The Internet: Challenge, Opportunities, and Governance

Transcription

1 6th International Conference on Advances in Computing & Communications 2016 Kochi, India, 6-8 Sep 2016 The Internet: Challenge, Opportunities, and Governance Raja Kumar Murugesan Deputy Dean

2 Introduction The Internet, will be shaping the economy and society of the 21 st century Smart technologies are shaping the landscape of possibilities connecting more people and things to each other Trends include Mobile Internet, Cloud, IoT, smart wearables, smart cars, smart cities and etc Ability to connect people, things and engage them more meaningfully will grow exponentially Infinite opportunities, comes with challenges such as security and privacy Continued evolution of the Internet impacts difficult issues to be addressed making Internet Governance significant & complex 2

3 Outline Internet Governance Who governs the Internet? Different perspectives Challenges Opportunities Future 3

4 Internet The Internet has evolved from a closed network to a critical, public and commercial infrastructure used by all Has no centralized control on technological implementations or policies for access and usage It operates by self-governance influenced by market mechanisms ISPs government agencies regulatory bodies businesses, associations standard setting organizations network engineers end users etc. 4

5 IG different perspectives More Internet dependency by the society, more Internet Governance (IG) relevancy IG is relevant to all from e-business to social network users Internet reflects different perspectives, approaches and policy Telecommunication specialists thru development of technical infrastructure Computer Specialists development of standards and protocols Human rights activists privacy, freedom of expression, other basic human rights Lawyers jurisdiction and dispute resolution Politicians techno-optimism, threats; child protection, internet security etc., Diplomats process and protection of national interest 5

6 The Internet and Governance Internet is Ubiquitous more users, more services offered Internet governance refers to the processes that impact how the Internet is managed How the Internet is governed is critical as it directly impacts our life, economic and social opportunities far into the future 6

7 Early IG, Late 1960s, DARPA net Mid 70s, TCP/IP invention IG Evolution 1986, IETF managed the development of the Internet through a cooperative, consensus based decision making. No centralization DNS war NSF subcontracted managing the DNS to Network Solutions Inc (NSI) Internet community did not like it, leading to DNS war New players came in, international organizations and governments Lead to the development of ICANN Establishment of ICANN led to most debates today 7

8 , World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) WSIS placed IG on diplomatic agendas and established the Working Group on IG (WGIG) WSIS Tunis agenda 2005 elaborated on IG, definition, listing issues, establishing IG Forum (IGF) a multi-stakeholder body convoked by the UN Secretary General expiration of the MoU and establishment of a new MoU between ICANN and US DoC There was hope that ICANN would eventually become an International organization ITU announced a stronger focus on cybersecurity and development assistance ICANNs discussion on.xxx domain Debates on whether ICANN should only be concerned with technical problems or should include public policy Intervention by US and other governments on.xxx domain raised the question on national governments participation in ICANN deliberations8

9 companies such as Google, Yahoo and facebook felt that a change in the Internet Architecture with a breach in net neutrality would endanger their business telcos such as Verizon, AT& T, ISPs and the multimedia industry wished to see some differentiation in packets travelling on the Internet Fast growth of social networking and increased use of web 2.0 tools opened up issues of privacy and data protection Affirmation of commitments between ICANN and US DoC to make ICANN a more independent organization 2010 IG debate was the impact of fast growing social media that includes protection of privacy of users ICANNs Introduction of non ASCII domain names for Arabic and Chinese, and approval of.xxx domain for adult materials Jan Egyptian authorities cut access to the Internet, a first example of country wide Internet blackout ordered by a government 9

10 2012 Introduction of new generic Top Level Domains (gtld) 2013 Snowden revelations on the US National Security Agencies (NSA) various surveillance programmes Snowden s revelations made global public to be interested in the way Internet is governed Main concern was data protection and privacy rights 2014 The US government asks the Internet community for a plan for moving IANAs oversight to the global multistakeholder community 2016 In March, the proposal on multistakeholder approach was submitted and in Aug NTIA stated that they will allow the IANA contract to expire 1 st Oct

11 Internet Governance reference framework IG is complex as it involves many issues, actors, mechanisms, procedures, and instruments One approach focuses on technical, the Internet Infrastructure (IP address, DNS, and root servers) and ICANNs position in this field the other focuses on policy (legal, economical, developmental and sociocultural issues) Technical and policy coherence Difficult to separate the two as Technical solutions are not neutral Each technical solution promotes certain interests, empowers certain groups, and to certain extent impacts social, political and economic life Internet for a long time both technical and policy was governed by one group the early Internet community Due to business and government actors it is difficult to be governed together 11

