DNS Abuse Responses
DNS Abuse Responses are the various tools, methods, collaboration, and philosophies spawning from DNS Abuse itself.
Overview edit
There are four time-related categories of responses to DNS Abuse:
- reactionary detection and removal of sources of abuse (necessarily after the fact),
- cotemporal efforts to mitigate the amount and likelihood of abuse or its impact,
- future-focused work on stopping abuse before it can happen, and
- ongoing allowance of abuse for ideological or jurisdictional reasons.
Response Options edit
Reactionary Removal edit
Cotemporal Mitigation edit
Future Prevention edit
Intentional Inaction edit
Points of View edit
Every type of Internet user has worries over DNS Abuse and the responses to it.
Social Scientists edit
Governments/Intergovernmental Organizations edit
Pro-Mitigation edit
- Budapest Convention
- Domestic Legislation
Pro-Privacy= edit
Pro-privacy legislation
Technical Community edit
Internet Governance Organizations edit
ICANN edit
So far, ICANN has been steadfast in its focus on technical DNS abuse and avoidance of policymaking around content abuse. As recently as ICANN 71, the organization was criticized by [[____]] and [[ ___]] for not doing enough to steward contracted parties and non-contracted parties toward involvement in reducing abuse. However, ICANN and SSAC, in particular, can point to SAC115.
IGF edit
DNS Abuse Institute edit
This newcomer is entirely focused on
Private Sector edit
Registars edit
Registries edit
BC edit
The business community wants
IP edit
Intellectual property lawyers
ISPCP edit
Internet Service and Connectivity providers
Reputation Industry edit
End Users edit
End users, even those who work in the DNS industry, need help managing DNS Abuse mainly because of the timeless effectiveness of Social Engineering attacks. For instance, at the end of 2020, GoDaddy notoriously tested its workers to see if they would share sensitive information after clicking on dubious links from a spoofed email.[1]