The backstory here is that ICANN ex-president Mike Roberts inadvisedly said last week: >http://atlargestudy.org/forum_archive/msg01113.shtml >It's serious. It's first things first. It's about keeping people from >being killed by terrorist plots hatched over the net. All of a sudden it >matters that you know what you are talking about. If you are an Internet >engineer, what about nailing down the RFC's needed for secure new >functionality in the DNS? If you are a root server host organization CEO, >all of a sudden being a volunteer in Jon Postel's army takes on new meaning. -Declan --- Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 11:13:54 -0500 Subject: Response to Mike Roberts From: Richard Forno <rfornoat_private> To: <declanat_private>, <politechat_private> Here's one for you Declan.....cheers, rf Original article (with hyperlinked references) at http://www.infowarrior.org/articles/2001-10.html Daddy, Daddy, Can ICANN Play too? Richard Forno 28 October 2001 : Essay #2001-10 rfornoat_private c) 2001 by Author. Permission is granted to quote, reprint or redistribute provided the text is not altered, and appropriate credit is given. Summary: In a day where anything anti-terror is considered noble, legitimite, and powerful, Mike Roberts wants the entity he co-founded to get its fair share. "Clemenceau said war was too important to be left to the generals. When he said that, 50 years ago, he might have been right. But today, war is too important to be left to politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought. - General Ripper to Wing Commander Mandrake in "Doctor Strangelove" (1964) In his statement to the world at the Joint Session of Congress on September 20th, President Bush looked square at the camera, and established a new truism: you are either with the United States, or you are with terrorists. This warning fell on very receptive ears for supporters and alumni of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the controversial Clinton-conceived entity charged with overseeing internet stability, domain name administration, and protocols. To ICANN supporters, it seemed the perfect opportunity to try and expand the influence and power of an organization thatís caused more headaches for the Internet community than pop-under advertisements for X-10 cameras. In a heated message to the ALSC-Forum list, ICANN's co-founder and former Grand Vizer and Poohbah Emeritus, Mike Roberts, formally proposed that ICANN should be involved in the "war against terrorism." In particular, his missive implies that ICANN should be involved in this "war" and work toë"keep people from being killed by terrorist plots hatched over the net." This begs the question of whether ICANN's November Board meeting will constitute the first roll call of the Internet's Keystone Kops? Will the squad be housed in the ICANN offices at Marina Del Rey? (Will each Kop be issued their own TLD as part of their basic equipment issue?) Roberts' message sounded like he's running for political office, perhaps as - God help us - an advisor on Homeland Security to Tom Ridge? For those unaware, Roberts is the former leader of an organization that - contrary to its established mantra - routinely operates in secret, caters to big business, silences its own Board members when they dissent, and invents its rules of procedure and official corporate recordings as it goes along. If Iím not mistaken, thatís similar to how the secret police in Soviet Europe operated during the Cold War with impugnity, resulting in established censorship and the ruling class catering to wealthy special interests while oppressing the general population. Roberts notes that the October 26 bill signing ceremony marked the dawn of the "new Internet" and demise of the "old Internet." Those familiar with the legislation understand that the surveillance powers enacted into law have been technicaly feasible for years by law enforcement and computer criminals alike. From a technical perspective, itís nothing new. Granted, there is expanded potential for abuse by law enforcement in surveilling users, but people should finally understand what us security types have said for years - if something is deemed personal or sensitive, it should not be sent over the Internet, or if it must, should be protected effectively from unauthorized disclosure. Not to mention, confounding these techniques is not difficult. Thus, as Tina Turner might say, "whatís ICANN got to do with it?" Let Mike Roberts tell you. He rightfully observes that these new law enforcement powers bring the internet community (vendors, operators, and users) into the so-called 'war on terrorism' - and as such, believes that ICANN, like many other technology vendors, must "reconsider how this new law affects them." Contrary to Roberts' assessment, and the cult of personality surrounding ICANN as an entity, this new law does not promote ICANN's importance to World Order and Public Safety, nor does it further legitimize its already-dubious existence as the Internet's governing body. As I said in my comments last month, ICANN in its current form, is incapable of assuming additional responsibility until it can demonstrate its competence with