Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 57

Thread: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Wash DC
    Posts
    8,766

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    WHAT IS A CYBER THREAT?

    Cyber security is a "nebulous domain... that tends to resist easy measurement and, in some cases, appears to defy any measurement," according to a report issued in March by Sandia National Laboratories.

    In order to establish a common vocabulary for discussing cyber threats, and thereby to enable an appropriate response, the Sandia authors propose a variety of attributes that can be used to characterize cyber threats in a standardized and consistent way.

    "Several advantages ensue from the ability to measure threats accurately and consistently," the authors write. "Good threat measurement, for example, can improve understanding and facilitate analysis. It can also reveal trends and anomalies, underscore the significance of specific vulnerabilities, and help associate threats with potential consequences. In short, good threat measurement supports good risk management."

    See "Cyber Threat Metrics" by Mark Mateski, et al, Sandia National Laboratories, March 2012.
    As a general rule the most successful man in life is the man who has the best information.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Rockall
    Posts
    78,958

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    Quote Originally Posted by Count Bobulescu View Post
    Expect to hear more about this in the coming days. Not sure yet if the concerns are justified or misplaced, but it’s always good to be vigilant. Read more at link.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-va...rsecurity-bill

    "There's no authority to censor or block sites in the bill," he said. "The only authority is to share information with the private sector and for them to voluntarily share it with the government.
    Well, that's reassuring... not.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Wash DC
    Posts
    8,766

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    A cyberattack against natural gas pipelines has been under way for months. "A sophisticated cyberattack intended to gain access to US natural gas pipelines has been under way for several months, the Department of Homeland Security has warned, raising fresh concerns about the possibility that vital infrastructure could be vulnerable to computer hackers. The department’s Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team said recently that it had identified a single campaign behind multiple attempted intrusions into several different pipeline companies since December last year. There was no information about the source or motive for the attack, but industry experts suggested two possibilities: an attempt to gain control of gas pipelines in order to disrupt supplies or an attempt to access information about flows to use in commodities trading...The threat of attacks on IT systems has prompted the US authorities to step up their security efforts in recent years, including the creation of ICS-CERT, designed to protect critical infrastructure." Ed Crooks in The Financial Times.
    As a general rule the most successful man in life is the man who has the best information.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    5,727

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    Quote Originally Posted by Count Bobulescu View Post
    A cyberattack against natural gas pipelines has been under way for months. "A sophisticated cyberattack intended to gain access to US natural gas pipelines has been under way for several months, the Department of Homeland Security has warned, raising fresh concerns about the possibility that vital infrastructure could be vulnerable to computer hackers. The department’s Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team said recently that it had identified a single campaign behind multiple attempted intrusions into several different pipeline companies since December last year. There was no information about the source or motive for the attack, but industry experts suggested two possibilities: an attempt to gain control of gas pipelines in order to disrupt supplies or an attempt to access information about flows to use in commodities trading...The threat of attacks on IT systems has prompted the US authorities to step up their security efforts in recent years, including the creation of ICS-CERT, designed to protect critical infrastructure." Ed Crooks in The Financial Times.

    You know this is where we will be fighting our next war, right?

    Too tired to expand on this thought right now. I need to stop thinking. Stop thinking.
    .

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Wash DC
    Posts
    8,766

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    Quote Originally Posted by random new yorker View Post
    You know this is where we will be fighting our next war, right?
    .
    Absolutely!
    As a general rule the most successful man in life is the man who has the best information.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    hiding inside Brendan Gleesons underwear drawer...
    Posts
    13,555

