[governance] Fwd: Call for input to President's Commission on Enhancing Cybersecurity - bridging the trust gap between the IT community and the US government

[JFC Morfin]

Dear Herb,

I am afraid the architectonic solution is quite simple and we all 
know it pretty well since 1986 : add an ISO presentation layer six to 
the Internet architecture. The problem are :
- where to put it
- where to get the money from.
- what is the political impact.

- Where? where the RFC 1958 Internet architecture tells it : at the 
fringe, i.e. on the user side. It means ***outside*** of the 
internet. i.e. along the principle of subsidiarity? This has been 
already documented by the WG/IDNA2008 chaired by Vint Cerf, but not 
fully built upon by the IAB (RFC 5895).

- who is to pay for it? the users. Problem ; they will want something 
in return. Control on the added intelligence in their layer six 
interface/box: i.e. freedom to chose their RFC 6852 Global Community. 
And therefore the referential service to their smart interface. i.e. 
their e-nation.

Impact ? a choice must be done:

- either no security and keep ICANN/IANA for everyone,
- or security
--- and ICANN/IANA only for the US Citizen
--- and new IANA zones (ex. DNS Classes) for the other nations.

I am afraid this was what was voted at the DubaI ITU 2012 meeting 
against the NSA, so they were happy with the Snowdenia derivative. 
After 30 years they keep  restaining the world, strangling 
innovation, in the hope of an impossible solution. The network is 
quite stubborn. An open distributed network cannot be US centralized. 
This is the US BUG: if they want to dataoms work their way, the US 
are to "Be Unilaterally Global".

Something that most do not want.

Best
jfc



At 21:01 18/07/2016, willi uebelherr wrote:

>Fom: Herb Lin <herblin at stanford.edu>
>
>Dear IPers -
>
>You may know that President Obama has established a commission to
>consider how to strengthen cybersecurity in both the public and
>private sectors while protecting privacy, ensuring public safety and
>economic and national security, fostering discovery and development
>of new technical solutions, and bolstering partnerships between
>Federal, State, and local government and the private sector in the
>development, promotion, and use of cybersecurity technologies,
>policies, and best practices.  (See
>https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/02/09/executive-order-commission-enhancing-national-cybersecurity
>.)
>I am one of the 12 designated commissioners.
>
>Recognizing that trust is hard to build and easy to destroy (and a
>variety of things have happened over the last 20 years have occurred
>to do the latter), one issue that has come up is the enormous gap of
>trust between the U.S. government and the information technology
>(IT) community, from which many IPers are drawn.  This rift is not
>helpful to either side, and I'd like to solicit input from the IP
>community about what you think the government can do or refrain from
>doing to help bridge that gap.
>
>It would be most helpful if you could three things in your response:
>
>1 - Your best examples of things the government (and what part of the
>US government) has done to alienate the IT community specifically.
>(Or, at the very least, show how the examples you provide connect to
>the interests of the IT community.)
>
>2 - Things that the U.S. government could realistically do in the
>short and medium term (i.e., 0-10 year time frame) that would help
>bridge the trust gap.  If your answer is "Don't do dumb things!", it
>would be better and more useful to provide *examples* of what not to
>do.
>
>3 - Things that the U.S. government could realistically do in the
>longer term to do the same.
>
>Please send your responses to CENCinput1 at gmail.com.  (I set up this
>email address, but I'd like to keep the traffic separate from my
>non-Commission work email.)  I promise to read as many as I can
>individually and share what I learn with the commission membership.
>
>Also, feel free to circulate this call for input to anyone else you
>feel would want to comment.
>
>Thanks much
>
>Herb


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t