Let’s Encrypt, do not confuse confidentiality and security

Let’s Encrypt was recently the subject of discussions in the small world of TLS certificates, by suddenly revoking 3 048 289 certificates which should not have been issued. A bug in its validation software prevented CAA registrations controls, and the certificates in question should not have been initially issued. These significant disruptions resulted from this mass revocation, but it is difficult to complain about a free service.

I am often asked what I think of Let’s Encrypt, and I always have this same answer: Let’s Encrypt has done a lot to encrypt the web, but is undermining the security of the web. Encryption allows to ensure confidentiality (no one can spy on) and integrity (no one can modify) of exchanges. But encryption alone is not enough if I do not have any guarantee of the identity of the one I am exchanging with (legitimate or fraudulent?)… And that is the whole problem.

Let's Encrypt - SSL TLS certificates - Nameshield

In 2015, the Let’s Encrypt initiative supported by leading players of the Internet (EFF, Mozilla, Cisco, Akamaï…) was created with the purpose of massively and freely spreading SSL certificates to the whole world. More than five years later, the organization secures 190 million websites and has just announced that it has issued a billion certificates. The milestone was reached on February 27, 2020. This is undoubtedly a great performance.

96% of the web encrypted in January 2020

In 2015, less than half of the web traffic was encrypted, to reach 96% in January 2020. Of course, Let’s Encrypt is not the only player responsible for this rise. Edward Snowden launched the first alert, Google has largely stepped into the breach, between referencing policy and changes in web security indicators. But by providing to all, free certificates based on a largely automated system, Let’s Encrypt has democratized encryption… and put the concept of identity into oblivion.

No identity, no security

Let's Encrypt - SSL TLS certificates - Nameshield

Let’s Encrypt’s credo is simplicity, to “simplify to the extreme HTTPS deployment and put an end to its horribly complex bureaucracy” (says EFF in the launch campaign). The horribly complex bureaucracy has however a meaning: high authentication, which guarantees the identity of the certificate’s holder. Maybe not the absolute guarantee of legitimacy, not a guarantee of content either, but the guarantee of a registered company, legitimately owner of the concerned domain name and with a certificate validated according to a drastic procedure.

Let’s encrypt merely verifies the domain name’s control (DV, Domain Validation). One only has to click on a link in an email or to fill in a TXT record on the domain name’s DNS zone. Yet domain names registration in most TLDs is purely declarative. It is quite easy to register a domain name, to request a certificate from Let’s Encrypt and to publish a website in HTTPS://.

The results?

In five years, all phishing and fraudulent websites have switched to HTTPS://. Since 2016, Vincent Lynch alerted on this problem, 15 270 certificates with the term “Paypal” had been issued by Let’s Encrypt, 14 766 of these certificates were fraudulent.

The market has been brought down in terms of authentication level. Let’s Encrypt is far from being the only one responsible, Google and Mozilla, with their 70% of market shares, have largely supported the initiative, the big Cloud hosting providers followed, as well as the Certification Authorities, challenged on the prices. Today we have a secure web with 77% (November 2019) of certificates whose proprietary’s legitimacy is not verified.

High authentication changes the game

The web has become encrypted by default. Does that make it more secure? Nothing is certain. The web user educated for twenty years to check the presence of the padlock in the address bar, trusts a web where all the fraudulent websites display the security padlock. Today, Internet is confidential but that does not make it safe.

It is urgent to return to high authentication. High authentication ensures a set of compulsory, drastic and controlled steps in order to obtain certificates. The procedures are enacted by CA/B Forum, regularly strengthened, and followed by audit from Certification Authorities.

23% of the certificates are still issued on the basis of high authentication, mostly in the corporate world, where CISO are pushing to preserve it. We all have to rely on them and support initiatives supporting OV (Organization Validation) and EV (Extended Validation) certificates, especially EV to guarantee the identity of the websites visited by web users. While identity on the Internet seems to have been somewhat forgotten for some time in favor of confidentiality, it is likely to come back to the spotlight again soon, driven in particular by web users and the need of personal data protection.