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    Quote Originally Posted by Count Bobulescu View Post
    A cyberattack against natural gas pipelines has been under way for months. "A sophisticated cyberattack intended to gain access to US natural gas pipelines has been under way for several months, the Department of Homeland Security has warned, raising fresh concerns about the possibility that vital infrastructure could be vulnerable to computer hackers. The department’s Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team said recently that it had identified a single campaign behind multiple attempted intrusions into several different pipeline companies since December last year. There was no information about the source or motive for the attack, but industry experts suggested two possibilities: an attempt to gain control of gas pipelines in order to disrupt supplies or an attempt to access information about flows to use in commodities trading...The threat of attacks on IT systems has prompted the US authorities to step up their security efforts in recent years, including the creation of ICS-CERT, designed to protect critical infrastructure." Ed Crooks in The Financial Times.
    No sources forthcoming from them as to who may be carrying out the attacks? Seems a tad made up on their part if you ask me, they know about the attacks but there is no signature at all there as to how did them? There was a great article recently in rolling stone magazine about the stux net virus and how they worked out using the programing languages who had designed it and it was a lot more complex than something that would be used on an industrial complex like this. Where is jmc when you need him? He knows all about these techy things and can explain it a lot better than I can!
    History is the only true teacher, the revolution the best school for the proletariat - Rosa Luxembourg

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Wash DC
    Posts
    8,766

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    I'm not a fan of the Daily Caller, but this popped up on my Google feed. Who would you like in charge of your internet, the current lot, US based NGO agencies, or Vlad Putin and the Chinese? Vlad and the Chinese are making a bid to gain control. read on, full piece below.

    http://dailycaller.com/2012/05/24/de...rnet-takeover/

    The State Department is expected to finally name a lead negotiator next month for high level international talks with the U.N. in December that would decide the fate of the Internet, a senior U.S. official told Florida Republican Senator Marco Rubio last week.

    The nomination would come nearly a year after then-Russian Prime Minister Vladmir Putin announced in June 2011 that he and his allies sought to establish international control over the Internet. At the time, Putin had “reaffirmed” Russia’s support of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) — a little-known U.N. agency responsible for the international regulation of long-distance calls and satellite orbits — as his preferred instrument to bring about international cooperation on cybersecurity and Internet issues. Russia is a co-founder of the ITU, dating back to 1866.

    Following Putin’s announcement, Russia, and several of its authoritarian allies – China, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan – submitted a document entitled “The International Code of Conduct for Information Security” to the U.N. in September 2011. The document was hailed by the Chinese government as “the first relatively comprehensive and systematic document in the world … to formulate international rules to standardize information and cyberspace behavior.”

    The Daily Caller first reported in December 2011 that FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell warned the Federal Communications Bar Association of the effort by China, Russia and other authoritarian regimes to upend the Internet from its current model — a voluntary multi-stakeholder process, loosely governed through various U.S.-based nongovernmental international organizations.

    Russia and its allies are currently pushing to renegotiate a treaty that deregulated international telecommunications and set the stage for the expansion of the Internet. First established in 1988, 193 countries are expected to vote on a new version of the treaty, the International Telecommunications Regulations (ITR), at an ITU conference in Dubai this December.

    McDowell in a February Wall Street Journal Op-Ed continued his efforts to sound an alarm and draw attention to the issue.
    During a recent Senate hearing, McDowell told Rubio that the State Department — which would take the lead role on negotiations with the ITU — still has yet to appoint a head of the U.S. delegations to the conference.

    The commission plays, actually, a supporting role as a sort of technical advisor to the State Department,” said McDowell. “The State Department takes the lead role on that. I understand that through both private and public information that the State Department will be announcing a head of the U.S. delegation, a head negotiator, probably next month sometime.”

    “This comes at a crucial time as some very crucial meetings are going to take place internationally later in June leading towards a treaty negotiation in Dubai this December,” said McDowell. “So it’s really of utmost importance that the United States cultivate allies throughout the world and especially the developing world, which could be devastated by international regulation of Internet governance.”

    Rubio, no stranger to the fight for Internet freedom, denounced federal regulation of Internet service providers by way of the FCC’s net neutrality regulations during the November 2011 Senate showdown and withdrew his support for the Protect IP Act (PIPA), the Senate’s version of the much-despised Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), and called upon Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to reconsider bringing the bill to the Senate floor, when thousands of websites — including Wikipedia and Google — protested the legislation in January.

