April 2009 - skunkworks - Skunkworks Site

Acer Aspire with dodgy keyboard
by Daudi Were 15 Apr '09

15 Apr '09

Hi people, I got my hands on a brand new Acer Aspire One ZG5 but it seems to have a dodgy keyboard/track pad not all the keys seem to work. For example pressing “B” or “N” has no effect pressing “M” types \m. similarly pressing “J” has no effect but pressing “L” types “lj” in that order. Another example pressing “8” has no effect but pressing “0” types 8. Writing this I notice a pattern if I start from 8 and type downwards and diagonally towards the right crtl button, pressing: 8 – types nothing I – types iy K – types kn < - types ,b the trackpad is also moody – pressing the right button does nothing at all and the left button alternates between behaving like the left and then like the right. So first of all – could this be a software problem? The laptop came with windows xp home pre-installed and I received it brand new – box unopen – battery not slotted in – had to set windows up. Keyboard is set to US. Secondly – if the Keyboard is Gaza are there any official Acer dealers in Kenya who would respect international warranty and repair or replace the machine free of charge? ( I have the original receipts). The machine was bought in Sydney, Australia last Friday. Any suggestions would be appreciated – I don't really want to go into installing a new OS as if I have to return it I want it to be in as original state as possible. Thanks D -- Pamoja e:daudi.were@gmail.com skype: d.were

6 7

Internet connection issues
by Simon Mbuthia 15 Apr '09

15 Apr '09

Hi guys, I recently upgraded my PC by changing the motherboard, and other parts, and since then, I have been having issues with my connection. I have spoken with someone from my ISP and she said the problem could be on my side. Whenever I dial up, it's an iBurst connection, I get connected, but the link only stays up for a short time then becomes so slow. If I disconnect and reconnect, it fails to resolve DNS entries, so I reboot and the connection is back again, only for the link to become slow again after a few minutes. So I've been wondering whether it could be my NIC... coz apparently, I'm the only one on iBurst having that issue, according to the person I spoke with from the ISP. Anyone know what my problem could be? Thanks, Me.

3 3

It's Track IT not Car Track
by Peter Osotsi 14 Apr '09

14 Apr '09

I see Skunks here confusing two car tracking companies. Its Track IT not Car Track, those are two different companies. Apparently, we lack innovation in Kenya. Think of Safaricom and your neighboring shop renames to Safaricane or Safaricon. Mlevi hawezi kuona tofauti. No wonder Kenyans are being conned left, centre and right and they won't complain to moribund authorities. Kenfish.

1 0

Toshiba Tecra
by Musya mike 14 Apr '09

14 Apr '09

Any one with Toshiba Tecra A8 recovery cd?Lost my CD and XP doesn't install at all...never goes past the 'Select partition(to format/delete/create' screen even with a cd having SATA drivers(added with nlite). Ubuntu installs fine but need a xp partition or Vista.Please help...

4 5

AfricanSignals.com: Tracking mobile phone and internet costs in Kenya
by Erik Hersman 14 Apr '09

14 Apr '09

I just pushed out a new wiki to track costs and services by the mobile phone operators and ISPs in each country in Africa. This has been a big pain for most of us over the years, just keeping up with what is out there, its real cost, and the real speeds and usability of the service. If you have 5 minutes, jump over to http://www.africansignals.com/ kenya (or whatever your country you feel like) and add to it. Let's see if we can make this a real resource for everyone. My blog post on it, with a special thanks to Josiah Mugambi, Jon Gosier, John Etherton and Brian Muita for helping to get some info in there: http://whiteafrican.com/2009/04/14/tracking-mobile-and-internet-services-ac… Cheers! Erik Hersman www.AfriGadget.com www.WhiteAfrican.com

1 0

Re: [Skunkworks] [kictanet] Fwd: IGF 2008 Highlights - Reminder
by John Walubengo 14 Apr '09

