14,932
edits
Changes
→SSAD
===SSAD===
===SSAD===
On 17 May 2018, the [[ICANN Board]] approved the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data to allow [[CPH|contracted parties]] to [[Contractual Compliance|comply with ICANN contractual]] requirements while also complying with the [[GDPR|European Union's General Data Protection Regulation]], triggering a GNSO Council initiation of a PDP on 19 July 2018. Phase 1 was to confirm the Temporary Specification by 25 May 2019. Phase 2 was chartered to discuss a standardized access model to nonpublic registration data, aka [[SSAD]].<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/initial-report-of-the-expedited-policy-development-process-epdp-on-the-temporary-specification-for-gtld-registration-data-team--phase-2a-03-06-2021 Initial Report of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Team – PHASE 2A, ICANN Public Comment]</ref>
On 17 May 2018, the [[ICANN Board]] approved the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data to allow [[CPH|contracted parties]] to [[Contractual Compliance|comply with ICANN contractual]] requirements while also complying with the [[GDPR|European Union's General Data Protection Regulation]], triggering a GNSO Council initiation of a PDP on 19 July 2018. Phase 1 was to confirm the Temporary Specification by 25 May 2019. Phase 2 was chartered to discuss a standardized access model to nonpublic registration data, aka [[SSAD]].<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/proceeding/initial-report-of-the-expedited-policy-development-process-epdp-on-the-temporary-specification-for-gtld-registration-data-team--phase-2a-03-06-2021 Initial Report of the Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on the Temporary Specification for gTLD Registration Data Team – PHASE 2A, ICANN Public Comment]</ref>
* In the public forum, [[Griffin Barnett]] notified the Board that the [[BC]], [[IPC]], the [[NomCom]] appointed representative for the [[NCPH]] did not approve the Phase 2A Final Report at the GNSO Council Vote, because the report does not require differentiation between natural and legal person data processing consistent with the GDPR or publication of a pseudonymized rather than anonymized or web form registrant email (needed to re-enable cross-domain correlation for DNS abuse law enforcement and cybersecurity efforts). [[Mason Cole]] asked why [[PPSAI]] is being held up by the SSAD ODP. [[Becky Burr]] explained that now it's held up due to [[Prioritization Framework|Prioritization]] in that [[EPDP]] Phase 2A needs to go first.
* In the public forum, [[Griffin Barnett]] notified the Board that the [[BC]], [[IPC]], the [[NomCom]] appointed representative for the [[NCPH]] did not approve the Phase 2A Final Report at the GNSO Council Vote, because the report does not require differentiation between natural and legal person data processing consistent with the GDPR or publication of a pseudonymized rather than anonymized or web form registrant email (needed to re-enable cross-domain correlation for DNS abuse law enforcement and cybersecurity efforts). [[Mason Cole]] asked why Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Implementation ([[PPSAI]]) is being held up by the SSAD ODP. [[Becky Burr]] explained that now it's held up due to [[Prioritization Framework|Prioritization]] in that [[EPDP]] Phase 2A needs to go first.
* [[ALAC]] expressed unhappiness to the [[ICANN Board]] over [[SSAD]] [[ODP]], EPDP phase 2 recommendations, emphasizing SSAD would probably not be worth the cost and would run into trouble with NIS2 when passed.
* [[ALAC]] expressed unhappiness to the [[ICANN Board]] over [[SSAD]] [[ODP]], EPDP phase 2 recommendations, emphasizing SSAD would probably not be worth the cost and would run into trouble with NIS2 when passed.
* The [[BC]] was presented with a model and demo capable of supporting both sides of the SSAD challenge. It provides the verifiable claims to support the evaluation of requests from requesters and allows the logic engine to evaluate the lawfulness of the request, even if the backend remains manual on the [[registrar]] side.
* The [[BC]] was presented with a model and demo capable of supporting both sides of the SSAD challenge. It provides the verifiable claims to support the evaluation of requests from requesters and allows the logic engine to evaluate the lawfulness of the request, even if the backend remains manual on the [[registrar]] side.