    “Any place that bans certain terms from search should not be a leader in international Internet regulatory framework,” said Rubio, referencing China’s practice of censoring certain keywords in search engines.

    Believed to be on the short-list of potential running mates for presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, Rubio also declared during a talk in March at The Heritage Foundation that Fidel Castro’s Cuba could not survive a technological opening; during a speech at the Brookings Institution in April, he praised the role of Americans in creating the Internet.

    McDowell was, however, encouraged by a recent joint statement made by the White House, the State Department and the Commerce Department about the upcoming negotiations, which he said the FCC was “on board with.” FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski affirmed the Obama Administration’s stance that it was committed to strongly opposing the proposals to bring the Internet under an international regulatory framework.

    Internet freedom has been a major foreign policy issue for the State Department since the beginning of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s tenure. Called ”the godmother of 21st century statecraft” by her Senior Advisor for Innovation Alec Ross in a July 2010 New York Times feature, Clinton is credited with ushering in the use of mobile digital technology to “amplify” traditional diplomatic efforts and encourage cyber activism.

    Scott Cleland, a member of the United States Department of State Advisory Committee on International Communications and Information Policy, told TheDC that the renegotiation of the ITR would essentially create an “ITUnet,” an international alternative to the Internet with much stricter governance. The U.N. being a voluntary organization, however, would not have enforcement power to coerce nations into compliance with the treaty.

    “Everything about the Internet is voluntary, and in order for this to work, countries would have to leave the Internet and join an ‘ITUnet,’” said Cleland, who served under the previous Bush Administration, in addition to the current Obama Administration.

    “Only authoritarian regimes and their allies want an ‘ITUnet,’” said Cleland, “That would provide political cover for them to take control of their national Internet.”
    Not everyone, however, is convinced of the State Department’s efficacy in the promotion of Internet freedom, nor the U.S. government’s own track record on Internet issues.

    “America’s “Internet freedom agenda” is at best toothless and at worst counterproductive,” said Evgeny Morozov, a fellow at the DC-based progressive think tank New America Foundation, in a recent piece in Slate critical of both the State Department’s and the hacktivist group Anonymous’ Internet freedom agendas. New America Foundation has worked closely with the State Department on various Internet freedom initiatives.

    “While Hillary Clinton likes to give speeches in which she fashions herself the world’s greatest defender of “Internet freedom,” the harsh reality is that her own government is its greatest enemy,” said Morozov. “Given the never-ending flow of draconian copyright and cybersecurity laws coming from Washington, this fact is getting harder and harder to conceal from the global public, who starts to wonder why American diplomats keep criticizing Russia or China but don’t say anything about the impressive online spying operation that the National Security Agency is building in Utah.”

    Democrats and Republicans have been quarreling over how to expand executive branch power over the Internet and to regulate and surveil Americans: the FBI wants to wiretap social networks, the CIA wants to spy on Americans through their dishwashers, and a member of Congress wanted to give DHS the ability to spy on the legislative and judicial branches.

    “While focusing on (and overselling) the liberating promise of social media in authoritarian regimes,” said Morozov, “it conceals a number of emerging domestic threats that have nothing to do with dictators—and everything to do with aggressive surveillance, disappearing privacy, and the astonishing greed of Silicon Valley.”

    The State Department did not return The Daily Caller’s request for comment.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/05/24/de...#ixzz1w0g0Rmkk
    As a general rule the most successful man in life is the man who has the best information.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    5,727

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    Sure most of the folks here would be pleased with Vlad, Vlad...

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Derry
    Posts
    2,074

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    Quote Originally Posted by Count Bobulescu View Post
    I'm not a fan of the Daily Caller, but this popped up on my Google feed. Who would you like in charge of your internet, the current lot, US based NGO agencies, or Vlad Putin and the Chinese? Vlad and the Chinese are making a bid to gain control. read on, full piece below.
    The whole point of the Internet, a distrubuted decentralised network, was that it could not be easily shut down or controlled even in the event of nuclear war.

