DNS Security Facilitation - Technical Study Group: Difference between revisions
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
# Help the [[ICANN Community]], contracted parties, and others understand the risks and benefits of DNS [[RBL|Blocking]] and filtering for [[SSR|security and stability reasons]], best practices, tooling for DNS interdependencies to avoid large-scale collateral damage, using the Public Suffix List ([[PSL]]), sharing lists to avoid overblocking, and general reputation hygiene | # Help the [[ICANN Community]], contracted parties, and others understand the risks and benefits of DNS [[RBL|Blocking]] and filtering for [[SSR|security and stability reasons]], best practices, tooling for DNS interdependencies to avoid large-scale collateral damage, using the Public Suffix List ([[PSL]]), sharing lists to avoid overblocking, and general reputation hygiene | ||
# Develop and deploy a formalized incident-response process across the DNS industry that allows for interaction with others in the ecosystem | # Develop and deploy a formalized incident-response process across the DNS industry that allows for interaction with others in the ecosystem | ||
# Raise Covert Channel Awareness | # Raise [https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9248526 Covert Channel] Awareness | ||
Of these recommendations, the TSG said the two top priorities for ICANN were conducting a study and offering a report on best practices for authentication against the different roles and risks in the DNS and encouraging the development and deployment of a formalized incident-response process across the DNS industry that allows for interaction with others in the ecosystem. | Of these recommendations, the TSG said the two top priorities for ICANN were conducting a study and offering a report on best practices for authentication against the different roles and risks in the DNS and encouraging the development and deployment of a formalized incident-response process across the DNS industry that allows for interaction with others in the ecosystem. | ||