| webarchive 2nd Dec 2002ISOC-England: ISOC-E Digest Friday 17 May 2002 Volume 1: Issue 03
“The Internet is for Everyone” The Internet Society of England freely distributable monthly Newsletter Editor: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <editor@england.isoc.org> Producer: Richard Francis Please distribute widely ! Instructions for subscribing/unsubscribing are included at the end of this message ***** See last item for further information, disclaimers, caveats, etc. ***** This issue is archived at <http://www.england.isoc.org/newsletter/index.rhtm> Contents: Welcome to issue number 3 News Feature: Governance of the Internet at the Crossroads ICANN 2 ? (Richard Francis) Feature: Crying Klez: Maybe the sky *is* falling (Robert M. Slade) Working Groups Events Diary In the next issue of the ISOC England Newsletter Abridged info on ISOC England ———————————————————————- Date: Mon, 0 May 2002 00:00:00 -0000 From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Subject: Welcome to issue number 3 Welcome to the third issue of the ISOC England Newsletter. HACKING INCIDENT This month, the computer that runs the mailing list itself was hacked maliciously, and all data pertaining to the ISOC England Newsletter mailing list membership was erased. Thankfully, we have kept back-ups of the original list membership, but if you had subscribed to the distribution list yourself, and this issue reaches you by way of someone else forwarding it to you, then you may not be in the distribution anymore. Make sure you don’t miss out on future issues by sending a command to: majordomo@gih.com with the command: subscribe isoc-e-newsletter in the body of the message CALL FOR ARTICLES Hacking is a plague to the Internet, and we are planning on discussing the problem in one of our future issues. If you wish to contribute an article on the subject, please email me. FEATURES This month’s first feature article, “Governance of the Internet at the Crossroads”, penned by Richard Francis, is the first of a series on ICANN reform. He looks at reform from the perspective of National Internet Top Level Domain Registries (ccTLDs). ICANN, the global Internet governing body, may sound like an acronym we do not really relate to, but ultimately, actions taken by ICANN will affect all of us! They are responsible for the stable operation of the international root server system. Wiped disk… E-mails to all of your address book… Have you ever been hit by a computer virus? The second feature article included in this newsletter is written by Rob Slade, a worldwide authority on computer viruses for way more than a decade. According to Silicon.com, KLEZ is a virus that is top of the “”virus league tables”. Just like previous similar critters, it spreads by using loopholes in MS Outlook – and is very successful at that. Computer viruses are here to stay – but steps can be taken against them to minimise their spread. In today’s world of information overload, Rob’s article provides the facts. We would really like to receive feedback from everybody, so if you have suggestions, comments, or would like to contribute an article to the ISOC-E newsletter, then please write to: editor@england.isoc.org Happy Reading! —————————— ISOC NEWS IMPORTANT: ISOC ENGLAND MEMBER DISCUSSION LIST The ISOC England member’s discussion list has moved home! The list has also been modified from being “opt-out” to being “opt-in”. This means that in the past, all ISOC England members used to be automatically subscribed to the ISOC England Discussion list. Today, members need to specifically subscribe to the discussion list. All members are joined automatically to the announce list. This list is for announcements only and is for the use of the board or authorised administrators of the chapter. The members list is an open discussion list and is optional. All members who wish to take part in chapter discussions need to visit the website at www.england.isoc.org and log in using their username and password. You then need to select “Change personal details” and your membership details will be displayed. If you do not remember your password/username, a password recovery function is provided. Once into your member area, click on “Change my Subscriptions” and select the mailing lists you would like to be subscribed to at the bottom of the “update” page. Emails will be sent to the email address you give in the member record. 2002 ISOC BOARD OF TRUSTEES ELECTIONS In accordance with the new ISOC Governance model, those are coming up soon. An announcement was made by Christian de Larrinaga, explaining the current position of the Board, and the search for solutions to ensure that every voice within ISOC England is heard: http://www.england.isoc.org/isoc-newgov-info.rhtm The initial process has now taken place, and Veni Markovski has been chosen as the ISOC European Chapters representative. The election date is Tue May 28.