    Politicians are wedded to ancient obsolete notions of top-down control over hierarchical pyramid structures. That world is slipping away, and eventually the self-organising spontaneous-assembly flat organisational structures and flexible project management of the open source world will begin bleeding out into other areas of society. It's already happening with the slow death of newspapers and the rise of informed independent bloggers - it'll happen everywhere else too, in all other industries, and eventually traditional 19th-century politics and politicians will be rendered obsolete.

    The real revolution is already underway and cannot be stopped.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    5,727

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    Quote Originally Posted by Sidewinder View Post
    The whole point of the Internet, a distrubuted decentralised network, was that it could not be easily shut down or controlled even in the event of nuclear war.

    Politicians are wedded to ancient obsolete notions of top-down control over hierarchical pyramid structures. That world is slipping away, and eventually the self-organising spontaneous-assembly flat organisational structures and flexible project management of the open source world will begin bleeding out into other areas of society. It's already happening with the slow death of newspapers and the rise of informed independent bloggers - it'll happen everywhere else too, in all other industries, and eventually traditional 19th-century politics and politicians will be rendered obsolete.

    The real revolution is already underway and cannot be stopped.
    Great. We agree here.

    More relevant to this discussion:

    May i remind you that the US is (to my knowledge that you are more than welcome to challenge) the country in the western world that has more experience negotiating under self-organizing spontaneous-assembly FLAT organizational structures and flexible project management that you so pompously refer to above?
    .

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Wash DC
    Posts
    8,766

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    As was laid out in the article quoted in the OP the debate at the Dubai conference on the ITU will come down to western countries versus many emerging countries. It goes without saying that there will be an element of US bashing and an attempt to stick it to Man.

    If control of the assignment of domain names etc were to pass from the existing US based NGO’s to the UN sponsored ITU, there would be little noticeable change in western society but potentially significant negative change for the residents of the countries that want to censor the net. And because the UN is voluntary it would not have the enforcement power to.coerce countries into compliance with the treaty. So Russia, China, etc. could argue in favor of the treaty, sign up to it, and then promptly ignore it
    As a general rule the most successful man in life is the man who has the best information.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Wash DC
    Posts
    8,766

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    http://www.rt.com/news/itu-internet-...on-russia-386/

    Russia backed by China and India is pushing through a takeover of the internet by a UN supranational agency to make the web truly universal. The aim of the plan is to standardize the behavior of countries concerning information and cyberspace.

    *Leading emerging economies supported by other United Nations members initiated the discussion around handing over internet regulation to a UN agency. At present it is controlled by private shareholders.

    BRICS countries China, Brazil, India and Russia share the belief that the Geneva-based UN agency the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) would do a better job if put in charge of international cyber security, data privacy, technical standards and the global web address system.
    *
    ‘Hands off our web

    *This week the US House of Representatives prepares to vote on the proposal and the expectations are, there will be no great uphill struggle.Washington opposed UN regulation of the internet just weeks after the “international code of conduct for information security” was submitted to the General Assembly.

    Commander of US Cyber Command Army Gen. Keith Alexander said “I'm not for regulating, per se. I'm concerned about it, and this is a tough question.”
    Gen. Alexander stressed that instead of expecting action from the UN, sovereign states should better secure critical infrastructure and government networks without official regulation.

    The American side admits that the current multi-stakeholder system gives maneuver space to nonprofit organizations worldwide instead of governments. Nonprofits are the indispensable element of American “soft power” over the world and it is highly doubtful they could be sacrificed that easily.

    The head of the US Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration Larry Strickling has been categorical, saying in the regulations supposed by the initiative “it is really the governments that are at the table, but the rest of the stakeholders aren’t.”

    On April 19, US Congress adopted Resolution 628 “expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States should preserve, enhance, and increase access… to an open, global internet”.

    “It is the sense of the House of Representatives that if a resolution calling for endorsement of the proposed international code of conduct for information security or a resolution inconsistent with the principles above comes up for a vote in the United Nations General Assembly or other international organization, the Permanent Representative of the United States to the United Nations or the United States representative to such other international organization should oppose such a resolution,” the bill announces.