Nameshield renews its ISO 27001 certification

ISO 27001 - Nameshield renews its ISO 27001 certification

Nameshield Group is an expert in domain names, DNS, TLS/SSL certificates management.

Through our experience gained from world-renowned customers with ever-increasing security requirements, we have also become technical experts in Information security. That is why we have implemented an Information Security Management System (ISMS).

In 2017, we obtained the ISO 27001 certification of this ISMS for our activities of domain names portfolio, DNS and TLS/SSL certificates management. Nameshield Group has thus become the sole French registrar ensuring such a level of security for its customers.

Since then, our employees involved in the ISMS continuously contribute to the constant improvement of our security arrangements.

An analysis of the risks and their processing, according to the Ebios method, answer to our security goals and those of our clients.

We permanently adapt to security, performance and sustainability needs. It results in the deployment of more secure products and services, with higher added values, that meet our clients’ expectations more and better.

We know how to mobilize ourselves in case of incidents and learn to always do better by analyzing the processing of each alert.

We have and control a business continuity plan. Therefore, we are able to carry out our activities remotely (backup site, telecommuting, redundant servers…), whatever the threats.

Information security is the DNA of Nameshield Group and all its employees.

Logically, our ISO 27001 certificate has been renewed for 3 years in last February without any non-compliance nor comments being notified.

This international recognition ensures you:

  • An availability rate (domain names management platform and DNS Premium)
  • Tests implementation allowing us to permanently review ourselves and anticipate incidents
  • The raising awareness of all Nameshield employees to all Information security aspects
  • The reliability and performance of our system
  • The study of our experience feedbacks to continuously improve our security and thus yours

Apple announces the limitation of SSL certificates duration to 1 year in Safari

Apple Safari - SSL certifcates one year - Nameshield
Source de l’image : kropekk_pl via Pixabay

Apple announced this week that the maximum lifetime of SSL / TLS certificates on its devices and Safari browser would be limited to 398 days (1 year, and 1 month to cover the renewal period). The change, announced by Apple at the CA / Browser Forum meeting in Bratislava, Slovakia, will take effect for certificates issued after August 31, 2020.

Apple’s announcement follows a failure of the CA / B Forum’s vote on one-year certificates (Bulletin SC22), which was held in August 2019, and reflects a continuing trend to shorten lifespan certificates. Following this vote, Google had also expressed its intention to reduce certificate lifetime outside the framework of the CA / B forum if they do not position themselves quickly. This announcement is a bit of a surprise, we would rather have thought that Google or Mozilla would take the first step.

What are the consequences for companies and their SSL / TLS certificates?

Is shorter validity a good thing?

The shorter the validity period of a certificate, the more secure the certificate. By requiring replacement of certificates over a shorter period of time, security updates are made to certificates, they deploy faster. The shorter private key lifetime of a certificate is also a strong recommendation from online security players to limit the potential duration of fraud following a compromise.

From a security perspective, everyone agrees that reducing the life of certificates is a good thing. The problem lies on the operational side with the consequences of this reduction being: more frequent intervention on certificates, therefore greater complexity in keeping an up to date inventory and the need for optimal organization with partners for certificate issuance.

Should Apple’s announcement be taken into account?

Safari is one of the two main web browsers, with 17.7% in January 2020, behind Google Chrome (58.2%) and ahead of Microsoft Internet Explorer and Edge (7.1%). It is difficult to ignore the announcement as it will affect 1/5 of Internet users, what is more is that if Google does follow, it is better to anticipate and prepare. Nameshield’s has already adopted this stance.

Things to keep in mind

Certificates issued before September 1, 2020 are not affected by this change. They will remain valid for the entire two-year period. All certificates issued on or after September 1 must be renewed each year to be considered reliable by Safari.

We must therefore prepare to move towards having certificates with a maximum duration of one year compared to the current two years. Being able to rely on a partner and effective tools is more essential than ever.