Announce Election done Stop accepting nominations done Announce initial slate Fri done End accepting petitions Fri done Final slate to Elections Comm done Mail ballots Sun done Election day Tue 28-May-02 Announce results Fri 31-May-02 End receiving challenges Mon 10-Jun-02 Reply to challenges Mon 17-Jun-02 Annual General Meeting Mon 17-Jun-02 For full information on the election process, please consult: http://www.england.isoc.org/bot-election-chapter.rhtm VOTING TAKING PLACE ON TWO MOTIONS FOR ICANN REFORM The DNSO (Domain Name Supporting Oganization of ICANN) is conducting a vote on the reform of ICANN. The two motions to be voted on are: * Motion 1. “Request that US DoC hold open competition for services now offered by ICANN” * Motion 2. “Basic principles for the ICANN Reform Process” To have your voice heard, you need to register in the Voting Registry. A form to that effect is found on: http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-voting-registry.html Basic outline of the voting on Two motions about ICANN Reform * Basic outline http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2002.GA-b12-outline.html Electorate and Voting Registry * Electorate. Voting roster http://www.dnso.org/secretariat/b12.rosterindex.html, as of 15 May 2002, at the time the ballot was prepared. Voting Rules used by the DNSO General Assembly * Voting rules http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/2000.GA-voting-rules.html Time for the vote * Begins: Wednesday 15 May 2002, 13:00 UTC (06:00 LA, 09:00 New York, 15:00 Paris, 22:00 Tokyo) * Ends: Wednesday 22 May 2002, 13:00 UTC (06:00 LA, 09:00 New York, 15:00 Paris, 22:00 Tokyo) Results published on 24 May 2002, 16:00 UTC —————————— APRIL/MAY NEWS DIGEST In the fast-changing world of Technology and the Internet, News are a daily event. Here is a selection from April and May’s newsreel. I welcome comments about the selection! Please e-mail your feedback to editor@england.isoc.org PRIVACY ‘NET IS DESTROYING CIVIL LIBERTIES,’ BLAIR WARNED (silicon.com – 20 March 2002) “If the government doesn’t explicitly defend personal liberties then these may be swept away by the growth of new technologies.” http://www.silicon.com/ess52159 REGULATORY IBM DROPS INTERNET PATENT BOMBSHELL (ZDnet – 18 April 2002) A recent IBM patent claim could threaten royalty-free access to a key Internet standard protocol backed by the United Nations. http://cgi.zdnet.com/slink?177220 NEW LAW WOULD CRIMINALIZE FALSE WHOIS INFO (newsbytes – 3 May 2002) A.N. Other would not be able to register domain names in US http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/176371.html NON EU ONLINE BUSINESS PROVIDERS TO PAY VAT (silicon.com – 7 May 2002) Businesses delivering goods digitally to European customers will have to pay VAT even if they are based outside the European Union http://www.silicon.com/ess53161 INTERNET GOVERNANCE & E-GOVERNMENT DOT-EU DOMAINS GIVEN THE GREEN LIGHT (silicon.com – 26 March 2002) The European Union looks set to have its own .COM equivalent http://www.silicon.com/a52283 DOT EU REGULATION DOCUMENT PUBLISHED http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/dat/2002/l_113/l_11320020430en00010005.pdf CONSUMER GROUPS DECRY DOT-US POLICIES (Bizreport – 29 April 2002) A good lesson in what mistakes to avoid with DOT-EU http://www.bizreport.com/article.php?art_id=3362&width=1024 ACM ASKS ICANN TO SCALE BACK MISSION (BizReport – 3 April 2002) The Association of Computing Machinery gets involved in the debate http://www.bizreport.com/article.php?art_id=3230&width=1024 ICANN SEEKS NEW DOT-ORG OPERATOR (22 April 2002) Do you fancy like bidding for running a major Top Level Domain? http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-22apr02.htm E-ENVOY TOLD: ‘MORE ACTION, LESS CHAT’ (silicon.com – 25 April 2002) National Audit Office criticizes the