12 Old vs New approach Old approach, existing laws with minor adjustments could be applied to the Internet Cyber approach, Internet is fundamentally a different communication system hence, it requires a different form of governance Decentralized vs centralized structure of IG IG structure should reflect the very nature of Internet i.e. network of networks It is so complex that it cannot be governed by a single international organization Decentralized IG was one of the reason for the fast internet growth This view is supported by the technical community and developed countries Centralized approach is argued by the developing countries due to limited human and financial resources availability 12

13 Protection of Public Interest on the Internet Main strength of the Internet is its public nature that has enabled its fast growth, and creativity How to protect the public nature of the internet is one of the core issues The core internet infrastructure from intercontinental backbones and local area networks are owned by private Whether this privately owned property can be managed in the public interest? This has been the main discussion on network neutrality Geography and the Internet Policy Uncertainty Policy Balancing act Holistic approach and prioritization 13

14 Internet Governance Different Different Perspectives: Perspectives Infrastructure Legal Economic Development Sociocultural 14

15 Infrastructure

16 Telecommunication Infrastructure Regulation national and international by many public and private ITU sets technical standards, telecommunication specific international regulations, assist developing countries telecommunication systems, the allocation of the radio spectrum, and the management of satellite positioning International telecommunication regulations, liberalization of pricing and services in the internet field WTO - provides framework for general market rules Liberalization of telecommunication market worldwide 16

17 Telecommunication Infrastructure The last mile (local loop) issues Last mile problem affects use of the Internet Solution Technology > Wireless Liberalization of this segment of the telecom market Liberalization of telecom markets New communication services over existing infrastructures Developing countries challenges Liberalize and make the market bigger and efficient or preserve income form exiting telcos monopolies 17

18 Issues contd.. Establishment of technical infrastructure standards Set increasingly by private and professional institutions WiFi standard (IEEE b) by IEEE Certification of WiFi compatible equipment by WiFi allliance The above helps institutions to influence the market Who owns the electromagnetic spectrum? Currently managed by governments, regional initiatives (e.g. EU Radio Spectrum Committee (RSC) and the Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG) and the ITU Spectrum is now conceived as less scarce due to its efficient use with new technologies Hence, should be open spectrum free from government regulation 18

19 Issues contd.. Open Spectrum > two potential problems Telcos investment to operate 3G network Free not necessarily mean will be used by many as public Only used by those who have technical capabilities Governments needed solutions for efficient use of the spectrum due to increasing demand for spectrum Digital television has allowed release part of the radio spectrum for other services digital dividend 19

20 TCP/IP TCP/IP, Key Internet Technical standard IG w.r.to TCP/IP Introduction of Standards, set by IETF IP address distribution follows a hierarchy IANA a subsidiary of ICANN distributes blocks of IP to the 5 RIRs RIRs distribute to LIRs and/or NIRs LIR/NIRs to ISPs and companies, and ISPs to individuals 20

21 Limitation of IP addresses IPv4 exhausted! Solution? Issues NAT quick fix CIDR by the RIRs IPv6 transition - long term solution Challenges with IPv6? transition Backward compatibility Technical assistance IPv6 distribution policy framework 21

22 Issues contd.. Changes in TCP/IP and cybersecurity Original Internet was closed, Security was no issue, not in mind Intrinsic security requires changes to the TCP/IP IPv6 provides some security, but not substantial Technology, standards and policies could bring conflict of interest?! Competing businesses and/or national interest Changes in TCP/IP and limited bandwidth Real-time applications QoS sensitive Multimedia services and content need minimum QoS to guarantee minimum level of performance QoS requirement may require changes in IP that could be a potential challenge to Network neutrality principles! 22

23 DNS Creation of new TLDs is unlimited But, creation of new gtlds had been slow and debated process 2012 ICANN began new gtld programme Any organization can apply to run a new gtld registry Opposition trademark concerns and cyber-squatting ICANNs new policy consultation Resolving competing claims for gtlds Cybersquatting Public morality Registration fees, and others 23

24 Issues contd.. Management of Country domains IANA reiterates the ISO standards for country codes Who should manage cctlds? Countries trying gaining control over their cc domains ICANNs approval on transition No conflict from interested stakeholders within the country Follow Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) principles for the delegation of cctld administration Follow Best practices proposed by World Wide Alliance of Toplevel Domains Reluctance of many cc domain operators to become part of ICANN system ICANN is formulating Accountability Frameworks as less formal way to solve the above concern. ICANN, in May2010 started approving TLDs in other than in English scripts IDN is one of the success of the IG regime 24