Towards the end of the correlation between authentication and technical certificate management

What seems to be taking shape within the CA / B Forum is the idea of allowing an authentication duration identical to that which we know today (two years) while forcing the certificates to be replaced several times during this same period.

The main Certification Authorities, the bodies that issue certificates, anticipate these changes and are working on several automation systems to manage certificate life cycle. They would thus limit the need to go through a potentially cumbersome re-authentication procedure with each replacement. Companies could replace their certificates as many times as they want during this period. This would make it possible to anticipate possible further reductions in the maximum lifetime of certificates.

The trend is also towards the installation of automation tools for the maintenance of a precise inventory of certificates on the one hand and technical reinstallation on the other. Nameshield is closely monitoring these various developments and will allow you to continue working with confidence.

Our team is also at your disposal to anticipate these changes and answer any questions you may have.

Municipal elections 2020: buzyn2020.fr and buzyn2020.paris domain names redirect towards Anne Hidalgo’s campaign

Municipal elections 2020: buzyn2020.fr and buzyn2020.paris domain names redirect towards Anne Hidalgo’s campaign
Image source: Sadnos via Pixabay

Following the announcement on Sunday February 16, of Agnès Buzyn’s candidacy to Paris municipal elections, several political journalists discovered on Monday that the domain name buzyn2020.fr was registered but redirected towards “Paris en commun”, the campaign website of another candidate, Anne Hidalgo.

Several other names were registered on Sunday night, also redirecting towards Paris en commun’s homepage like buzyn2020.paris, agnesbuzyn2020.fr and agnesbuzyn2020.com.

If several of these names were anonymously registered, two of them were registered by the association “Montreuil en Commun”, a group of “four municipal councilors” who claims to be “without any political label” and explains to Numerama the fact that these names were available “indicates the improvisation of her candidacy and LREM’s lightness regarding a serious matter such as a candidacy to run for Paris’ mayor”.

Raising awareness to cybersquatting risks

The LREM candidate will not be able to use the domain name buzyn2020.com either, which was registered on Monday by Crisalyde, a risk and crisis management consulting company.

I took the opportunity to raise awareness. It’s my job, I saw a risk and I took advantage of it”, explains Selim Miled, Crisalyde’s CEO, to the Parisien.

Cybersquatting is a practice that consists in taking a domain name by registering it, using or mentioning a trademark, a business name, a patronym or any name on which the applicant has any right, in order to make material or moral profit from its current or future notoriety.

Thus, Crisalyde registered 6 domain names: buzyn.paris, agnesbuzyn2020.paris, buzynpourparis.com, buzynpourparis.fr, buzyn2020.info and buzyn2020.com. “As soon as Agnès Buzyn’s team contacts me, I will give them the domain name at the purchased price, with a friendly advice” adds Selim Miled.

What strategy to adopt against cybersquatting?

Agnès Buzyn’s team will have to contact the persons who registered these names, who may decide to graciously give them back or resell them at prices they will have set.

However, legal actions exist aiming to retrieve a cybersquatted domain name, like the UDRP procedure (Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy). This procedure will allow to suppress or transfer the domain name.

And lastly, in order to prevent any cybersquatting risk, it is recommended to implement a domain names registration monitoring to be immediately alerted of any new domain names registration that can potentially infringe your notoriety or your business.

For more information on our online brand protection expertise and domain names recovery procedures, don’t hesitate to contact a Nameshield consultant.

FIC 2020 – Nameshield’s DNS Premium labelled France Cybersecurity once again

During the 12th edition of the International Cybersecurity Forum (FIC), the major event in terms of cybersecurity and digital confidence, which currently takes place from January 28 to 30 in Lille, Nameshield was given once again the France Cybersecurity Label for its DNS Premium solution.

Nameshield’s DNS Premium labelled France Cybersecurity
8th Edition of the France Cybersecurity Labels ceremony, January 29, 2020

Nameshield’s DNS Premium labelled France Cybersecurity

The DNS is at the heart of companies’ critical services: Internet, email, applications…

Exposed more and more frequently to attacks, like DDoS, Man in the Middle… it must remain available.