E-envoy mission http://www.silicon.com/ess52923 Report at: http://www.nao.gov.uk/pn/01-02/0102764.htm ACCESSIBILITY BBC LAUNCHES EURO-CENTRIC SEARCH ENGINE Dissatisfied with US-centric search engines? http://www.bbc.co.uk OECD PUBLISHES REPORT ON INTERNET TRAFFIC EXCHANGE (13 March 2002) http://webnet1.oecd.org/pdf/M00027000/M00027258.pdf TECHNICAL BT TRIALS ‘NEXT GENERATION’ BROADBAND (silicon.com – 26 March 2002) Forget ADSL – even higher transfer rates are coming soon! http://www.silicon.com/a52281 HALF A MILLION HAVE BROADBAND IN UK – OFTEL (NUA Internet Surveys – 3 May 2002) http://www.nua.ie/surveys/index.cgi?f=VS&art_id=905357918&rel=true BT’S ‘NO FRILLS’ DSL IS AN ISP KILLER (silicon.com – 24 April 2002) No frills ISP will hit the market in Autumn http://www.silicon.com/a52900 BT ANNOUNCES PLANS FOR UK’S FIRST PUBLIC ACCESS WIRELESS LAN NETWORK (10 April 2002) Full details in June http://www.groupbt.com/Mediacentre/Agencynewsreleases/2002/an34.htm HACKING WITH A PRINGLES TUBE (BBC News – 8 March 2002) Make sure that wireless LAN is secure, or you could get hacked http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1860000/1860241.stm OECD’S CAUTIONARY TALE OF PORN AND CYBERSPACE (IHT – 3 April 2002) Domain name renewals gone wrong http://www.iht.com/articles/53353.html KLEZ TOP OF THE VIRUS LEAGUE (silicon.com – 1 May 2002) Klez – extremely irritating – extremely contagious http://www.silicon.com/a53058 ECONOMY HOW TO SURVIVE AS AN IT CONTRACTOR (silicon.com – 19 March 2002) Tips for IT contractors and sub-contractors http://www.silicon.com/ess52133 IT SPENDING ON THE RISE (silicon.com – 18 March 2002) Is the worst over ? http://www.silicon.com/ess52089 NTL: ‘WE MAY RUN OUT OF CASH’ (silicon.com – 27 March 2002) BT competitors facing hardship http://www.silicon.com/p52314 ITV DIGITAL COLLAPSE COULD HARM INTERNET TAKE-UP (ZDnet – 2 May 2002) The UK government’s target of achieving universal Internet access by 2005 could be wrecked by the collapse of ITV Digital, MPs warned on Wednesday. http://cgi.zdnet.com/slink?178249 THE POLITICS OF PEERING (ISP Planet – 29 April 2002) Inter-ISP Peering agreements will shape tomorrow’s Internet http://www.isp-planet.com/business/2002/equinix.html TONGUE IN CHEEK “I’LL BE BACK,” DISGRUNTLED CYBORG TELLS AIRPORT SECURITY (silicon.com – 15 March 2002) What could happen when you take Internet access too seriously. http://www.silicon.com/ess52068 YAHOO SUED BY SIGNATURE YODELER (USA Today – 19 April 2002) What is the market price for a Yodel? http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/2002/04/19/yahoo-yodel.htm @rE Y0U l1v1ng 1n @ C0mpUtEr S1mUl@t10n? Dr. Nick Bostrom, Dept. of Philosophy @ Yale University put his point across that you are… http://www.simulation-argument.com/ —————————— GOVERNANCE OF THE INTERNET AT THE CROSSROADS – ICANN 2 ? by Richard Francis rfrancis@igovernance-consultants.com Internet historians who look back to 2002 in the future may have some sympathies with the Miami Law Professor, Michael Froomkin who has recently written: ‘Who cares what ICANN was supposed to be for half an eternity ago in Internet time. (Maybe we’ve learned a thing or two since then)…the critical element for ICANN is technical coordination…the public interest is served by delegating resources, not hoarding them, and by presiding over an orderly de-centralization of policymaking, away from current single point of near-total failure'(1). In February 2002, Dr Stuart Lynn, CEO of ICANN, published a proposal for fundamental reform of ICANN. The premise of the proposal is that ICANN, in its current form cannot fulfil the goals for which it was set up.(2) Many commentators consider the ICANN system is ‘broken'(3). Dr Lynn’s premise has led to the most comprehensive global discussion of ICANN, and mass of written material generated by that discussion since its foundation in the 1990s. The history of the establishment of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) will be familiar to many members of the local Internet community in the UK. For those who have not followed the ICANN experiment in global co-regulation of the Internet, ICANN is a Californian not for profit corporation, created following President Clinton’s challenge to US Commerce Department’s National Telecommunication and Information Administration to ‘support efforts to make the governance of the domain name system private and competitive, and to create a contractually based self-regulatory regime that deals with potential conflicts between domain name usage and trademark laws on a global basis’ [and as it has turned out, a raft of additional policy matters].