    But the International Telecommunication Union is far from giving up. The United Nations agency prepares to hold a vast World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12) in December in Dubai where ITU member states will discuss the proposed revisions to the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITR) that might expand the ITU’s mandate to encompass the internet.
    The ITR is a legally binding international treaty signed by 178 countries.
    *
    UN internet takeover initiated by Putin

    *Last June, then-PM Vladimir Putin met ITU Secretary-General Hamadoun I. Touré. The two discussed global access to the benefits of information and communication technologies (ICT). Vladimir Putin announced his support for an internet takeover by the United Nations and backed the International Telecommunication Union.

    Recalling that the ITU is one of the oldest international organizations (an extension of the International Telegraph Union established in 1865), Putin said that “Russia was one of its co-founders and intends to be an active member”.
    Among many issues on the global agenda that require international cooperation, Putin stressed the importance of the internet in particular.

    That was the beginning. Three months later, in September 2011 China, Russia and several other countries submitted to the UN a Document of International Code of Conduct for Information Security.

    Drafted as a formal document of the 66th session of the General Assembly, the paper called on UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to distribute the document among all UN member states for further discussions within the framework of the United Nations.
    This initiative could guarantee a “multilateral, transparent and democratic international management of the internet”, the paper said.
    As a general rule the most successful man in life is the man who has the best information.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Wash DC
    Posts
    8,766

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    Here’s a series that has been running in WaPo on the possibilities of cyber attacks
    Worth a read, more to come I think. New term to learn, Zero Day Vulnerability.
    20 minute reads each.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/invest...y.html?hpid=z1

    Charlie Miller prepared his cyberattack in a bedroom office at his Midwestern suburban home.
    Brilliant and boyish-looking, Miller has a PhD in math from the University of Notre Dame and spent five years at the National Security Agency, where he secretly hacked into foreign computer systems for the U.S. government. Now, he was turning his attention to the Apple iPhone.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/invest...y.html?hpid=z1
    It began as a hobby for a *teenage computer programmer named John Matherly, who wondered how much he could learn about devices linked to the Internet.
    After tinkering with code for nearly a decade, Matherly eventually developed a way to map and capture the specifications of everything from desktop computers to network printers to Web servers.
    He called his fledgling search engine Shodan, and in late 2009 he began asking friends to try it out. He had no inkling it was about to alter the balance of security in cyberspace.
    “I just thought it was cool,” said Matherly, now 28.
    Matherly and other Shodan users quickly realized they were revealing an astonishing fact: Uncounted numbers of industrial control computers, the systems that automate such things as water plants and power grids, were linked in, and in some cases they were wide open to exploitation by even moderately talented hackers
    Related

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine..._headlines_Thu

    U.S. officials and high-tech business giants have launched an assault against what they view as a massive threat to the Internet and to Silicon Valley’s bottom lines: foreign governments.
    In a congressional hearing Thursday, they will warn lawmakers of a growing movement led by China, Russia and some Arab states to hand more control of the Web to the United Nations and place rules on the Internet that the U.S. companies say would empower governments to clamp down on civil rights and free speech.
    http://gcn.com/articles/2012/05/30/i...egulation.aspx

    Beware UN regulation of the Internet, panel warns
    By William Jackson
    May 30, 2012
    The Internet has flourished in a non-regulatory environment, and imposing international controls on the global network would choke the type of innovation that has allowed it to thrive, a panel of government and industry officials said May 30.
    “The administration firmly supports the position that the United Nations is not the place for the day-to-day technical operation of the Internet,” said Richard Beaird, the State Department’s senior deputy coordinator for communications and information policy.
    Proposals that would give the U.N.’s International Telecommunications Union authority to regulate the Internet would risk balkanizing it and stifling innovation that has made it a driver of global economic growth, a panel of speakers said at a discussion hosted in Washington by the Free State Foundation, a free-market think tank.
    Source: GCN (http://s.tt/1d1Te)
    As a general rule the most successful man in life is the man who has the best information.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Wash DC
    Posts
    8,766

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    http://www.digitaltrends.com/web/wci...-the-internet/
    New site WCITLeaks.org seeks to shed light on proposals that aim to give the United Nations' International Telecommunications Union and its member states more power over the Internet.

