[bestbits] [ITU-PP - cyber security] Comparison of current and proposed changes on resolution 130

[Joana Varon]

Dear all,

Reading APC excellent remarks on PP and trying to understand what is at
stake in the debate of new proposals for resolution 130: "Strengthening
the role of ITU in building confidence**and security in the use of
information and communication technologies*"*, I've been working in this
spreadsheet to compare different proposals that have been submitted with
the current text of that resolution:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jihGnkCLxuXVM1c2ZkNXlfpBbWGLhTMChK1UxCh37sg/edit?usp=sharing
*
**Current Status of the debate:*
There has been 4 proposals with some substantial changes:
- Brazil
- Arab group
- RCC (Russia)
- Indonesia
- Cuba
And there is a proposal with practically no change (from CEPT) and a NOC
(No-change) from US.

The resolution (and proposals) is being debated in an ad hoc group
chaired by Brazil.

Based on the CEPT proposal and on the US NOC, the five eyes (US,UK,
Canada, Australia and New Zealand), sometimes using the discourse of
mission creep, have been repeatedly intervened to block any change, even
though the whole text is being negotiated under brackets.

On the other hand, besides Brazil, it is not the most freedom friendly
countries that have been pushing for change.  

Analyzing the original current text (and other docs), we can observe
that it is within ITU's mandate to deal with some aspects of
cybersecurity and it is already doing. So, I believe that the argument
of "mission creep" has been thrown in a way a bit misleading, I see US
et all using "freedom" solely to protect their market. And I do believe
that texts like that resolution should be updated, particularly if based
on latest achievements in negotiations at other UN foruns, like the
resolution about privacy in the digital age, and other documents from
the WSIS+10 review process, which ITU is part of.

I know this is not consensus within civil society. And I know that
proposals do not come from the most exciting progressive group of
countries. Brazilian position can be seen as a middle ground. But, yes,
it could be tricky, but I'm always bored if I catch myself in any
alliance with US gov discourses, so I tend to flag a red light when it
happens.

I hope the spreed sheet sheds a light in this particular issue and we
can brainstorm a bit about*risks and possibilities,* particularly on the
Brazilian position vis-a-vis current res.

kind regards

joana 

-- 
Joana Varon
@joana_varon
PGP 0x016B8E73

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20141028/b74d56a9/attachment.htm>