedented number of development initiatives relevant to people with disabilities. This makes it essential for the global disability community to be able to participate effectively in the decision-making processes associated with these programs. In light of this, this study aims to explore whether information technologies can help create a more inclusive global governance, forming the basis for equitable development for people with disabilities.
Design/methodology/approach
The results of a global survey of disabled people’s organizations (DPOs) leaders are discussed. This asked disability rights advocates about their experiences with accessibility and barriers to effective participation, low-cost accessible technological solutions for remote participation, and freely available “off-the-shelf” online technologies – in particular social media platforms – to bridge the gap between the disability community and global governance processes.
Findings
Although only a small number of international conferences offer accessible virtual participation through web conferencing and other tools, responses from DPO advocates suggest that there is a strong demand for this technology and provide evidence of its potential for improving accessibility in global governance. Furthermore, disability organizations all over the world have embraced social media platforms to liaise with their grassroots and enable them to partake in policy-making processes.
Originality/value
This study highlights community-backed technological solutions to persisting barriers that systematically exclude people with disabilities from fundamental global governance processes, illuminating the nexus of disability, accessibility, and participation.
Technology and accessibility in global governance and human rights- the experience of disability rights advocates.pdfUNICEF-Innocenti-Digital-Inclusion-Global-Policy-Review-2023.pdfA global review of selected digital inclusion POLICIES findings and policy requirements for greater DIGITAL QUALITY of children
Note: This review should be read alongside the UNICEF child-centred digital equality framework, which outlines the elements and stakeholders necessary for achieving digital equality for children.
Highlights
Around the world, policies on digital inclusion have achieved results: Many more children are connected and have digital skills than in the past.
However, vast inequalities still exist in levels of internet access, digital skills, and patterns of use – particularly for girls from disadvantaged communities. To rectify these inequities, a holistic approach to digital policies is essential.
Using the UNICEF Child-centred Digital Equality Framework, A Global Review of Selected Digital Inclusion Policies reviewed 126 digital inclusion policies and related public communiqués. The goal was to assess whether these policies aimed to increase digital inclusion for children, dealt with inequalities in children’s lives, and showed readiness for emerging technologies and how they might impact children.
While we found room for improvement, the analysis revealed many promising – and sometimes unique – practices. In the review, we highlight these and identify policy gaps that need to be addressed to achieve greater digital equality for children. This global review outlines key requirements for holistic policy approaches to digital inclusion including:
Focus on children as a key user group
Apply digital inclusion and think of equality holistically
Address inequalities by focusing on specific needs
Follow an intersectional approach to supporting girls’ digital inclusion and equality
Drive broad-based digital literacy
Focus on outcomes, not only inputs
Aim to be future-ready
Embody a coordinated approach
Be based on true multi-stakeholderism
Day 3: United Nations and the Global Digital Compact
The political declaration was adopted on the occasion of the United Nations’ 75th anniversary in September 2020, and the Secretary-General in September 2021 released his report Our Common Agenda PDF. The Common Agenda proposes a Global Digital Compact to be agreed at the Summit of the Future in September 2024 through a technology track involving all stakeholders: governments, the United Nations system, the private sector (including tech companies), civil society, grass-roots organizations, academia, and individuals, including youth.
The Global Digital Compact is expected to “outline shared principles for an open, free, and secure digital future for all”. The Common Agenda report suggests issues that it might cover, including digital connectivity, avoiding Internet fragmentation, providing people with options as to how their data is used, application of human rights online, and promoting a trustworthy Internet by introducing accountability criteria for discrimination and misleading content. Find out more here.
The 18th annual Internet Governance Forum (IGF), held in Kyoto from October 8-12, 2023, centered on the theme "The Internet We Want – Empowering All People." This event, convened by the UN Secretary-General and hosted by the Government of Japan, delved into the rapid advancements in digital technology, focusing on critical issues like data governance, artificial intelligence (AI), cybersecurity, and the environmental impacts of technology. A significant concern highlighted was the uneven distribution of digitalization's benefits, with about 2.6 billion people, mostly in the Global South and vulnerable communities, still offline. UN Secretary-General António Guterres emphasized the need to harness digital technologies for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), highlighting three key action areas: closing the connectivity and governance gaps, and reinforcing a human rights-centered approach to digital cooperation. The IGF Leadership Panel issued a vision paper advocating for a comprehensive, inclusive, and secure Internet. Guterres also announced the formation of a High-Level Advisory Body on AI to propose governance solutions. The forum, which saw participation from diverse sectors, hosted over 300 sessions across various sub-themes. The outcomes of IGF 2023, including the ongoing public consultations on the Kyoto IGF Messages, are set to provide a framework for the Global Digital Compact at the 2024 Summit of the Future. This pivot marks a significant step towards addressing the digital age's challenges and opportunities, focusing on inclusivity, governance, and a human-centric approach. Additionally, the UN General Assembly will review the IGF’s mandate in 2025 as part of the 20-year review of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS+20).
A project by: International Institute for Sustainable Development
Digital Governance Discussion Group (DGDG): One World, One Internet, Many Voices
By Wolfgang Kleinwächter Professor Emeritus at the University of Aarhus
Available at CircleID (Feb. 14) or click image (right)
Day 3: Case study presentations: Stories of Hope and Change Driven by the Internet and Internet Governance
William_J_Drake_2016_Data_Localization_a.pdfThe document delves into the complex interplay between transborder data flows (TDF), national sovereignty, and international trade, particularly in the context of the digital era. It highlights the efforts of organizations like the OECD and the Intergovernmental Bureau of Informatics (IBI) in understanding the impact of corporate TDF on the economic, legal, social, and political independence of nation-states, often framed as challenges to national sovereignty. The document also touches on the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and its implications for cross-border service supply, emphasizing the principle of 'technological neutrality'.
The discussion extends to the socio-political aspects of trade and the internet, acknowledging the challenges in making progress and providing relief to affected companies and stakeholders. The potential contribution of such policies to internet fragmentation is a concern. The document suggests exploring parallel opportunities to promote internet openness alongside trade processes.
A controversial topic addressed is the definition of data localization and barriers, particularly concerning data protection and personal privacy. The debate includes different perspectives, such as viewing European data protection measures as economic protectionism or political control.
The document proposes the idea of a multistakeholder approach to complement intergovernmental efforts, drawing lessons from the experiences of the Internet community in managing critical resources through institutions like ICANN, the IETF, and the RIRs. It also considers the possibility of informal issue networks or dialogues.
Lastly, it references a 2016 non-paper released by the United States, which emphasizes the importance of enabling cross-border data flows and combating discriminatory barriers that hinder the free flow of information. The paper advocates for trade rules that protect data movement, subject to reasonable safeguards, and highlights the contribution of such measures to enhancing consumer confidence in electronic commerce. It calls for each party to adopt a legal framework for the protection of personal information in electronic commerce, considering international guidelines and adopting non-discriminatory practices.