25 Root servers 13 root servers in the world, maximum technically possible USA: 10, Sweden: 1, Netherlands: 1, Japan: 1 Even all 13 go down, domain name resolution can still function thru other domain name servers distributed hierarchically throughout the Internet Root servers are replicated thru anycast, resolving servers are close to end-user Root zone files are approved by US government proposed by IANA and given to root server managing companies Verisign operates the master root server that updates content approved by DoC The files in the master are then replicated to the root servers This is a concern for many governments as unilateral changes could be made to the master root server 25

26 Issues Internationalization of the control of root servers One country responsible for the content of the root servers was a concern US government to pass supervision of IANA to a new mechanism by 30 Sep 2015 Transition should be guided by - Support and enhance the multi-stakeholder model - Maintain the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet DNS - Maintain the openness of the Internet Alternative root servers, feasibility and risks Single vs alternative root server system possible discussion? 26

27 Internet Access - issues Should the internet infrastructure be considered a public service? IBPs and critical infrastructures Telecommunication liberalization and the role of ISPs and IBPs 27

28 Network Neutrality - Issues Economic Human right issues, have and have nots? A lot to discuss. Who are the main players and arguments? Basic principles Policy approaches Developed and developing countries International Organizations and NGOs Open issues 28

29 Standardization

30 Web standards TCP/IP facilitated communication, but lacked applications HTML as the basis of the www led to internets exponential growth HTML evolved into XML with W3C for application standardization W3C has not influenced internet governance 30

31 Cloud Computing Data has moved from hard disks to the cloud Started with the use of online mail servers and applications such as Yahoo, Gmail, facebook, Twitter, wiki, blogs etc. More devices are connected to the Internet High dependency leads to pressure on robustness and reliability Privacy and data protection on who will have access to our data Digital information assets, national borders, regulations etc. 31

32 Common standards for smooth data transfer between different cloud operators Adoption of open standard is considered as another option Google has already started Data Liberation front, open standards towards data transfer between clouds Safe Harbour agreement between EU and US does not seems to work well on privacy and data protection Especially after the Snowden s leaks of mass surveillance Other governance issues in cloud computing may follow 32

33 Convergence Telecommunications, broadcasting and information delivery were handled by different technologies and regulations Today, the Internet has converged technological platforms for these While technical convergence is happening rapidly, its economic and legal consequences will take time to evolve 33

34 Economic Issues Convergence has reshaped traditional markets putting companies operating on separate domains into direct competition Legal framework Convergence opens up several governance and regulatory questions What happens to existing national and international telephony and broadcasting organizations? Will new organizations be developed that focus mainly on the Internet? Should the regulation of convergence be carried out by public authorities or self-regulation? E.g., Malaysia implemented Communications and Multimedia Act in 1988 as a general framework for the regulation of convergence EUs regulatory framework for electronic communication moved to national laws So are Swiss Telecommunication laws and regulations 34

35 Risk of convergence cable operators and ISPs Broadband internet is introduced thru cable in many countries e.g. US, and is more popular than ADSL Concerns are, cable operators could buffer between users and the Internet challenging the net neutrality principle Cable is not regulated by common carrier rules that applies to telephony that specifies access should be non discriminatory Cable operators could block certain applications, block access to certain materials, surveillance possibilities, and ability to violate privacy This may lead to Internet monopolies If The cable Internet is for telecommunication service and not information service then regulation has to follow common carrier rules 35

36 Cybersecurity - Issues Type of action data interception, illegal access, spyware, data corruption, sabotage, denial-of-service, and identity theft. Type of perpetrator possibilities include hackers, cybercriminals, cyber-warriors, and cyberterrorists. Type of target - ranges from individuals, private companies, and public institutions to critical infrastructures, governments, and military assets. 36

37 Cybersecurity framework Includes policy principles, instruments, and institutions dealing with cybersecurity Critical Information Infrastructure Protection Global critical infrastructure now depends on the Internet e.g., energy, transport and finance Vulnerability of the Internet is the vulnerability of modern society Cybercrime Cooperation is missing combating cybercrime black markets where easy to use digital weapons like viruses and botnets are easily available as outsourced services Cyber conflicts or Cyberwar has high media visibility but still low policy and legal regulations at a very early stage 37