14 Apr '09

Thanx Mwende on the highlights of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) meeting at Hyderabad, India 2008. Quite an overload I must say - buffer overflow in technical terms ;-) Hope u will be there tmrw morning @Jacaranda to verbalize all these in simpler terms and within 10-15mins... Regards. walu. --- On Tue, 4/14/09, mwende njiraini <mwende.njiraini(a)gmail.com> wrote: > From: mwende njiraini <mwende.njiraini(a)gmail.com> > Subject: [kictanet] Fwd: IGF 2008 Highlights - Reminder > To: jwalu(a)yahoo.com > Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> > Date: Tuesday, April 14, 2009, 3:31 PM > Dear all > Below are Highlights of the IGF held in Hyderabad sent to > the mailing list > last year. > regards > Mwende > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: mwende njiraini <mwende.njiraini(a)gmail.com> > Date: Dec 10, 2008 11:49 AM > Subject: Re: IGF 2008 Highlights - Day 2 > To: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions > <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> > > > > *Day 2: 4th December 2008* > > * * > > *Theme: Promoting Cybersecurity and Trust * > > * * > > *0930-1100 Panel discussions: Dimensions of Cybersecurity > and Cybercrime* > > The internet was not originally designed with security > features however with > increased use of the internet security considerations > arise. > > > > It is important to recognize regional, local and cultural > issues that may > affect cyber security and develop a relationship of trust > in order to > develop a framework that determines - what happens in a > crisis, how to > engage in law enforcement. This is important as security > issues need to be > addressed before there is a crisis and should be done at > all levels. > > > > *Computer Emergency Response Team* > > * * > > The use of the Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT) at a > regional and > national level based on the framework developed by the > Carnegie Mellon > University (www.cert.org) as follows: > > > > 1. *Organisational * > > At an organisational level there should be a person > responsible for security > – the response to security threats need to be formalized > – that is > organizational incident response should be formalized. > > > > 1. *National* > > Formation of national CERT is necessary but not sufficient. > Channels for > relaying of information, mitigating threats need to be > organised and tested > on a regular basis. The national CERT should work with > regional CERT as > well as have links with law enforcement organisations. > > There is need for development of a strategy as well as > testing of the > system. Any incidents should be reviewed. > > > > The goals of CERT should include: > > - early detection, > - short response time, > - reduction of impact, > - recognition of liability issues, > - analysis techniques – which are forensically safe, > need to be developed > in advance not when time is of the essence > - Alignment of with partners > > > > ITU-D study group 1 Q 22/1 is studying issues on: *Securing > information and > communication networks: best practices for developing a > culture of > Cybersecurity* > > > > The security should be implemented without damaging the > nature of the > internet, and protecting vulnerable groups > > > > *Introduction of cybercrime and terrorism* > > Traditional crime has moved online for example harassment > and money > laundering however there are new forms of crime in the > virtual world > including: > > - phishing, virus/malware, etc > > - Critical infrastructure threats – banking, > transport, banking, > energy, government and national security > > - Terrorist use of the internet to publish > ideologies, raise funds, > recruit new members > > > > The challenges in combating cybercrime and terrorism: > > - The crime scene and who is in charge with > dealing with the > threat. > > - Relevance of geographic distance > > - Investigative cost and the need to carry out > real time > investigations > > - Legal framework > > - Procedural legal problems > > - Complex search and seizure laws > > - Responsibility and data > > - It complex due to numerous operators involved > > > > *Questions and discussions* > > - Global issue – which needs coordinated effort > and cooperation - > in order to avoid the development of cyber havens. > > > > - Action, feedback and reaction necessary in order > to update > prevention mechanisms with regard to recent incidents > > > > - A relationship of trust important between the > CERT and ISPs –ISPs > need to provide data – this should a bottom up process > > > > - Organisations work in an eco-system –sharing > of information – > collecting statistics before, during and after an incident > > > > - Access (usage and querying) to the data base at > the CERT should > be controlled – because of privacy issues > > > > - A mutual Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) and > formal structures > should be created through a formal bottom-up process. > > > > - Network based crime raise issues associated with > creating an > appropriate balance between the needs of those > investigating and prosecuting > and rights and interests. > > > > - Need for coordination is a challenge to > governments because of > the lack of expertise – therefore have to rely on > academia and private > sector > > > > - The CERT should be an independent group of > experts that should be > fully empowered > > > > - Appropriate safeguards to protect the > functioning of the > organisation necessary as they give confidence and ensure > business > continuity during investigation > > > > - New institutional