The Nameshield’s DNS Premium is the solution which meets DNS protection needs with a redundant, ultra-secure infrastructure with all the key DNS services (anycast, DDoS protection, DNSSEC, statistics…).

The DNS Premium solution labelled France Cybersecurity, thus allows its users to protect their digital assets from any attack and ensures a high availability of their Internet services.

France Cybersecurity Label, the guarantee of a certain level of quality in terms of cybersecurity

Nameshield’s DNS Premium labelled France Cybersecurity

For reminder, the France Cybersecurity label is the guarantee for users that the Nameshield’s products and services are French and possess clear and well defined functionalities, with a certain level of quality in terms of cybersecurity, verified by an independent jury.

It answers to several needs and objectives:

  • Raise awareness among users and international ordering parties regarding the importance of the French origin of a Cybersecurity offer and its intrinsic qualities ;
  • Certify to users and ordering parties the quality and functionalities of labelled products and services ;
  • Promote French cybersecurity solutions and increase their international visibility ;
  • Certify to users and ordering parties the quality and functionalities of labelled products and services ;
  • Increase their overall use and the users’ security level.

This label is governed by a committee composed of representatives gathered in 3 colleges:

  • College of officials: representatives from the “Direction Générale de l’Armement” (DGA, the French Government Defense procurement and technology agency), the “Direction Générale des Entreprises” (DGE, the French Directorate General for Enterprise within the Ministry of Economy, Industry and Digital), and the “Agence Nationale de la Sécurité des Systèmes d’Information” (ANSSI, the French National Cybersecurity Agency).
  • College of industrials: representatives from the “Alliance pour la Confiance Numérique” (ACN – Alliance for digital confidence) and HEXATRUST.
  • College of users: representatives from groups of users, such as: CIGREF, GITSIS, CESIN, CLUSIF ISSM space.

Nameshield, a 100% French company, certified ISO 27001 on all its registrar activity, was able to bring all the necessary guarantees to obtain the France Cybersecurity Label for its offer, the DNS Premium and illustrates its engagement to always provide the best services and standards regarding cybersecurity.

For more information on our labelled solution DNS Premium, please visit Nameshield’s website.

2020 and the SSL, a small prediction exercise

Browsers and Certification Authorities, the battle continues.

Cybersecurity - SSL 2020 - Nameshield Blog
Image source : TheDigitalArtist via Pixabay

2019 was a busy year, with growing differences of opinion between browsers makers and Certification Authorities, an explosion in the number of phishing sites encrypted in HTTPS and significant progress on the depreciation of TLS v1.0.

Discussions on extended validation, more generally the visual display of certificates in browsers, and the reduction of the duration of certificates have taken a prominent place. None of these discussions are over, no consensus seems to be emerging, 2020 is looking like a busy year. Time to look ahead…

Will the fate of Extended Validation be determined?

2019 saw the main browsers stop displaying the famous green address bar with the padlock and the name of the company, in favor of a classic and unique display, no longer taking into account the authentication level of the certificates:

SSL 2020 - EV certificate - Nameshield

However, discussions are still ongoing at the CA/B forum level, as well as within the CA Security Council. Both of these certificates regulatory bodies will be looking in 2020 for an intuitive way to display identity information of websites.

Historically approved by everyone, including the financial industry and websites with transactions, EV (the acronym for Extended Validation) was Google’s target in 2019. Other browsers, under the influence of Google, between Mozilla financed by Google and Microsoft and Opera based on Chromium open source, have followed in this direction. Only Apple continues to display EV.

For browsers, the question is whether or not TLS is the best way to present the authentication information of websites. It seems that it is not. Google assumes that it is not up to Certification Authorities to decide the legitimate content of a website and wants the use of certificates for encryption purposes only.

