Network Neutrality & Spam


Published on

Net neutrality & spam issues in Internet Governance

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Network Neutrality & Spam

  1. 1. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality & SpamInternet Governance & Standards Development Workshop, AccraEdwin A.
  2. 2. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality
  3. 3. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality - explained3What if you wokeup one day and… could NOT accessbecauseyour ISP or Governmentsays so ?!!NN is all aboutTrafficManagementEndStartBandwidth
  4. 4. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality• The Internet‟s success lies in its design, which isbased on the principle of network neutrality.• From the outset, the flow of all the content on theInternet, whether coming from start-ups or bigcompanies, was treated without discrimination.• New companies and innovators did not needpermission or market power to innovate on theInternet.4
  5. 5. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality - definedSource: principle that Internet service providers andgovernments should treat all data on theInternet equally, not discriminating or chargingdifferentially byuser, content, site, platform, application, type of attachedequipment, and modes of communication.
  6. 6. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality – The current situation6
  7. 7. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality – The current situation7Less bandwidth HIGH bandwidthIncreasing Bandwidth DemandBandwidthneeds beforebirth of..Bandwidthneeds afterbirth of..Bandwidth = How much stuff can passthrough the pipe (or wire) at a time
  8. 8. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality – IIB in Ghana8
  9. 9. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality – simplified definition9The principle that all Internet traffic should be treated equally
  10. 10. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality: The Issues• Emerging consensusthat there is a need forappropriate trafficmanagement.• The main question ishow to interpret theadjective „appropriate‟.• 3 other areas of debatebesides TechnicalIssues10•Economic•Legal•Human rightThe 3 other Issues
  11. 11. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality: Economic Issues• Many significant networkoperators – including bothtelecoms and ISPs – havechanged their businessmodels• Some operators currentlyprovide VoIP, IPTV & otherservices in addition to theirtraditional services11• ISP vs OTT Serviceproviders• Proposals for Multi-tierInternet policy to ensureQoS• E.g. Google & Orange deal• ETNO WCIT-12proposals (“sender paysprinciple” )• Proposals for business tier• E.g. Google vs. Verizon
  12. 12. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality: Legal Issues12• FCC vs. Comcast, 2007• Canadian ISP, Telus blocksaccess to pro-union blogs &other websites during labordisputes, 2005• Do ISPs have the right toblock traffic to certaincontent or materials?• E.g BitTorrent• Is the National InformationTechnology Agency allowedto block Youtube duringoffice hours
  13. 13. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality: Human right Issues• Access to information• Freedom of expression• Health• Education13
  14. 14. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality – The risks• Tiered Internet• Suffocated competition• Stifled innovation14
  15. 15. www.isoc.ghNetwork Neutrality: Arguments For & Against• Control of data (ISPGatekeeping)• Digital rights and freedoms• Competition and innovation• Preserving Internet standards• End-to-end principle15• ISPs need ability to control accessto manage bandwidth needed toassure QoS• Internet has succeeded because ofabsence of regulation• Reduces incentive for investmentin broadband infrastructure anddeploymentArguments For Arguments Against
  16. 16. www.isoc.ghNet Neutrality: ProponentsProponents ExamplesMajor Corporate Players Google, Yahoo!, Amazon, Vonage, eBay, MicrosoftTech Groups and ThoughtLeadersVint Cerf, Tim Berners-Lee, Prof Nii Narku Quaynor, BillMoyers, Craig Newmark, Harvard Berkman Center, ProfLawrence Lessig, Robert W. McChesney, Tech Net, Eric SchmidtPolitical Parties Democrats(President Obama)Selected Newspapers New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle, San Jose MercuryPressUnions and MajorAssociationsAmerican Civil Liberties Union, American LibraryAssociation, Christian Coalition of America, Consumers Union,Environmental Defense Institute, Feminist Majority, Free Press,Gun Owners of AmericaCelebrities Moby, REM, Alyssa MilanoWebsites www.savetheinternet.com16