models based on hybrid > frameworks – for example > Sri-Lanka CERT was set up in June 2006 and involves > government as well as > skilled incident handlers (http://www.slcert.gov.lk/) > > > > - Need for increased cooperation as cyber crime is > multi-jurisdiction issue – harmonization of enforcement > processes and > legislation approach such as that of the council of Europe. > > > > * * > > *Indian CERT* > > - The internet is used for numerous activities > leading to an > increase cyber attacks consequently there is a need for > training on best > practices and implementation. > > - India's legislation includes computer > related offences and is > currently being amended to be in line with the European > cyber convention. > > - National CERT operates in partnership with Asia > and pacific CERTs > > - The Indian CERT is a government lead industry > initiative – that > aims at creating awareness and compliance to best practices > > - Training of law enforcement officers on analysis > of computer > related crime a challenge and undertaken through PPP. > > - A secure national cyberspace – requires > collaboration, research > in technologies through a bottom-up process. > > - Areas of conflicting interest need to be > addressed as cybercrime > is a global phenomenal – these areas include conflict > with individual > rights, unnecessary censorship and society issues > > - Establishment of global alliances essential to > ensure stability > of internet > > - Sharing to data about cyber attacks is a > challenge > > - Establishment of a CERT takes time – needs to > include > participation of private sector partners > > > > The ITU has identified five pillars with regard to internet > security which > include: > > > > 1. Legal issues > 2. Technical procedural issues, Organisational > structures including > CERTs > 3. Capacity building > 4. International cooperation > > > > There is need for proactive approach to provide an early > warning system for > example that used in the event of natural disasters as well > as need for > organisation and cooperation between all stakeholders. > > > > With regard to initiating internet security measures – > start with an issue > where there is a common understanding for example child > protection which was > the basis of the launch of the child line protection. > > > > *Capacity building* > > *Issues* > > - Lack of capacity in of ISPs > > - Inter-south cooperation required as challenges > and infrastructure > similar > > - Retention of skilled human resources a challenge > > - Use of network operator groups for capacity > building > > - Need to utilize the existing educational > framework by integration > of cybersecurity into curriculum – this creates > sustainability in capacity > building > > - Training should be relevant to the environment > – appropriate use > of technology, cost, concentrate on getting the maximum > benefit – innovation > in order to derive the maximum value will be based on > training received > > - Need for collaboration platform – so as to > continue sharing > information > > - Need to focus on reality on the ground > > > > *Kind of training* > > - technical training > > - policy issues – IPv4/6 > > > > *Technical challenges* > > - operators need to be profitable – environment > liberalized – > however still certain monopolized areas – international > connectivity – > imbalanced competition – therefore profitability issue- > cant invest in new > technologies – limited investment in training > > > > *My comment*: Urgent need create of culture of > cybersecurity (end-users, at > organisation level and nationally) and establishment of > national, regional > CERTs. > > > > *14:30 - 16:00 Workshop 76 Neutrality Debate Important for > You? (Network > Neutrality Debate: The Implications for Development) * > > * * > > *Technical issues* > > All networks need to be managed > > > > High broadband connectivity principles > > ( > http://www.tiaonline.org/gov_affairs/issues/internet_services_applications/… > ) > > > > - transparency > > - ability to attach any device > > - right to access any legal content > > - right to download any legal content > > > > *Economic issues* > > Net neutrality has significant micro and macro > implications. Broadband > investment influenced by the broad economic environment > because of the > massive investment required > > - Regulation is viewed more beneficial in view of > the current > economic crisis > > - More users create value to the platform > > - Optimal pricing structure – a possibility - > may not want to > charge content providers to contribute to access > > - Mandatory net neutrality/unbundling expected to > depress > investment in broadband plus may have a significant > negative effect on > investment NGN. > > - Centre for European Policy Studies – research > titled: "I own the > pipes, you call the tune: The net neutrality debate and its > (ir) relevance > for Europe" available at > http://shop.ceps.eu/BookDetail.php?item_id=1755 – > argues that the internet is not neutral – pro-neutrality > rules/changes being > proposed should be evaluated > > - The analogy of the roads and vehicles was used > to describe net > neutrality – the roads represent the pipes while the cars > represent the > packets/traffic – which are not regulated and may be of > any shape or > size. However > there is regulation with regard to speed. > > - issue of convergence – important for users > > - internet to drive innovation and economic growth > > - activism issues are important to understand the > issues > > - slowing down the traffic and packets on internet > has a > consequence of slowing down