    Last week, I wrote about how the US government is gearing up for a showdown with other United Nations member states over the future of the Internet. Basically, a growing number of countries — most notably, Russia and China — want to give regulatory power of the Internet to the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), which is a wing of the UN. This, in turn, would give ITU member states more power over the Internet. The Obama administration, Congress, and US-based businesses are all against this plan.

    At the moment, Internet governance is the duty of a number of nonprofit organizations, like the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), among others. While no government legally controls these organizations, they were more or less set up by the United States and its allies, and generally follow the lead of the US. Because the Internet is a global entity, some other countries think this is unjust and want to change the power balance. Thus, the ITU proposals.

    The proposals to make this shift are expected to be presented at a meeting in December called the World Conference on International Telecommunications, or WCIT (pronounced “wicket”). Technically, there’s nothing secret about these proposals — or, at least, there’s not supposed to be. That said, the proposals and other documents related to WCIT are frustratingly out of sight, often closed behind firewalls on the ITU website.

    Enter WCITLeaks
    And that’s where WCITLeaks.org comes in. Launched this week by Jerry Brito and Eli Dourado, policy analysts for the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, WCITLeaks is calling on those with access to the ITU proposal documents to anonymously share the information with the rest of us. Any related documents will be posted to the Website for all to see.

    Three documents have been posted so far — and what they show isn’t good. Among the documents is a proposal by the European Telecommunications Network Operators Association (ENTO), a Brussels-based lobbying group that represents 35 companies around the world. As CNet reports, the ENTO proposal wants to amend the International Telecommunications Regulations treaty (pdf) to impose taxes on major Internet companies, including Google, Facebook, Apple, and Netflix, for the traffic they gather over Internet service provider’s Internet connections.

    As you might imagine, charging such fees would create havoc in the Internet business ecosystem, and could have a wide variety of unintended consequences for users and businesses alike.


    Read more: http://www.digitaltrends.com/web/wci...#ixzz1xO7UCGDc
    As a general rule the most successful man in life is the man who has the best information.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Wash DC
    Posts
    8,766

    Default Re: World War 3.0 SOPA & Much More

    http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/15/de...nference-leak/
    New documents, from Brazil and Saudi Arabia, about proposals for a December international telecommunications conference in Dubai have surfaced, due to the efforts of WCITLeaks.org.

    WCITLeaks — a site launched by Jerry Brito, a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University and director of its Technology Policy Program — posted the documents on Friday. The post came just ahead of the Council Working Group (CWG) meeting for the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), scheduled for June 20-22, in Geneva, Switzerland.

    The ITU is a U.N. agency responsible for the regulation of satellite orbits and long-distance calls. The treaty that is set to be renegotiated is the 1988 version of International Telecommunication Regulations, which deregulated international telecommunications and paved the way for the Internet.
    A renegotiation of the treaty terms could place the Internet under international regulation, disrupting the current voluntary governance process — the “multi-stakeholder” process. In preparation for the December conference, ITU member states are expected to discuss the proposals at the CWG.
    “The proposals are not classified, and it’s not illegal to share them,” Brito said earlier in June.

    On May 31, Brazil submitted a document entitled, “Principles for the Governance and Use of the Internet.” Among the principles outlined are guarantees to “freedom, privacy and human rights,” “innovation,” and net neutrality.
    According to the leaked document, Saudi Arabia proposed that the ITU secretary-general conduct a “feasibility study” to both consider increasing government representation in the CWG, and to consider the “written contributions” of “other stakeholders.”

