Newsletter Vol 1 Issue 3

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

************************

Scroll to Top