the development internet > > > > *Issues from a user perspective* > > - no consensus on the issues exists > > - Users do not necessarily want free/unlimited > control – however > what they want is: what they access should not be > controlled > > - They do not want to be forced to buy their store > brands or > services of preferred service providers of the broadband > connectivity > provider. > > - There is no value in packaging/bundling of > services – rather it > is designed to sell services at a high price > > - Users question whether a free market would help > as suppliers are > out to make money – there is an economic motivation to > invest – which means > there is no one to look out for consumers > > - Need for establish anti trust/anti monopoly > regulations > > - ISPs must be made to know that users are not > willing to give up > their rights thus should develop internet usage plans that > are favourable to > the users - suppliers must listen to consumers > > - Users have the power to demand what we want if > only they demanded > it > > - The investment on the internet should be allowed > in all areas – > core and edges without fragmenting it - networks should be > built using open > interfaces - end to end principle protection is significant > > - Users want the internet to encourage innovation > > - Use of restaurant analogy where the chairs, > tables and food are > outsourced > > - Users should have the ability to have access to > the content they > want as long as it is connected to open interfaces > > - Users have concern on the future of the > internet; content > equality and its ability to deliver content in different > ways thus > encouraging local innovation > > > > *My comment:* significance of net neutrality with reference > to developing > countries was not addressed – taking into consideration > that the motivation > for investment in broadband connectivity is socio-economic > development thus > deployment of both local and international for example > submarine cable is > being done by governments rather than the private sector. > > > On 12/8/08, mwende njiraini > <mwende.njiraini(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > *5th December 2008* > > *930-1100 Panel Discussion Transition from IPv4 to > IPv6* > > Based on several studies it is projected that IPv4 > addresses will be > > globally exhausted by 2011 however address space will > still be available at > > a local level. Seamless take up of IPv6 is expected > with the exhaustion of > > IPv4 and there is on going discussion – to define > policy to facilitate > > smooth transition for operators and ensure that new > comers have minimum IPv6 > > address space allocation to start up business. > > > > The following issues were discussed from different > perspectives: > > > > *Issues from operators' perspective*: > > - Deployment of IPv6 enabled equipment in the core > networks should be done > > increment – however uptake is low because there is > no extra revenue > > generated with the implementation of IPv6 i.e. the > lack of commercial > > drivers. However this is expected to change with the > as customer numbers > > grow. > > > > - Need for upgrade – therefore operators from > developed countries stand at > > an advantage as they have the resources and are nearly > exhausted their local > > allocations. > > > > - Getting operational experience is a challenge – > there is need to invest > > in operational tools to run IPv6 in terms of software > configuration > > utilities management and trouble shooting > > > > - Participation in standardization – where users > have equipment that > > supports only IPv4 – how do they access services > that are available only on > > IPv6-based networks? The IETF is working on the > transition mechanisms > > however the co-existence of both protocols is expected > for a long time > > > > - Operators are pushing for IPv6 support in customer > premise equipment > > (CPE) as well as software that supports the new > protocol version. However it > > is expected that legacy applications will be available > in the foreseeable > > future > > > > *Issues from a vendor perspective* > > - Transition has been going on for some time in the > vendor world. The > > transition has been a long process for vendors and > operators – in terms of > > getting the technology and standards ready > > > > - As IP is the core of the internet – transition to > ipv6 – is significant > > particularly with the increase of IPv6 enabled devices > connected to the > > internet specifically mobile phones > > > > - need to understand technology and therefore need for > operational and > > implementation experience > > > > - managing customer demand/expectations for IPv6 > enabled services and > > devices > > > > - cost of staff training > > > > - there are mistakes that will be made – therefore > need for mutual support > > in the implementation of v6 > > > > *Social and economic perspectives*- > > - Transition should be cooperative endeavour with > social and economic and > > policy considerations > > > > - Gradual implementation and interoperability between > IPv4 and v6 expected > > so as to preserve the investment already made > > > > - There is a general understanding that IPv6 will > compliment and supplement > > the existing IPv4 as well as provide improved routing, > multicasting, > > efficient infrastructure. The following questions > however arise: > > > > o The advantages that IPv6 offer are good reasons to > invest in the new IP > > version. > > o Would transition be transparent and would backward > compatibility required > > > > - Users want the stability of the