[ALAC] ICANN Compliance serves breach notice on BizCN registrar

Garth Bruen gbruen at knujon.com
Sat May 17 16:26:02 UTC 2014


I want to thank everyone for helping move this along, especially Alan who
dug into the details. 

This took THREE YEARS to get to. Yes, the first complaint about this issue
with BizCn was June 2011. The complaints were repeatedly dismissed by
Compliance. While it may seem a victory for them to finally get a breach
notice, it was a shameful process getting here. While ICANN may argue that
things have changed, nothing has changed in terms of facts, only the
attitude of the organization has changed. We can cheer this, but there are
bigger problems underneath. The way I see it there are two big questions:

1. Why, from June 2011 to March 2013 did they refuse to investigate the
facts of the case, even going so far as to say the data had been verified?
2. Will the Ombudsman re-open the investigation into the matter? The failure
of this office to conduct a factual investigation points to a grave loss of
accountability within ICANN.

Sincerely, Garth





-----Original Message-----
From: alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
Sent: Thursday, May 8, 2014 11:44 PM
To: Dev Anand Teelucksingh; ALAC Working List
Subject: Re: [ALAC] ICANN Compliance serves breach notice on BizCN registrar

Note that the non-compliant issues 1, 2 and 3 are all associated with an
audit to ensure that registries comply with the Expired Registration
Recovery Policy, the result of the PEDNR PDP that ALAC initiated and saw
through.

Compliance has been citing a number of registrars in recent days over these
issues.

It is worthy of note that for some of the Whois accuracy issues that we
raised, they fixed these by moving the "proxy service" from non-existent
French addresses and non-existent e-mail addresses to a new address is
Moscow (probably valid based on Google) and a new e-mail address that at
least has a valif domain name. All "interesting" to say the least.

One thing I noted that we may want to act on. The e-mail domain address
associated with this Russian proxy service is registered via the same proxy
service.

Holly: Should this be allowed under the new P/P rules being developed. Or
even registering their contact address via ANOTHER P/P service. Shoe we make
an additional statement to the WG?

Alan

At 08/05/2014 10:06 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh wrote:
>Dear All,
>
>BizCN registrar, the focus of many of the compliance related issues 
>raised by the ALAC in the past few months has been served with a breach
notice.
>See
>http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/serad-to-guanghui-08may14-e
>n.pdf
>
>Many of the concerns raised by the ALAC regarding this particular 
>registrar appear to have been included in the breach notice, including 
>the systemic Whois inaccuracy complaints.
>
>Kudos to all those involved that worked hard on this to get some results.
>
>Kind Regards,
>
>Dev Anand Teelucksingh
>_______________________________________________
>ALAC mailing list
>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
>At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki:
>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee
>+(ALAC)

_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA
C)




More information about the ALAC mailing list