(4) At Harvard, faculties who are participants in the Kennedy School of Government’s broad research programme, ‘Visions of Governance in the 21st Century’ describe ICANN as a rare ‘experiment’ in governance.(5) ICANN is responsible for coordinating the Internet’s naming, address allocation, and protocol parameter assignment systems. These systems enable globally unique and universally interoperable identifiers for the benefit of the Internet and its users. As overall coordinator of the Internet’s systems of unique identifiers, ICANN’s role according to its March 2002 mission statement, while defined and limited, includes both operational and policymaking functions (6).
A few country code country code top level domain (ccTLD) managers, such as Nominet UK, were involved in the international consultation which led to the establishment of ICANN; most were not. At the time there was a clear distinction between ICANN’s technical co-ordination role and its role in relation to generic top level domain (gTLD) policy matters. ICANN has added 7 new gTLDs to the .com, .org and .net open gTLD registries. The clear distinction has been lost, notwithstanding a separate agreement between the US Government and ICANN relating to the organisation and management of the ‘IANA function’.(7) The ccTLD Registry managers are internationally one of the most ‘organised’ group of actors on the ICANN stage. At the end of the ICANN meeting in Accra they issued a communiqué, commenting on the Lynn reforms (8). Now that many governments and the ccTLD managers in their countries have a far deeper understanding of the Domain Name System (DNS) the opportunity must not be lost to grapple with one of the most difficult issues that ICANN have to deal with: documenting the fact that the root of the ccTLD registry managers’ authority, within the DNS, is the consent of their local Internet community, including national Governments as key members of those communities. They do not get their authority from the IANA function of ICANN. Two basic technical functions are critical for ccTLD registry managers: * Stable and secure operation of the Primary Root Server (currently operated by Verisign under the direction of the US Government) and the 12 Secondary Root Servers (currently operated by volunteers, two of which are located in Europe) * Maintenance of a database of ccTLD Managers and name server addresses. There is a growing consensus among ccTLD managers that matters of interoperability, stability, security are matters of responsibility for the ccTLD itself, which is accountable for this to their local Internet community. As a TLD registry is not considered to be responsible for the technical use of each second level domain (SLD) delegated to Internet users, or for the technical functionality of the SLD, the administrator of the database comprising the authoritative database for ccTLD managers (currently the IANA) should not attempt to assume such a responsibility for ccTLDs, and domain names registered under them. When the ICANN Board come together at their next meeting in Bucharest in June and begin the process of responding to the calls for reform, it is inconceivable that they will recommend to the US Department of Commerce to discontinue the experiment in governance. Nevertheless there is a general view that the need for major reform is so marked that the organisation that emerges will be so significantly different for Internet historians to mark the launch of ICANN 2 in 2002-2003. The organisation that emerges might be a UN Commission on the Internet Naming and Numbering. My guess it will be ICANN 2. A full response to the needs of ccTLD Registry managers must be built into the reformed organisation. FOOTNOTES 1. See Prof Michael Froomkin Johnson & Crawford: ‘The Conflicting Myths of ICANN’ – ICANN watch 22.04.2002 http://www.icannwatch.org/article.php?sid=687&mode+thread&order+0 2. The full text of the Lynn proposal can be found at http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-24feb02.htm 3. eg Paul Hoffman in ‘Reforming the Administration of the DNS Root’, 25 April 2002 http://www.proper.com/ICANN-notes/dns-root-admin-reform.html 4. For a summary of the report go to http://www.gao.gov/audit.htm 5. See ‘ICANN and the Migration of Governence, JS Nye Jr and JD Donahue in ‘Who controls the Internet?’ Bertelsmann Foundation 2001 6. The ICANN staff mission statement is at http://www.icann.org/general/toward-mission-statement-07mar02.htm 7. see http://www.iana.org 8. see http://www.wwtld.org/communique/ccTLDGhana_communique_13Mar2002.html Richard Francis is a founding director of Internet Governance Consultants. He chairs ISOC’s Legal and Regulatory International SIG. (Full Bio available in ISOC England Newsletter V1.01, archived at: http://www.england.isoc.org/newsletter/index.rhtm ) —————————— CRYING KLEZ: MAYBE THE SKY *IS* FALLING by Robert M. Slade rslade@sprint.ca (This article was first published in Risks Digest 22.06 – 8 May 2002) Maybe it’s because the name is unassuming, without the flash of a “Melissa” or “Loveletter” or “Chernobyl.” Maybe it’s because various reports have called it Klaz, Kletz, W32/Klez.[a-k]@mm, or I-Worm.Klez. Maybe it’s because the public’s attention has been exhausted by media viruses like Code Red. Maybe it’s because there have been a number of versions, and only the latest one has made an impact. Maybe it’s because the beast is bewilderingly complicated. Whatever the reason, a virus called Klez (or, more specifically, Klez.H) seems to be happily spreading far and wide, without much attention from anyone except antiviral vendors. Warnings have been issued about it, but these are often limited and unhelpful. The general media does not appear to have paid any attention to the problem at all. One of the most widespread and dangerous viruses of recent times, Klez is hard to identify, is difficult to track, is generating serious numbers, and carries a number of payloads. Also, it probably isn’t the last of it’s kind. Klez is actually a family of viruses. The limited information available seems to indicate that the same author or a small group, probably resident in China, is likely responsible for all of the Klez variants. Eight have been identified so far, seemingly released between the fall of 2001 and spring of 2002. Each variant has added new features and payloads. In little over half a year the Klez family has gone from being a minor nuisance to a major threat. The first version was so buggy that flaws in programming seemed to be the major concern. However, even then the virus was notable for its ambition and complexity. In addition to spreading itself, Klez dropped a virus called ElKern. (There have been reports of a new version of a new version of the CIH virus traveling with Klez, but this may be due to infection of the Klez program file itself.) The subject line, sender address, and filename attachment were all variable, avoiding the major means of e-mail virus detection. (Various Klez variant subject lines have promised games, humour, pornography, vague but important messages, and, interestingly, antiviral protection.) Klez also used a vulnerability in Microsoft’s Outlook mailer (actually resident in Internet Explorer programming) that would automatically unpack and invoke the message attachment, in some cases before the message was even read by the user. (This mailer loophole, sometimes known as the IFRAME vulnerability, had actually been addressed and patched by Microsoft in March of 2001. Users who had regularly upgraded installed patches would not have been at risk of this specific function. The bug is addressed in www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/downloads/critical/q290108/default.asp and http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS01-020.asp. However, the more widely known Microsoft security bulletin, http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS01-027.asp, deals with a composite patch, and talks about browser certificates, rather than the mail problem. It is also interesting to note that, in order to use this function, Klez forms messages with a non-standard MIME [Multimedia Internet Mail Extensions] format. Non-Microsoft mailers, such as Pegasus and Netscape Communicator, may not even allow users to see the attachment, and thus, inadvertently, offer users additional protection.) The file attachment, as of version H, will have an extension of .EXE, .BAT, .PIF, or .SCR. The MIME file type will not match the extension (although that