internet to be > maintained and hope that > > IPv6 will offer opportunities for addition to > personality features on the > > internet – this is what makes the business case > > > > - In the India case there are a large number of > service providers – and > > there is only a 1/8 usage – therefore demand is low > – the need to enhance > > cultural diversity however provides opportunities to > create demand through > > local content development including E-government > programme and Info-tainment > > > > - It is important to break the myth that IPv6 is a new > internet - It is not > > a new internet rather continuation of the internet > > > > - The main benefit is the address space addition- > which may allow for > > efficiency > > > > - There is no need to establish a deadline or regulate > the implementation > > of IPv6 – as it will be market driven. Additionally > users should have rights > > to use IPv4 and IETF is working on coexistence > > > > *Policy perspective* > > - With the impending exhaustion of IPv4 – further > implementation will be > > problematic – as not all players will support > transition therefore it is > > important to examine measures – for continued use of > IPv4 and possible > > migration of users to private IPv4 address space > > > > - creation of action plan to be implemented by 2010 > – for example offering > > of incentives such as tax exemption and capacity > building > > > > - examination of existing programmes and mechanisms > > > > - establishment of taskforce of IPv4 exhaustion > > > > - the messages of ISPs is that they must carry IPv6 > > > > - IPv4 scarcity and demand for more security are the 2 > major challenges > > driving the uptake of IPv6 > > > > - Institution of market transfer or reclamation > mechanisms of IPv4 > > resources not required by local internet registries to > the regional internet > > registries when transition to IPv6 is implemented. > However this would be a > > challenge as RIRs have no contractual authority this > may create a grey > > market. This challenge may be overcome through a loose > membership > > association that allows others to use others resources > > > > - Institution of secure routing objects including PKI > to authenticate users > > raises governance/control issues – RIRs have > centralized control which may > > make it efficient and better able to address security > issues this makes an > > RIR an central governance institution. Membership of > security/government > > associations in the RIR would result in infiltration > of technical, policy > > agendas that may make the transition to IPv6 > complicated > > > > - However it is argued that RIRs should remain neutral > and trans-national > > institutions which: > > o maintain a homogenous technical group > > o maintain a bottom-up approach in policy making > > o guarantee the stability of the internet and business > continuity of > > members > > > > - main challenges in the deployment of IPv6 include: > > o lack of public education, information and skill > > o limited network policy decisions to make deployment > happen > > o lack of incentive to deploy ipv6 > > > > *1100-1230 Workshop 59:Building a global capacity > building curriculum > > framework and premier* > > > > - Integration of IG capacity building in existing ICT > and public policy > > courses was advocated. > > > > - The training may be offered either online, offline > or through short term > > executive courses. > > > > - Collaboration between different stakeholders who > have different needs is > > imperative in order create an understanding of the > issues arising from > > increased used of the internet particularly those that > transcend the > > geographical, and cultural borders. > > > > - internet security awareness programme set up in > India > > > > - Presentations on the Diplo IG capacity building > programme ( > > www.diplomacy.edu/ig) – including a demonstration of > the online platform. > > > > - The Diplo approach includes the training course > (foundation and > > advanced), policy research, policy immersion and > community interaction. > > > > - The impact associated with the IG capacity building > programme have been > > varied and impressive including the establishment of > IG governance masters > > programme in Srilanka and the use of telecentres to > disseminate IG related > > information. > > > > - Diplo has successfully offered the training to > professional worldwide for > > the last 4 years leading to the establishment of > national, regional and > > global community > > > > *1400-1530 Workshop 29: Building confidence and > security in the use and > > security in the use of ICTs for African countries > > > > *Main challenges in Africa > > - lack of infrastructure > > - lack of services > > > > Therefore opportunity to learn from mistakes in > developing countries and > > establish of computer emergency response team > currently there is only one > > active CERT in Africa in Tunisia, South Africa is in > the process of setting > > up a CERT with the deadline of 2010 before the FIFA > world cup. While > > countries such as Morocco, Kenya and Ivory Coast are > thinking about set in > > up CERTs. > > > > The approach in dealing with Cybersecurity in > developing countries > > > > Success of Cybersecurity is based on 3pillars > > > > 1. *Technology pillar* – ICT/security tools > –including: > > o PCs / networks, physical security tools, data tools > (storage media and > > cryptography), availability of infrastructure and > application (redundant > > servers and PKI) > > > > 2. *Methodology pillar* – policy, procedures and > regulations on three > > levels: > > o managerial level (security policy, management > procedures and capacity > > building, audit) Legislative level (law and > regulation) > > o operational level (acces control rules, > implementation plans, monitoring, > > watch, incidence handling) > > o continuity of services level ( business continuity > plan, crisis > > management, drill exercises) > > - actors in this pillar include the government, > security professionals and > > users > > > > 3. *Social behaviour pillar* – creating a culture of > cyber security > > o cultivate culture of cyber security through > continuous action of raising > > awareness using diverse media/channels > > o the target audience includes managers, decision > makers, security, > > children, parents, teachers > > > > > > *Case study: CERT-TCC - Tunisia* > > > > *The functions of the CERT include*: > > > > - Watch- collect information from different sources eg > CISCO, HP. > > Microsoft, network of CERTs, community of hackers > > - Training > > - Coordination > > - Response > > - Incidence handling > > - Incident analysis > > - Awareness > > - Warning alert > > > > *Key issues*: > > > > • Information, warning and alert – carried out to > in collaboration with > > ISPs, managers decision makers, internet community > through mailing list, > > call centre, media > > > > • Oriented campaign – utilizing prospectus, > posters, email, radio, > > cartoons, video, attack simulation and guides > > > > • Incident handling - training in new tools > > > > • Coordination important in the effective > functioning of the CERT – > > incident coordination procedures and information > including regional CERTs, > > other CERTs within the country (for example Brazil has > more than one CERT), > > ISPs and operators, vendors and integrators, and > national authorities. > > > > Need for the formation of CERTs in Africa however the > challenges of lack of > > "know how" in IT security need to be > overcome through: > > - capacity building > > - encouragement of the development of national > solutions based on open > > source components > > - improved R&D capabilities and making it more > responsive to urgent needs > > - encouraging academic research in the important > topics of security > > (cryptography, methodologies…) > > > > *The following questions and comments were raised*: > > > > - the need for social engineering through the creation > of a culture of > > cyber security to be addressed specifically because of > the increased > > requirements by government to obligate to provide > subscriber identification > > information > > > > - how can African countries start up a cert- through > collaboration for > > example with existing CERTs > > > > - in establishing a culture of cybersecurity – > consideration should be > > given to the fact that there are different social > cultures in different > > countries however there is consensus on issues such as > child pornography, > > identity theft > > > > - how can a regional approach be developed where there > are differences in > > level of ICT infrastructure and use of infrastructure > in the delivery of > > services, what tools can be used to encourage decision > makers to be involved > > in the issues of cyber security? > > > > o It was recognised that funding and expertise was > required for example > > AFDB, World Bank and Islamic Bank while ITU have > regional workshops on cyber > > security > > > > o As African countries build on infrastructure and > services – there is an > > opportunity to learn from those that have already > developed CERTs. > > > > - How does the CERT monitor traffic: with the > collaboration of ISP and > > operators as well as supporting legislation > > > > - Regulators need to advice the government to use ICT > in development – this > > is a manifestation of government commitment > > > > - The role of policy making was emphasized – as it > provides government > > commitment to using ICT for social economic > development and governance and > > consequently support for cyber security initiatives > – including the > > formulation of legislation. > > > > - There should not use a piece meal approach to cyber > security to prevent > > ineffectiveness for example Mauritius has electronic > transaction act but PKI > > not yet established > > > > > > > > On 12/5/08, mwende njiraini > <mwende.njiraini(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Following our recent online discussions on > Internet governance issues in > >> Kenya, the Kenya IGF and East African IGF; you may > wish to follow the > >> discussion currently ongoing at the global IGF > 2008 in Hyderabad India at > >> http://www.intgovforum.org. > >> > >> Below are highlights from workshops I attended on > Day 1 December 3rd): > >> *0930-1100 hrs Workshop 43: Legal aspects of > governance critical > >> internet Policy issues of public relevance* > >> *1st presentation* > >> The issues on that have legal implications > include: > >> • internet security intellectual property > rights, infringement, privacy > >> and protection mechanisms > >> • IP domain name protection, conflicts arising > out of data and content > >> ownership privacy therefore increasing role of P2P > in growth of internet 2 > >> • Consumer status and rights in relation to > e-commerce cross border and > >> domestic online trade > >> • Telecom issue viz backbone deployment and > interconnection costs > >> • Freedom of expression – the extent of > censorship and control on online > >> content > >> > >> There is need for capacity building to create > meaningful participation of > >> individual and SMEs as well as increasing > connectivity