what itís been chartered to do, and - more importantly - the Internet community can trust it. (In other words, take care of its own affairs first.) ICANN recently announced a renewed organizational push to examine Internet security matters - yet, there are few on its decision-making Board that have any knowledge of security issues, and even fewer that have been even remotely involved with operational Internet security at all. Like CEOs and Cabinet-level people, ICANN as a whole is the last group we in the Internet community want to review and implement security policies, but nobody seems to understand this. The blind could quite possibly be leading the blind here. Many could easily interpret this as Roberts' pining or whining (at ICANN's request, no doubt) to find a way for ICANN, an entity already on shaky ground in the eye of the Internet community, to capitalize in something -anything- considered "anti-terror." After all, everybody wants a piece of the anti-terror pie - it's the biggest, baddest budget right now and viewed by many as "free money" if the correct business or policy case can be made to get some of it. (Besides, if ICANN, and the United States, are against terrorists, and you are against ICANN, that would make you a terrorist supporter and thus against the United States, right? How convienient.) According to Roberts, ICANN needs to "keep people from being killed by terrorist plots hatched over the net." Such actions are far outside ICANNís charter and competencies - proactive posturing for anti-terror is a function of the national security and intelligence communities that draws on a diverse suite of sources, methods, and resources to stave off potential terrorist plots and other threats. Does ICANN plan to become the Internet Gestapo, CyberStasi, or petition to join the US intelligence community? Roberts rightly notes that protective measures for root servers are certainly necessary and fall under ICANNís purview - critical world servers canít be located in basements and broom closets. ICANN would be correct to develop standards and policies to safeguard those critical systems. However, is he proposing ICANN enter the content censorship business and establishing what constitutes "terrorist information" on the global Internet? If so, how? While ICANN has a role in root server security, it is (as it should be) a very limited one; namely, developing policy and standards for root server security, not conducting operations to save all mankind from the evils of Internet-based terror. As ICANN Director Karl Auerbach wisely observes, not only is ICANN in "serious need of reform" but with regard to the Roberts Missive, should be more of an "observer" than a "player" in this critical area. A career technologist, Auerbach has posted some rather well-contrived suggestions for ICANNís role and improving the security and stability of the Internet as his website. Yes, Karl is one of the few voices of reason, sanity, candor, and occasional dissent on ICANN's Board. He doesn't drink the Kool Aid served at ICANN meetings very often, either. Roberts' wraps up his missive with a grave warning to the At-Large Study community (ALSC), many of whose views run contrary to ICANN. He admonishes them to be "prepared to compromise your goals" in light of the post-September 11th, anti-terrorist-centric ICANN organization he is trying to craft. Translation: As always, if you're against us, be prepared to be chastised, ignored, or steamrolled by us so we can stay in the spotlight and in-charge. Resistance is futile. (Remember President Bush's admonition above?) The missive concludes with Roberts' saying ICANN doesn't deserve the "abuse" it receives on various e-mail lists and public forums. This is nothing more than the Dot Pot calling the Dot Kettle black. Roberts is shedding crocodile tears here, and no sympathy should be given. The entity he helped establish is starting to publicly show its limitations and self-imposed shortcomings....let the truth be heard! While some forums are more inflammatory than others, the underlying premise remains the same - and Roberts is old enough to know that the truth can sometimes hurt. Using anti-terrorism as the impetus to further legitimize ICANN's self-perceived importance to the world is ludicrous, and further demonstrates the immaturity of its corporate philosophy and self-serving groupthink. As mentioned above, comments like these lead many of us believe Roberts is angling for elected or appointed political office somewhere, using his involvement with ICANN as a personalized bully pulpit. Mister Roberts admittedly reads Thomas Friedman's column in the New York Times. He must have overlooked Friedman's October 19th observation on America's new adversaries. "Because this new system [of terror] is an incredible force-multiplier, it can super-empower evil people so they can destabilize a superpower." Replace "of terror" with "net administration" and you've got ICANN. At least according to Roberts. c) 2001 by Author. Permission is granted to quote, reprint or redistribute provided the text is not altered, and appropriate credit is given. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 29 2001 - 09:46:13 PST