Re: [dssa] Interesting article -- probably out of scope for us, but FYI

[Patrik Fältström <paf@xxxxxxxxx>]

Just explain what is not included (typosquatting) and what is (confusability) 
[and what the difference is].

I.e. I think DSSA must explain why ICANN is evaluating confusability issues, 
and what that have to do with stability and security.

   Patrik

On 14 sep 2011, at 08:44, Patrick Vande Walle wrote:

> I tend to agree with Jim.
> 
> Clearly, the sort of typosquatting mentioned in the Ars Tecnica is not 
> something the ICANN community can do something about.
> 
> We may want to mention in the final report a non-exhaustive list of what 
> behaviours we considered being out of scope. At least, that would acknowledge 
> that we looked at them.
> 
> Patrick Vande Walle
> 
>  
> On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 07:11:35 +0100, James M Galvin wrote:
> 
>> This is not a "don't go down too deep issue", it really is out of scope.
>> 
>> The distinction that I think is important is that we are chartered to 
>> consider DNS security and stability issues, not issues for which the 
>> DNS can be used for nefarious or malicious purposes.  The fact that one 
>> can do bad things with the DNS does not make the DNS bad.  Even DNSSEC 
>> does not help the problem being described because it's not a DNS 
>> problem.
>> 
>> It might be worth a short discussion of this distinction in our final 
>> report.
>> 
>> Jim