Of course, the Certification Authorities see things differently. One can certainly see a purely mercantile reaction, EV certificates are much more expensive. One can also wonder about the purpose of authentication beyond encryption. The answer seems to lie in the staggering statistics of phishing websites encrypted with HTTPS. Browsers have for the moment imposed an encrypted web indeed… but no longer authenticated!

2020 will therefore be the year of proposals from Certification Authorities: providing better authentication, including identification of legal entities, following the path of PSD2 in Europe… One thing is certain, identity has never been so important on the Internet and it is up to all interested parties to find a solution, including browsers to find a way to display strong authentication of websites. To be continued…

Certificates with a shorter duration: towards one-year certificates

825 days, or 27 months, or 2 years, the maximum duration currently allowed for SSL Certificates. However, since 2017 and a first attempt within the CA/B forum, the industry is moving towards a reduction of this duration to 13 months (1 additional month to cover the renewal period).

Google and browsers came back in 2019 with another vote submitted to the CA/B forum, again rejected but by a smaller majority. The market is on the move. Players like Let’sEncrypt propose certificates with a duration of 3 months, others want to keep long durations to avoid overloads of intervention on servers. One thing is certain, the market does not have the automation systems in place yet to make the management and installation of certificates easier, a delay of one or two more years would otherwise be preferable, or at least judicious.

But all this is without counting on Google threatening to act unilaterally if the regulator does not follow… certainly in 2020.

From TLS 1.0 to TLS 1.3: forced advance

Expected in January 2020, Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla, Google and Cloudflare have announced their intention to depreciate support for TLS 1.0 (a protocol created in 1999 to succeed SSL 3.0, which has become highly exposed) and TLS 1.1 (2006), both of which are currently suffering from too much exposure to security flaws.

While TLS 1.2 (2008) is still considered secure today, the market seems to be pushing for TLS 1.3, the most recent version of the standard, finally released in the summer of 2018. TLS 1.3 abandons support for weak algorithms (MD4, RC4, DSA or SHA-224), allows negotiation in fewer steps (faster), and reduces vulnerability to fallback attacks. Simply put, it is the most secure protocol.

A small problem, however, is that many websites are taking action. At the beginning of 2019, only 17% of the Alexa Top 100,000 websites supported TLS 1.3, while just under 23% (22,285) did not even support TLS 1.2 yet. If the decision to depreciate older versions of the protocol is a good one, the form adopted by the major web players can be criticized, in particular by its unilateral nature. In the meantime, get ready, we are heading there.

The threat of quantum computing

Companies are talking more and more about quantum computing, including Google. But the reality is, while quantum will impact our industry, it certainly won’t be in 2020, or for at least a decade. There are still many questions that need to be answered, such as: What is the best algorithm for quantum resistance? No one has that answer, and until there is a consensus in the industry, you are not going to see any quantum solutions in place.

IoT is growing, but the lack of security remains a problem

IoT is a success, but a number of deployments are being delayed due to a lack of security. In 2020, cloud service providers will provide or partner with security companies to provide a secure provisioning and management of devices, as well as an overall secure IoT ecosystem, for their customers.

The regulatory frameworks for IoT manufacturing and deployments will most certainly be led by the EU, although we will also see an increase in the US. Attacks, compromises and IoT hacking will, unfortunately, continue. In addition, security standards will not be met and we will not even come close to a higher percentage of secure devices. Why is that? Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) are still not willing to pay the costs involved or pass them on to consumers for fear of losing sales.

China’s encryption laws will create a lot of uncertainty

In recent years, part of the digital transformation of the world has led to the codification of rights and restrictions on data in national laws and regional organizations. PSD2, GDPR, CCPA, PIPEDA… a real headache for international companies faced with regulatory standards and compliance.

On January 1, 2020, China’s encryption law was due to come into force. An additional data and… still unclear to those doing business in China. Clarification is still needed on several fronts. For example, commercial encryption for international companies must be approved and certified before it can be used in China – but this certification system has not yet been created. Similarly, there is uncertainty about the key escrow and the data that must be made available to the Chinese government. This has led to a wave of speculation, misinformation and, ultimately, overreaction. Given the opacity of parts of the new Regulation, many companies are opting for a wait-and-see approach. This is a wise tactic, assuming your organization does not have an experienced Chinese legal expert.