  17. 17. www.isoc.ghNet Neutrality: Proponents17“ I want to be clear what we meanby Net neutrality:What we mean is if you have onedata type like video, you dontdiscriminate against one personsvideo in favor of another. But itsokay to discriminate acrossdifferent types, so you couldprioritize voice over video, andthere is general agreementwith Verizon and Google on thatissue. “August 4, 2010; Google CEO, Eric Schmidt
  18. 18. www.isoc.ghNet Neutrality: Proponents18November 14,2007; Senator Barack Obama
  19. 19. www.isoc.ghNet Neutrality: OpponentsOpponents ExamplesMajor Corporate Players 3M, AT&T, Verizon, Telus, Comcast, Time-Warner, Shaw,EastlinkTech Groups andThought, Latinos in Information Sciences andTechnology,Political Parties Republicans(Senator McCain)Selected Newspapers Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Washington TimesUnions and MajorAssociationsCommunications Workers of America, AmericanConservative Union, National Association ofManufacturersWebsites http://handsoff.org19
  20. 20. www.isoc.ghNet Neutrality: Opponents20“They[Google, Yahoo, Vonage]dont have any fiber outthere. They dont have anywires... They use my lines forfree -- and thats BS.“… "Fora Google or a Yahoo or aVonage or anybody toexpect to use these pipes forfree is nuts!November 7 2005; AT&T chairman, Edward E. Whitacre Jr.
  21. 21. www.isoc.ghSpam
  22. 22. www.isoc.ghSpam - definedSpam is usually defined as unsolicited e-mail, which issent to a wide number of Internet users.22
  23. 23. www.isoc.ghSpam – What do people use it for?• Commercial promotion• e-marketing• Social activism• Political campaigning• Distribution of pornographic materials.• Distribution of malware• Fraudulent activities23According to the statistics from 2009, 81% of e-mail traffic is spam.
  24. 24. www.isoc.ghSpam – effectsBesides the fact that spam is annoying, it also causesconsiderable economic loss, both in terms ofbandwidth used and time lost on checking/deleting it.24
  25. 25. www.isoc.ghSpam - Combating spam• Technical means• Legal means25
  26. 26. www.isoc.ghCombating spam – Technical means• Locally – spam filters• Internationally through organizations such asspamhaus.org26
  27. 27. www.isoc.ghCombating spam – The Spamhaus way27
  28. 28. www.isoc.ghCombating spam – The Spamhaus way28
  29. 29. www.isoc.ghCombating spam – Legal means• Introduce anti-spam laws.• E.g. US Can-Spam Law , December 2003• EU anti-spam law, July 2003• Whiles both laws are good they lack the provision forcross-border spam prevention29
  30. 30. www.isoc.ghLegal means - US Can-Spam Lawexamined• Involves a delicate balance between allowing e-mail-based promotion and preventing spam.• Law prescribes severe penalties for distributing spam,including prison terms of up to five years• Law also tolerate or might even encourage spamactivity: spam is allowed until the receiver of spammessages says ‘stop’ (by using an opt-out clause).30
  31. 31. www.isoc.ghSpam - Effective combat approach• Requires international response• Australia, Korea, and the UK sign MoU• OECD established Task Force on spam and prepared ananti-spam toolkit.• The ITU organized the Thematic Meeting on CounteringSpam (2004)• EU establishes Network of Anti-Spam Enforcement Agencies• Leading internet companies that host email accountsestablish the Anti-Spam Technical Alliance (ASTA) , 200331
  32. 32. www.isoc.ghSpam - Effective combat approachSo what is Africa doing to combat spam?32
  33. 33. www.isoc.ghSpam - The issues• Different definitions across governments33
  34. 34. www.isoc.ghSpam - Spam & Authentication• Key structural enabler of spam• Sending e-mail messages with a fake sender‟s address.• DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM), IETF34
  35. 35. www.isoc.ghSpam - The need for global action• Most spam originates from outside a given country. Itis a global problem requiring a global solution• Developed countries prefer the strengthening ofnational legislations coupled with bilateral or regionalanti-spam campaigns• Developing countries prefer shaping a globalresponse to the spam problem35