through building IXPs > >> and local content development > >> > >> The question was raised as to whether there a need > of alternative > >> institutional mechanism. > >> The salient features of the MOU between ICANN and > the department of > >> commerce (DoC) include: > >> - The affirmation of the role of private sector > leadership > >> - The role of DoC in ensuring transparency and > accountability and > >> effective GAC participation > >> - Ensure accountability and publish by-laws and > strategic and operational > >> plans > >> - Agreement can be terminated in 120 days > >> > >> The MOU has been criticized because of the > following reasons: > >> - US governmental control on root server > administration > >> - Inconsistent with WSIS principle where no single > government should have > >> a pre-eminent role > >> - Domain name allocation policies need better > development > >> - IPv4 address allocation have been imbalanced > need to ensure IPv6 address > >> allocation does not suffer the same effects -This > assertion was however > >> refuted as IP addresses allocation based on need. > The need for prudent > >> management and keeping barriers low for the > transition to IPv6 was > >> emphasised. > >> > >> To overcome this WGIG proposed 4 models: > >> - Global policy council > >> - Intenational internet council with leading > government role to fulfil the > >> ICANN/IANA functions > >> - GAC to be strengthened with enhanced > coordination function > >> - Replace US govt role by general internet council > or with world ICANN (in > >> lieu of GAC) > >> > >> The common features of these models were the > overwhelming government lead > >> and the presupposition of the possibility of > international treaties. During > >> the discussion the viability of these models was > questioned given that speed > >> is of essence in the management of internet > resources. It normally takes a > >> long time to negotiate international agreements; > including treaties instead > >> a set of principles should be endorsed. > >> > >> The speaker recommended on the management of > critical internet > >> infrastructure should take into consideration the > following > >> • Treatment of technical resources of the > internet and global economic, > >> social and legal aspects arising out the internet > should be at par > >> • The development and implementation of polices > and standards and > >> solutions to various internet issues should be > done in a coordinated manner > >> for example telecommunication standard development > is done in a hierarchical > >> and predictable way. > >> • New structure would be a supreme authority > over internet > >> > >> In conclusion the speaker asked: Does the internet > as we know it need to > >> be altered radically? Should the status quo be > maintained? Should a Red > >> Cross model of recognition by international > community states be given to an > >> international entity like ITU, INTELSAT. However > fundamental change is not > >> necessary as failure has not been identified. > >> > >> *My comment*: this presentation was descriptive > and despite the fact that > >> an alternative model was proposed the principles, > mechanisms that would need > >> to be put in place in order to make it work were > not discussed > >> > >> *2nd presentation* > >> The next speaker spoke about the ccTLDs in latin > Amercia which are broadly > >> organised into two main groups: non-governmental > and governmental > >> organisations. A contribution from the floor > however clarified that the > >> Brazilian ccTLD is a multi-stakeholder – > coordinated by government – but on > >> a day by day basis operates as a non-governmental > organisation. The Indian > >> ccTLD is managed by government and private sector > – sovereign interest taken > >> care of through government representation. > >> > >> The rules and regulations under which the > institutions that manage the > >> ccTLDs are managed determinate legal framework > under which they operate. > >> Consequently ccTLDs are regulated under national > law while ICANN regulates > >> gTLDs – The possibility of self regulation is > based on the assumption that > >> private sector would act in the public interest. > >> > >> In the discussions some felt that there was need > for increased attention > >> of government in the management of ccTLDs – as > it was critical > >> infrastructure while on the other hand other felt > that there was the risk of > >> excessive regulation with increased involvement of > government. > >> > >> *1130 -1200 hrs Workshop 36: Strategies to > prevent and fight child > >> pornography in developing countries* > >> Child pornography in Brazil has grown out of the > popularity of social > >> networking. However the main challenge has been > issues related to > >> jurisdiction as content is resident in ISP based > in the USA and > >> trans-national ISPs like Yahoo, Microsoft and > Google which have branches in > >> strategic markets and have tailored the services > for these markets in terms > >> of language and content. > >> > >> Brazil was therefore unable to deal with serious > offences related to > >> content – specifically child pornography - > committed by Brazilians using > >> Brazilian IP addresses. The government has been > able to sign an agreement > >> with Google to fight child pornography on > Google's orkut social network. > >> > >> The following are consideration taken in drawing > up the agreement > >> 1. Which criteria should be used to define the > ability of a particular > >> country to legislate over and sanction conducts > committed on the internet? > >> - Where the data is