Difference between revisions of "Trusted Notifier"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "A '''Trusted Notifier''' is a designated entity for alerting Registries about illegal activity, content, and/or DNS abuse associated with a domain name.<ref>[https://www.n...") |
(I added a small "critiques" section to this page.) |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | A '''Trusted Notifier''' is a designated entity for alerting [[ | + | A '''Trusted Notifier''' is a designated entity for alerting [[registries]] about illegal activity, content, and/or DNS abuse associated with a domain name. Trusted Notifiers enter into written agreements with registries or [[registrar]]s, which outline the roles and responsibilities for handling reports of abuse. All action is still determined by the Registrar or Registry.<ref>[https://www.ntia.gov/press-release/2020/commerce-department-announces-ntia-pilot-program-hhs-fda-fight-illegal-online#:~:text=The%20%E2%80%9Ctrusted%20notifier%E2%80%9D%20designation%20expedites,for%20suspending%20domain%20name%20registrations.&text=At%20the%20end%20of%20the,sale%20of%20unapproved%20opioids%20online. Commerce Department Announces NTIA Pilot Program with HHS, FDA to Fight Illegal Online Opioid Sales]</ref> |
| + | ==Characteristics== | ||
| + | Trusted notifiers tend to have a higher level of confidence in reporting malicious activity than outside referrals. However, not all notifiers are “Trusted Notifiers.” What makes a notifier [[trust]]ed? The organization:<ref>[https://www.rysg.info/wp-content/uploads/archive/Final-CPH-Notifier-Framework-6-October-2021.pdf CPH Notifier Framework]</ref> | ||
| + | * has strong, demonstrated subject matter expertise | ||
| + | * shows consistent adherence to substantive, procedural due diligence | ||
| + | * rigorously reports | ||
| + | * is committed to a low false-positive rate and the accuracy of its notices | ||
| + | * has an enumerated challenge process for registrants | ||
| + | ==Types and Examples of Programs== | ||
| + | ===Government=== | ||
| + | * The [[NTIA]] and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s trusted notifier pilot program curbs access to illegal online opioid sales by working with domain name registries.<ref>[https://www.ntia.doc.gov/blog/2021/ntia-fda-pilot-program-curb-access-illegal-opioids-online-delivers-promising-results NTIA & FDA TF Pilot Program]</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Non-Governmental Arrangements=== | ||
| + | * [[TWNIC]] and [[DotAsia]] announced a trusted notifier fast track mechanism in March 2022.<ref>[https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20220329PR200.html&chid=9 TWNIC and DotAsia establish fast track mechanism to fight DNS abuse, Digitimes]</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Content-Based=== | ||
| + | Often Operators lack the subject-matter competencies and resources to identify, evaluate, and verify the alleged abuse. | ||
| + | * The MPAA is treated as a Trusted Notifier for reporting large-scale pirate websites registered in a domain extension operated by [[Donuts]], as announced in February 2016.<ref>[https://www.motionpictures.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Donuts-and-MPAA-Establish-New-Partnership-2.9.16.pdf Donuts and MPAA Trusted Notifier Piracy Program, Motion Pictures]</ref> | ||
| + | * It is illegal for Operators to try to verify certain types of abusive content (such as CSAM). [https://www.iwf.org.uk/about-us/ Internet Watch Foundation] has trusted notifier arrangements with many entities. See the full list [https://www.iwf.org.uk/membership/our-members/ here]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Critiques == | ||
| + | While the Trusted Notifier process is efficient for governmental involvement in virtual crimes, some are concerned about the involvement of private parties in content regulation.<ref>Schwemer, Sebastian Felix, [https://ssrn.com/abstract=3287754 Trusted Notifiers and the Privatization of Online Enforcement] (November 20, 2018).</ref> Concerns include: | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Lack of transparency in non-sensitive private regulation. | ||
| + | * The inability of governing bodies to regulate Trusted Notifier Agreements between private entities and registrars. | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:DNS Abuse Responses]] | ||
Latest revision as of 18:46, 13 June 2023
A Trusted Notifier is a designated entity for alerting registries about illegal activity, content, and/or DNS abuse associated with a domain name. Trusted Notifiers enter into written agreements with registries or registrars, which outline the roles and responsibilities for handling reports of abuse. All action is still determined by the Registrar or Registry.[1]
Characteristics
Trusted notifiers tend to have a higher level of confidence in reporting malicious activity than outside referrals. However, not all notifiers are “Trusted Notifiers.” What makes a notifier trusted? The organization:[2]
- has strong, demonstrated subject matter expertise
- shows consistent adherence to substantive, procedural due diligence
- rigorously reports
- is committed to a low false-positive rate and the accuracy of its notices
- has an enumerated challenge process for registrants
Types and Examples of Programs
Government
- The NTIA and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s trusted notifier pilot program curbs access to illegal online opioid sales by working with domain name registries.[3]
Non-Governmental Arrangements
Content-Based
Often Operators lack the subject-matter competencies and resources to identify, evaluate, and verify the alleged abuse.
- The MPAA is treated as a Trusted Notifier for reporting large-scale pirate websites registered in a domain extension operated by Donuts, as announced in February 2016.[5]
- It is illegal for Operators to try to verify certain types of abusive content (such as CSAM). Internet Watch Foundation has trusted notifier arrangements with many entities. See the full list here.
Critiques
While the Trusted Notifier process is efficient for governmental involvement in virtual crimes, some are concerned about the involvement of private parties in content regulation.[6] Concerns include:
- Lack of transparency in non-sensitive private regulation.
- The inability of governing bodies to regulate Trusted Notifier Agreements between private entities and registrars.
References
- ↑ Commerce Department Announces NTIA Pilot Program with HHS, FDA to Fight Illegal Online Opioid Sales
- ↑ CPH Notifier Framework
- ↑ NTIA & FDA TF Pilot Program
- ↑ TWNIC and DotAsia establish fast track mechanism to fight DNS abuse, Digitimes
- ↑ Donuts and MPAA Trusted Notifier Piracy Program, Motion Pictures
- ↑ Schwemer, Sebastian Felix, Trusted Notifiers and the Privatization of Online Enforcement (November 20, 2018).