is not a reliable indicator of a virus infection). E-mail addresses used to create new infected messages are harvested from the infected machine. Recent versions of the virus also have code to use ICQ as a source of e-mail addresses. Klez.E (version 2.0, according to internal text), released in January of 2002, added file infection capabilities, so that the virus could spread using e-mail, direct copying to network shares, and infection of program files. (Windows system files were often corrupted by the infection attempts. Other files might be infected by a companion type method: the original file was renamed and hidden and a copy of Klez written with the original filename.) The virus carried its own SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) program so that it did not need to use local mail clients. The “From” line was also faked such that if Alice received an infected message from Bob, it might not come from Bob but from Charles, who had addresses for both Alice and Bob on his infected machine. This function not only prevented tracking of the infected machine, but caused many people to try and track infections in the wrong place. In addition, the virus had a payload to overwrite text, Microsoft Word, MP3, HTML and other files with random data, thus destroying the contents. Early versions of the virus had a hidden message (in the body of the infected message) seemingly indicating that the author was trying to gain a reputation in order to get a better job. Later versions tried to kill processes of the Code Red family of worms, including Nimda, and included hidden messages suggesting that Klez was an antivirus virus. Klez.E, in addition to adding to the list of virus processes that would be stopped, also killed processes for a number of the most popular and effective antiviral programs. It would remove Windows Registry keys for antiviral software, and also corrupted checksums or deleted files for antiviral systems. (Text strings seemed to indicate that this was because the world had not offered the author a well- paying computer job.) The latest version (as of this writing), Klez.H, often sends itself in a message offering a tool to remove and immunize against Klez.E. (It purports to come from one of a number of well-known antiviral companies.) Klez.H also added a new function: it would frequently pick up a file from the infected computer and add it as an attachment to the infected message sent out. There is already one known case where a confidential negotiating document was transmitted to a mailing list of several thousand people in this manner. Fortunately, the file overwriting payload seems to have been removed. Any available virus tends to spawn variants. It is also not unusual for a virus author to improve on his (or her) own work, and release new versions. However, variants seldom involve additions of functions and features to the extent seen in Klez. The original version alone demonstrated effective social engineering and polymorphic techniques, as well as complex features that would be dangerous in conjunction with other forms of malware. In less than six months, the author (and the greatest probability is that there is a single author) has added features manipulating processes in memory, attacking antiviral and security software, increasing the means of reproduction and spread, and attacking data availability and confidentiality. It is unlikely that this is the last version of Klez that will be seen, and a number of common viruses could give the author new ideas for new payloads to add and new technologies to employ. In a sense, though, there is absolutely nothing new about Klez. Microsoft software is well-known to be full of bugs and security loopholes: Internet Explorer is much more dangerous to use as a browser than is Netscape Navigator. There are dangerous technologies in common programs that should be disabled or patched. There is a definite trend towards convergence in malware, with different types of programs supporting and distributing each other. Polymorphism has long been known in file infecting viruses: the use of variant subject lines in Klez is tame compared to the (literally) myriad forms of files generated by Tremor. Most importantly, however, your mother’s old adage still holds true. “DON’T RUN THAT PROGRAM ON YOUR COMPUTER! YOU DON’T KNOW WHERE IT’S BEEN!” Rob Slade is a data