located? > >> - International law principles (territoriality or > nationality) shall be > >> used to define the sovereignty of a state > regarding – cyber space – which is > >> a network of networks > >> - Define some reasonable standard – for example > managed by Brazilians and > >> is local content and local language > >> - Access points in Brazil, harmful conduct felt in > the country – taken > >> obligation under international law to take offence > – country of origin > >> approach would force thousands of users to > unfamiliar rules and travel – > >> offence under human rights therefore apply local > legislation > >> > >> 2. It is legitimate to enforce the conduct of > local office –as it > >> impracticable to send legal request to the US. > >> > >> > >> New tools have been implement that have reduced > number of images uploaded > >> and increase in number of reported cases- subject > to investigation. It was > >> inspiring to listen to parliamentarian talk about > the need to have > >> legislators engaged in the process as they > ultimately pass the laws. I > >> appreciated the fact that in there is great > cooperation between the > >> parliament, government, police, civil society and > private sector. > >> > >> The main challenges are: > >> • Lack of awareness and participation by > parliamentarians who are critical > >> in the formulation of legislation > >> • how to obligate ISPs to provide information > without infringing on > >> freedom of expression and privacy, > >> • what criteria should be used to deal with > these offences > >> • the creation of awareness of ISPs in > developing countries of the need > >> for judicial cooperation as well as social > initiatives to deal with cyber > >> crime. > >> • Insufficient infrastructure to deal with this > issue – law enforcement > >> does not have the human resources and technology > >> • Material produced to fight child pornography > are not evaluated – they > >> should be inline with the demand > >> > >> *My comment*: I would have like to know if > initiatives have reduced > >> offences, what is the success rate registered in > prosecution, ability of the > >> law enforcement and judicial system to deal with > offences. There was no > >> mention of where initiatives had been launched to > fight child pornography on > >> the financial front. > >> > >> > >> *1530-1700 Workshop 45: Opening to diversity and > competition of the DNS > >> system* > >> > >> > >> > >> There were 3 presentations in this session: > >> > >> > >> - *1st presentation* - alternate DNS system used > in library systems > >> > >> > >> - *2nd presentation* - implementation of security > in the Handle system > >> > >> > >> - *3rd presentation –* discussed the Net4D > >> > >> > >> > >> Net4D- provides the technical solution to the > political concern on the > >> control of root servers. Net4D networks enable the > following: > >> > >> • Empower the second generation of the web: the > semantic web. > >> > >> • Multi-stakeholder governance of DNS > >> > >> • Net4D classes should be open and interoperable > >> > >> DNS 1.0 – was a monopoly of ICANN web 1.0 html > with USA parentage and > >> English only while DNS 2.0 is open allowing for > competition including inter > >> alia: > >> > >> • Net4D semantic web > >> > >> • Open coherent approach to linguistic diversity > >> > >> • Allow technological innovation with value > added services > >> > >> > >> > >> Concern was however raised on the: > >> > >> • Investment/implementation cost required to > implementation of different > >> DNS systems depending on the BIND implemented and > root servers enabled > >> > >> • relinquishing of the political control of root > servers > >> > >> • Value to end users > >> > >> • Awareness and understanding of the issues by > different stakeholders > >> necessary – delivered in a way that they can > understand > >> > >> > >> > >> *My comment*: the session was technical – I hope > the techies on the > >> mailing list can help us understand the governance > issues associated with > >> the introduction of DNS competition and the impact > on developing countries > >> :)! > >> > >> > >> > >> Kind regards > >> > >> mwende > >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > kictanet mailing list > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > > This message was sent to: jwalu(a)yahoo.com > Unsubscribe or change your options at > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jwalu%40yahoo.com

1 0

MySql / PHP internships available (2 Positions Available)
by James Gutu 14 Apr '09

14 Apr '09

Greetings all. I need some interns for a project that I am working on. The candidates must be good at PHP / MySql have experience in web development have good programming habits (proper naming of variables, documentation e.t.c) be good at Ajax / Javascript Additional skill set would be: Intermediate user of Photoshop / Illustrator, CSS, Flash 8 / 9, ActionScript 2 There are 2 available positions. Please contact me off-list. A CV would be helpful. Regards, James

2 2

*Meeting Reminder* Today, 1800h, Alex Gakuru on Talking to Government
by Phares Kariuki 14 Apr '09

14 Apr '09

Hi, Today's meeting will be on Talking To Government, the talk will be given by Alex Gakuru. Meeting starts 6.00pm. Location: Teleposta Towers, 4th Floor. Andrew Wachira will be distributing Free Google Earth CD's :). -- With Regards, Phares Kariuki

1 0

Personal invitation from Nancy Bosire
by Nancy Bosire 13 Apr '09

13 Apr '09

Personal invitation from Nancy Bosire

1 0

Personal invitation from Nancy Bosire
by Nancy Bosire 13 Apr '09

13 Apr '09

Personal invitation from Nancy Bosire

1 0