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/15/de...#ixzz1yAxxIEUJ
    http://www.zdnetasia.com/multi-stake...y-62305133.htm
    Given that the contract to oversee the global domain name system will be up for renewal this September, and the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) will be organizing a global conference to review existing policies to include Internet management aspects into ongoing treaties, there is a lot of uncertainty regarding the future of the World Wide Web.

    One Internet Society executive argued that the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers' (ICANN) "multi-stakeholder" approach to managing affairs of the Internet should continue regardless which entity wins the contract from the U.S. Department of Commerce, though.
    Rajnesh Singh, regional director of Internet Society's Asia-Pacific bureau, said the nonprofit organization is a "strong advocate" of ICANN's multi-stakeholder model that involves all concerned parties including policymakers and industry and technical user groups to participate in its decision-making process.

    "This multi-stakeholder approach has proven to be nimble and effective in ensuring the stability, security, and availability of the global infrastructure, while still giving sovereign nations the flexibility to enact and enforce relevant Internet legislation within their borders," he stated.
    "This model has been a key contributor to the breathtaking evolution and expansion of the Internet worldwide."
    He declined to comment, however, on whether ICANN will be able to renew its contract after September, and whether other organizations winning the bid might affect the development of Internet growth.

    Multi-stakeholder model not perfect 
ICANN councilor and CEO of DotAsia, Edmon Chung, had last June pointed out that the multi-stakeholder model is not perfect and its decision-making processes are still in their very early forms. ICANN was also described by him as a "human experiment" that allows dialogue between diverse communities that have a stake in the online world.

    He added that on the issue of ICANN cutting all ties from the U.S. Department of Commerce, it is not possible to create a body that everyone has an equal say in because society has not evolved enough to allow for such an organization.
    ICANN CEO Rod Beckstrom, whose tenure at the organization ends on Jul. 1, also alluded to frustrations during his time there and pointed to a significant internal threat that might undermine its credibility.

    He said in March, during the organization's 43rd public meeting, that it was time to further tighten up the rules that have allowed perceived conflicts to exist within the board. "This is necessary not just to be responsive to the growing chorus of criticism about ICANN's ethics environment, but to ensure that absolute dedication to the public good supersedes all other priorities."

    Both ICANN and the Coalition Against Domain Name Abuse (CADNA) did not respond to ZDNet Asia's questions.
    ITU model not suited 
On the possibility of the ITU assuming the reins from ICANN, Singh pointed out that he has "serious concerns" about this due to the negative impact of some of its upcoming proposals seeking to "fence off the Internet within the constraints of national telecommunications regulations".

    The ITU will be holding its World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) this December, when 193 member states of the union will review and modify the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITR)--a 1988 treaty that currently governs traditional telecommunications.
    The director also noted that today's "international treaty making process" might not be the most effective way to manage cross-border Internet communications, or that some of the proposals up for discussion this December are "not consistent or compatible" with the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance.

    "Applying these old rules to the way Internet traffic moves between borders could have wide-ranging effects on interoperability and security, and could foist new costs on end-users," Singh said.

    A separate report by the New York Times (NYT) on Monday shed more light on the WCIT event, stating that the draft being prepared for the meeting includes several Internet-related provisions including measures to counter spam and bolster cybersecurity.
    However, it does not include any proposal to change the Internet's core governance functions, which are handled by ICANN, the Internet Engineering Task Force and the World Wide Web Consortium, the report stated.

    ITU's secretary-general Hamadoun Toure also told NYT: "It's unfortunate that the [U.S.] Congress is spending so much valuable time on something that isn't even on the table. There is no single reference to Internet governance in the preparation document."
    The ITU senior official's comments were aimed at the U.S. House of Representatives hearing in May 31. Democratic and Republican government officials had spoken out then against proposals from China, Russia, Iran, and Saudi Arabia calling for a less U.S.-dominated process, saying that if these are adopted, it would lead to a virtual takeover of the Internet, according to a report by ZDNet Asia's sister site CNET.
    If you think this stuff is all just academic huha read this and think again.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...pinion_LEADTop

    It's easy to understand why countries like Russia, China and Iran would want to rewire the Internet, cutting off access to their citizens and undermining the idea of a World Wide Web. What's more surprising is that U.S. diplomats are letting authoritarian regimes hijack an obscure U.N. agency to undermine how the Internet works, including for Americans.