In conclusion, the certificates industry continues to change. Nameshield’s certificates team is at your disposal to discuss all these topics.

Best wishes for 2020.

Fake mobile applications: a growing threat to brands and consumers

Fake mobile applications - Nameshield Blog
Image source: HeikoAL via Pixabay

With over 5 million mobile applications available today on the major apps stores like Google Play and App Store, over 2 000 new applications uploaded every day and almost 2 billion applications downloaded in France in 2018, mobile apps have rapidly grown over the last 10 years to become an essential element of the digital world.

According to a research done by FEVAD, the revenue from mobile commerce is estimated to 22 billion euros in France in 2018, i.e. ¼ of online sales. Thus, mobile applications represent a fast growing market.

Studies have shown that 68% of consumers identified as loyal to a specific brand have downloaded that brand’s app. Conversely, statistics indicate that 40% of users will go to a competitor after a bad mobile experience. Companies have then quickly come to realize that ensuring that their customers have a high quality and secured mobile experience when downloading and using their branded applications is the key to consumer loyalty.

The growth of fake mobile applications

As brands’ mobile applications have grown in popularity with consumers, the number of fake mobile applications being released into the market by malicious actors has also exploded. Fake mobile apps can be dangerous because they are associated with fraud attacks, and have become a growing threat to consumers. Indeed, they have increased by 191% from 2018 to 2019. The McAfee Mobile Threats report indicates that almost 65 000 new fake apps were detected in December 2018.

Despite the precautions taken by most major apps platforms to mitigate the number of malicious applications uploaded on their platform, cybercriminals continue to find ways to bypass these security measures.

A recent example, the fake Samsung app which has tricked 10 million Android users. This app named “Updates for Samsung” promises firmware updates, but in reality is not affiliated to Samsung. Once downloaded, the app proposes ads first and foremost. To download an update, the user must pay a fee of $34.99. However, this operation is completely free of charge since the firmware update is directly accessible from the smartphone’s settings.

What to do against these fake mobile apps?

Given the importance and omnipresence of mobile applications, it is absolutely essential for companies to incorporate into their brand protection and security strategies, a mobile application protection and a monitoring implementation of mobile apps present on the market.

Every second, a malicious application is active and poses a threat to brands and consumers. To face this, Nameshield proposes an online monitoring of mobile apps present on the applications stores, allowing to identify the ones that might be infringing your brands and assists you in the actions to implement.

For more information about our monitoring solution, don’t hesitate to contact your Nameshield’s consultant.

The financial industry, the target of more and more costly attacks on the DNS

The financial services industry, the target of more and more costly attacks on the DNS
Image source: JimBear via Pixabay

Financial services companies are particularly affected by cyberattacks. They possess a wealth of information on the customers, protect their money and provide essential services which must be available day and night. They are a lucrative target. Among the favored lines of attacks: the DNS.

The Efficient IP’s Global DNS threat annual report shows a constant growth of the DNS attacks’ number and the financial impacts, with an average financial loss of 1.2 million euros in 2019. This amount was estimated at 513 000€ in 2017 and 806 000€ in 2018.

If all the industries are affected by cyberattacks, 82% of the companies surveyed have been affected and 63% have suffered a traffic disruption, the financial industry pays a more important price with 88% of impact. Conducted with 900 persons from nine countries of North America, Europe and Asia, the study indicates that financial companies suffered 10 attacks in average during the 12 last months, i.e. an increase of 37% compared to last year.

The increase of the costs is only one of the DNS attacks’ consequences for the financial services industry. The most common impacts are the cloud services’ downtime, experienced by 45% of financial organizations, and internal applications downtime (68%). Furthermore, 47% of financial companies have been the victims of frauds by phishing attacks aiming the DNS.