38 Cybersecurity policy initiatives ITU s X.509 standards provides the basis for PKI used in https ITUs Global Security Agenda includes legal measures, policy cooperation and capacity building Commonwealth Cybercrime Initiative (CCI) to improve legislation and capacity of member states to handle cybercrime G8 s Subgroup on High Tech Crime establishing 24/7 communication between cybersecurity centres of member states to tackle cybercrime and promote cooperation between ICT industry and law enforcement agencies Council of Europe s Convention on Cybercrime Stanford Draft Convention on Protection from Cyber Crime and Terrorism recommends the establishment of an international body, the Agency for Information Infrastructure Protection (AIIP) 38

39 Influence of Internet Architecture on Cybersecurity Early Internet focus was on developing internet standards and applications, security was not priority Should we modify the current internet infrastructure or build security on the existing non-secure internet infrastructure Will this change affect other Internet openness, transparency and other features Though security related improvements on the internet protocol has been slow there are progress e.g. DNSSEC DNSSEC implementation challenges are there over the hierarchy of DNS registrars, ISPs and website hosts Security by design into technologies hardware, software and protocols will add security Vulnerabilities of the Internet are taken advantage for their own interests Human rights apart form value-based priority should also ensure the Internet is open and secure End users are the pillars of cybersecurity and they are the weakest link 39

40 Encryption, Spam encryption has become affordable for any Internet users, including criminals and terrorists There are governance issues in finding the right balance between respecting privacy of communication of Internet users and the need for governments to monitor communication relevant for the national security (potential criminal and terrorist activity remains an issue) statistics in 2014 says, 66% of traffic is spam Filtering spam has only limited effects, better to fight it thru technical and legal US, Can-Spam law, EUs anti-spam law weakness is cross-border spam Different definition of Spam prevents international anti-spam mechanism Authentication of could prevent fake address but anonymity is lost. Technical issue may affect policy Most spam originate across the country, needs global cooperation, capacity building and info exchange to combat 40

41 Legal

42 Legislation Legislation activities are progressing intensively in the Internet field especially with EU and OECD The priority areas are privacy, data protection, IP and cybercrime Too complex to regulate only thru legislation as society is dynamic Social norms prohibit certain behavior thru peer pressure E.g. Wikipedia has been evolving in to self-regulation ICANN proposed self-regulation as the preferred mechanism to regulate the Internet. Noticeable among ISPs Risks remains on areas of high public interest such as content policy, freedom of expression, protection of privacy Legal instruments International public & private laws, conventions, customary law Challenge is how to create a balance? 42

43 Internet Economy

44 Economic Issues More money has introduced more business and policy interest Challenges There should be optimal balance between Technical Efficiency, Economic Efficiency, and Social effects Replacing the existing flat-rate pricing structure with accounting based on packet traffic Changing the current Internet economic policies would open a Pandora s box Transactions over the Internet: E-Commerce, Internet Content Economy, Internet Access Economy, E-payments and cybercurrency issues: customer protection (privacy, data protection, cybersecurity), taxation, and digital signatures, detailed implementation standards, risk of incompatability 44

45 Internet Development

46 Digital divide Access and capabilities to use the Internet for technical, political, social or economic reasons Digital divide reflects socioeconomic inequalities in education, healthcare, employment, clean water and food Should facilitate Universal access, strategies, financial support, sociocultural aspects (literacy, ICT skills, training & education) Policies and institutional aspect 46

47 Sociocultural

48 Internet is a social phenomenon Internet has made considerable social and cultural impact on modern society Includes, privacy, freedom of expression, rights to receive information, rights protecting cultural, linguistic, and minority diversity, right to education Internet access Estonia, legal guarantee of right to access the Internet Finland, in 2010 all citizens have the right to 1 Megabit broadband connection Need to develop necessary software, hardware, content, standards and policy frame work to protect rights of people with disabilities Content control and policy through human rights, government and technology tools 48

49 Issues Effectiveness of content control and who should be responsible Education issues: quality assurance, recognition of degrees, online learning Child safety online: cyberbullying, abuse and sexual exploitation, violent games, addressing these challenges Balance between private and public interest Protecting the Internet as a Global public good 49

50 Internet Governance

51 Multistakeholder Approach IG has a wide variety of stakeholders National governments, international organizations, business organizations, civil societies, technical community and the end-users Efforts has been to the convergence of these actors in following an institutional approach Multistakeholder decision-making is accountable, sustainable and effective Creative solutions, a policy framework that balance public interests and private initiatives 51

52

53 Conclusion The multistakeholder approach for the Internet Governance is critical for ensuring the future of the Internet as a key driver for social and economic innovation Internet governance should promote universal, equal opportunity, affordable and high quality Internet access so it can be an effective tool for enabling human development and social inclusion The Internet is for everyone; let s work together to realize its full potential 53

54 Q&A