    The failure by U.S. negotiators to stop attacks on the Internet became known only through documents leaked last week. They concern a U.N. agency known as the International Telecommunications Union. Founded in 1865 to regulate the telegraph, the body (now part of the U.N.) is planning a World Conference on International Telecommunications in December, when the 193 U.N. member countries, each of which has a single vote, could use the International Telecommunications Regulations to take control of the Internet. The U.N. process is mind-numbing, but as Vincent Cerf, one of the founders of the Web, recently told Congress, this U.N. involvement means "the open Internet has never been at a higher risk than it is now."

    The process is secret, so it was hard to know what authoritarian governments were plotting or how the U.S. was responding. This column last month detailed some of the proposals, but other commentators doubted that any changes would be material.

    Disclosure came when two academics decided to use the openness of the Web to help save the Web. George Mason University researchers Jerry Brito and Eli Dourado earlier this month created a site called WCITLeaks.org. They invited anyone with access to the documents describing the U.N. proposals to post them, so as "to foster greater transparency." These documents are not classified but had not been made public.

    The WCITLeaks site hit pay dirt this past Friday. Someone leaked the 212-page planning document being used by governments to prepare for the December conference. Mr. Dourado summarized: "These proposals show that many ITU member states want to use international agreements to regulate the Internet by crowding out bottom-up institutions, imposing charges for international communication, and controlling the content that consumers can access online."

    The broadest proposal in the draft materials is an initiative by China to give countries authority over "the information and communication infrastructure within their state" and require that online companies "operating in their territory" use the Internet "in a rational way"—in short, to legitimize full government control. The Internet Society, which represents the engineers around the world who keep the Internet functioning, says this proposal "would require member states to take on a very active and inappropriate role in patrolling" the Internet.

    Several proposals would give the U.N. power to regulate online content for the first time, under the guise of protecting against computer malware or spam. Russia and some Arab countries want to be able to inspect private communications such as email. Russia and Iran propose new rules to measure Internet traffic along national borders and bill the originator of the traffic, as with international phone calls. That would result in new fees to local governments and less access to traffic from U.S. "originating" companies such as Google, Facebook and Apple. A similar idea has the support of European telecommunications companies, even though the Internet's global packet switching makes national tolls an anachronistic idea.
    Another proposal would give the U.N. authority over allocating Internet addresses. It would replace Icann, the self-regulating body that helped ensure the stability of the Internet, under a contract from the U.S. Commerce Department.

    According to notes in the leaked document, the U.S. delegation filed some objections here and there—but politely. The U.S. calls the broad Chinese proposal on regulating the Internet "both unnecessary and beyond the appropriate scope" of U.N. regulation. "The U.S. looks forward to a further explanation from China with regard to the proposed amendments, and we note that we may have further reaction at that time." Notes in the negotiating document say the U.S. delegation also objects to proposals in which "the text suggests that the ITU has a role in content-related issues. We do not believe it does."

    These are weak responses even by Obama administration standards. Ever since the pre-Internet era of the 1970s, authoritarian regimes have sought to use the U.N. to establish an "information world order" based on government control, not open flows of information. The U.S. learned during the Cold War that the only way to stop U.N. meddling is to wield a big stick. Washington had to leave Unesco when it played the kind of dangerous game the ITU has now chosen.

    It may be hard for the billions of Web users or the optimists of Silicon Valley to believe that an obscure agency of the U.N. can threaten their Internet, but authoritarian regimes are busy lobbying a majority of the U.N. members to vote their way. The leaked documents disclose a U.S. side that has hardly begun to fight back. That's no way to win this war.
    A version of this article appeared June 18, 2012, on page A11 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The U.N.'s Internet Power Grab.
    As a general rule the most successful man in life is the man who has the best information.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Share us
Follow Us