The survey clearly shows the insufficient security measures implemented for the DNS securing. The delay in applying security patches is a major problem for the organizations of this industry. In 2018, 72% of the interviewed companies admitted that a 3 days’ delay was necessary to implement a security patch in their systems, 3 days during which they are exposed to attacks.

Only 65% of the financial institutions use or plan to integrate a trusted DNS architecture, they seem to be always late and not to be sufficiently aware of the risks associated to this central point of their infrastructure. The evolution of the threats on the DNS is constant, the attacks are many and complex. It is essential to quickly react to better protect yourself.

Industry, trade, media, telecom, health, education, government, service… many others sectors are affected by the attacks. Some solutions exist. ANSSI publishes every year the guide of good practices regarding the DNS resilience, which details many recommendations in order to be protected. Relying on an Anycast network; possessing a protection system against DDoS attacks; having a monitoring of DNS traffic and a team able to take action quickly; possessing an efficient security policy … As many measures essential to the resilience and efficiency of the DNS network against these damaging attacks in terms of financial and image impact.

Hoping to see at last better figures in the 2020 report.

ICANN66 at Montreal – A contrasting summit

During the first half of November, the 66th ICANN Summit was held in Montreal, Canada. This third and final annual summit devoted to policies applicable to Internet naming was eagerly awaited as the topics under discussion are numerous. At its closing, however, it left many participants a little bit disappointed.

A preview of the topics and postures during the weekend before the official launch of the Summit

The weekend before the official opening of the Summit is usually an opportunity to get an overview of the topics and postures involved. Not surprisingly, the expedited Policy Development Process (ePDP) which aims to develop a consensus rule to specify future conditions of access to personal data that are no longer published in the WHOIS, the domain name search directory, due to GDPR, is one of the major topics.

Among other related topics, the replacement of the same WHOIS by the RDAP (Registration Data Access Protocol) probably next year for generic domain names. This replacement is not insignificant when we know that WHOIS has been in use for nearly 35 years.

The body representing governments, the GAC, has weighed up the issue of domain name abuse, which has taken off considerably on the new generic extensions launched in 2012. When we know the rise of Internet practices aimed at weighing on elections in certain countries and the economic impact of computer attacks and hacking, we understand that this subject is being pushed by the GAC. While one of ICANN’s topics is to clarify in their texts the notion of malicious uses, this term refers to domains registered for phishing, malware, botnets and spam, the other part concerns the means to stem them. The existence of abusive domains indeed threatens the DNS infrastructure, impacts consumer safety and threatens the critical assets of public and commercial entities. Finally, and not surprisingly, the subject of a future round of new generic extensions has also been on many lips.

ICANN66 at Montreal - A contrasting summit
Cherine Chalaby at the ICANN Summit held in Montreal

“The best ICANN summit”, really?

During the traditional opening ceremony, which brings together all the guests for one hour (2500 according to Goran Marby, ICANN CEO) in a huge room to listen to various speakers, including Martin Aubé of the Quebec Government’s Ministry of Economy and Innovation, Cherine Chalaby, one of the ICANN Board members whose term ends at the end of the year, told his audience that ICANN66 would be the “Best ICANN summit”. It must be said, however, that at the end of the week of debates and meetings, which followed one another at a sustained pace, while the subjects under discussion are really numerous, the feeling regarding this assertion was more than mixed for many participants.

First, the expeditious process for access to WHOIS non-public data is progressing with a framework constrained by ICANN and the Personal Data Protection Authorities. The outcome of this process is envisaged between April and June 2020 and it is currently a centralized model where ICANN would allow the future lifting of anonymity of data that are now masked due to GDPR which holds the line.

Then the subject that was probably most often mentioned during this new summit week concerned abuses with domain names. For ICANN, the subject is central because it is directly correlated to its totem: the stability of the Internet for which they are the responsible. Since February 2019, ICANN has been publishing some metrics on malicious practices identified through DAAR, their Domain Abuse Activity Reporting.