communications and security specialist from North Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; A worldwide authority on computer viruses and anti-viral software. Over the past 15 years, he has reviewed countless versions of anti-viral software and analysed an even larger number of computer viruses. His latest book, “Viruses Revealed” (http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/books/techrev/bkvr.rvw) shows where computer viruses come from, how they spread, and how you can protect the computers you are responsible for. Full Bio on: http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/books/techrev/rms.htm —————————— WORKING GROUPS These are still in the process of being formed. More information soon. —————————— EVENTS DIARY ISOC ENGLAND PARTNER INTERNET WORLD AND NEXT TECH CONFERENCE The new event for the next generation of IT covering storage, webservices, outsourcing and networking. It’s a dedicated event with a strategic free conference, worth £795 and free exhibition – 11-13th June 2002, Earls Court, London. Register now for FREE on http://www.nextecheurope.com INET 2002, WASHINGTON DC, USA 18 – 21 June 2002 “Internet Crossroads: Where Technology and Policy Intersect” Book NOW to attend the Internet’s yearly Global conference whose main themes this year are about: Technology, Uses of Internet, Governance, Legislation & Regulation http://www.inet2002.org/ ICANN MEETINGS IN BUCHAREST, ROMANIA – 24-28 JUNE 2002 http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-13may02.htm THIRD WIRELESS WORLD CONFERENCE The Digital World Research Centre is pleased to announce its third annual conference on the social shaping of mobile futures, called the Third Wireless World Conference, on 17-18 July 2002. This year’s theme is “Location.” http://www.surrey.ac.uk/dwrc/wireless3.html OXFORD INTERNET INSTITUTE (OII) – (CASTING A WIDER NET) (Integrating Research and Policy on the Social Impacts of the Internet) 27 September 2002 Location: University of Oxford One of the 4 breakout sessions at this inaugural session at the OII is on Internet Governance and ICANN evolution or reform. Full details found on: http://www.oxfordevent.com For a full schedule of future meetings and events, please consult: http://www.england.isoc.org/event/index.rhtm —————————— IN THE NEXT ISSUE OF THE ISOC ENGLAND NEWSLETTER Don’t miss the next issue of the ISOC England Newsletter, where we will be reporting on the ISOC Election results, as well as looking at ICANN in more detail, and from other perspectives. —————————— Date: 01 Jan 2002 (LAST-MODIFIED) From: editor@england.isoc.org Subject: Abridged info on ISOC England ISOC England is a full chapter of the Internet Society in the UK. ISOC England is a voice of the future, creates awareness and promotes the Internet in the UK as a centre for business, government and cultural activities by working in partnership with many of the leading institutions, in government, academia, society and business. Our mission statement is: To assure the beneficial, open evolution of the global Internet and its related internetworking technologies and applications through leadership in standards, issues and education in England. For more information about ISOC England, turn to: http://www.england.isoc.org/about.rhtm CONTRIBUTIONS: letters to the editors, suggestions etc. should be sent to editor@england.isoc.org with a clear subject line. We reserve the right to amend and publish any letter sent to this address. ISOC England does not necessarily endorse the views contained in this newsletter which are the responsibility of their original poster. All contributions are considered as personal comments. Usual disclaimers apply. SUBSCRIBING to the monthly Newsletter (for free!): Send message to majordomo@gih.com with command: subscribe isoc-e-newsletter in the body of the message UNSUBSCRIBING Send message to majordomo@gih.com with command: unsubscribe isoc-e-newsletter in the body of the message NEWSLETTER ARCHIVES are held at: http://www.england.isoc.org/newsletter/index.rhtm Copyright (C) 2002 The Internet Society of England The ISOC England Newsletter is a free newsletter distributed to members of ISOC England. Permission to re-distribute this newsletter for FREE is granted to anybody, provided this copyright notice is included. —————————— End of ISOC-E Digest 1.03 ************************ |
Internet Society UK