Their latest report presented in Montreal shows that 364 extensions (mainly new generic extensions from the 2012 round) revealed at least one threat posed by one of the domain names activated on these extensions. More worryingly, new generic extensions would still account for nearly 40% of malicious uses, compared to 60% for historical generic extensions. This figure should be highlighted with the volume of these two categories of extensions. Indeed, out of just over 200 million generic names, new generic domains represent only 15% of the total number of registered names. ICANN therefore wants this subject to be taken up by the entire community present in Montreal.

Proposals were made by the various bodies present, some of which went so far as to request a policy development process (PDP). This last proposal, if it were to obtain ICANN’s approval, would have the unfortunate consequence of postponing the hypothetical schedule for a next round of new extensions, a subject that interested many of the guests present in Montreal. Indeed, for ICANN, the problem of the concentration of malicious practices in the new generic extensions must be solved before any future round, so that the PDP still in progress on the review of the last round of 2012 has gone almost unnoticed.  

If the rules are slow to evolve on malicious uses, your Nameshield consultant can already provide you with adapted solutions to your needs on this key matter.

Nameshield signs up the Paris Call in order to actively contribute to the Internet’s stability

Paris Call - Nameshield

Just one year ago, in the context of the first Paris Peace Forum, the French President, Emmanuel Macron, launched the Paris Call for trust and security in cyberspace. This call is a political declaration aiming to express a mobilization on the stability in the cyberspace and strengthens the efforts of the international community and many actors involved in the digital security issues. This text reminds some principles that we think are fundamental, like the application of the international rights and the Human rights in the cyberspace. It also highlights the need of a multi actors’ approach, to create standards which will allow us to fully benefit, i.e. in a reliable and secure way, from opportunities provided by the digital revolution.

Lastly, the Paris Call promotes the strengthening of the digital products and services’ security that we use for example, in our daily lives. The text aims in that sense, to prevent cyberattacks perpetrated by malicious actors, which threaten all the users of the cyberspace.

Aware that our Society’s development, on the economic, cultural and democratic fronts, requires a strengthened trust of the information that flows through the Internet, Nameshield, which has worked for 25 years to protect the digital identity of its clients; companies, local collectivities and administrations through the use of their domain names, wished to join this initiative and sign the Paris Call.

Its job consists in ensuring the integrity and resilience of the identity of individuals and organizations on the Internet, represented today by the domain name. By highly protecting data on domain name identity cards (Whois) and by providing a high availability and high performance service through the associated Domain Name System (DNS), Nameshield contributes to a large extent to the second principle of the Paris Call: Protecting the Internet. To prevent activity that intentionally and substantially damages the general availability or integrity of the public core of the Internet.

Cornerstone of the Web, the Domain Name System (DNS) serves as the Internet directory. This protocol translates a domain name into an IP address, based on a database distributed on thousands of machines. If the DNS falls because of data corruption or a denial of service attack, all your websites and emails would become inaccessible, which is completely unthinkable nowadays! The DNS must be protected and must stay highly available.

Protocol created in the 1980’s, security flaws regarding the usual functioning of the DNS have been identified since its creation. That is why, a new secured protocol, DNSSEC, has thus been developed to ensure the authenticity of the exchanges through a certified signature. Other solutions can complete the resilience of your identity on the Internet: the registry lock, SSL certificates

The security solutions proposed by Nameshield, an independent French company that stores its data in France and possesses its own anycast and resilient DNS infrastructure, certified ISO 27001 on all its domain names activity, are compliant with the ANSSI recommendations on the good practices regarding the domain names’ acquisition and exploitation.

In the context of the 2nd Paris Peace Forum, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs wished to illustrate the second principle of the Paris Call: Protect the Internet by highlighting the services proposed by Nameshield. The company is proud to be able to collaborate, at its level, with the actors implicated in digital security issues in order to make the Internet more reliable and thus contribute to the security of the cyberspace.

https://pariscall.international/en/principles