December 2008 - KICTANet

Re: [kictanet] 1 million Laptops for who?
by Faima Basly 15 Dec '08

15 Dec '08

Mr Robert, I read the article in the papers yesterday and couldn’t help but echo some of your questions on this mail list that unfortunately have not yet been responded to. Of key interest is the following: Whats the plan for procurement? tender or 'donated'? To me this is a perfect opportunity to set up a partnership for local assembly with any of the big boys - Acer, Dell, HP etc to set up an assembly plant with a 2 year clear handover to Kenyans, part of the deal should have initial 80% local employment with clear skill transfer built in so that in 18 months you have 99% local employment at the plant. Do the math 1,000,000*40,000 kshs ( assumed price) = Lots of money. This is a deal that anyone would salivate for. Will the computers have MS Office or Linux - Again do the math as its likely to be the former. What about capacity building? Planned for or just wish ful thinking? Was there a need analysis carried out to determine that it is indeed Laptops required? So to me procurement of laptops should never be an option. As we already have the madaraka project in place, why not up skill and upscale this to meet this demand for the 1 million laptops. Or is Madaraka over? Secondly , the target group, I think you have it right, whats this about 'rural'? What is rural in Kenya? is it Turkana, Marsabit, Wajir, Nyeri, Malindi, Kibira? We need a clear cut definition and probably a sector by sector prioritization based on Vision 2030 and logically what will reap benefit to the Kenyan economy. Don’t get me wrong we must develop Kenyans consistently with a strong plan not hide behind the Rural Urban divide. I raise some of these concerns because last week I was eavesdropping on a launch at one of our Key hotels in Kenya . A Major computer chip manufacturer was launching their East African offices. They showcased their effort being a certain school in Nairobi having received some special student laptops and the school was showing how learning was improved. All good, but the purpose of the Launch? To make an appeal to the PS MOE to consider 'partnering' with this company to sell 240,000 laptops to the teachers in Kenya( wow I thought what a marketing gimic is this how it’s done?)Will this lead to a pronounce from MOE of some 240,000 Laptops for teachers???? Hook and bait? Anything further than this would be speculation. I agree teachers need laptops (computers maybe), but once again can we plan collectively as a government to work in unison and benefit locals on employment and empowerment? It CAN be done. Which brings me to the reason for this email. Shouldnt there be some kinds of checks and balances in place in our Ministries? Is there a way that 'we' can be involved before some of these utterances are made? We have two PS's of different Ministries each thinking along the same paths both with good ideas, but I worry on the path to execution. Of these 1 million Laptops Ndemo speaks of - what percentage for his fellow teachers? Jua Kali artisans?, Medical students. Is there a master plan being followed? or is it pure chance ? Dr Ndemo,I am sure there is a simple enough response to the queries raised above. I sincerely hope you will take the time to respond, and put my mind and probably others as well? at rest. Ms. Basly. ______________________________________________________________________ Hi Dr. Ndemo,I felt it would not be fair to close the year with one final outburst on your ministries policies.It was good to see that the governement will be giving laptops to youth in the rural area. http://www.nation.co.ke/business/news/-/1006/499894/-/jh30hdz/-/index.html Last time I checked 80% of the students in the University are from the "rural areas" would it not make more sense to first equip them with the necessary tools. I recently talked to IT degree students at Nairobi university and was shocked to find that less than 5% have computers dedicated to them and this are not provided by the institution but have been bought privately.It is good to talk of empowering the rural folk but is this the best way, should we not begin at the top and work our way down. This computers would also provide greater mileage if we example they where to be giving to to students in teacher training colleges so that they can take technology to the schools, country wide that they will be posted to after they graduate?Also do not forget the medical students who would be able to provide better medical services if they knew how to use and had access to the internet's resources.Another major issue that is lacking from the story is how the laptops are to be procured, is there any likelihood that they will be assembled locally as if they are we shall be killing to birds with 1 stone. Robert YaweKAY System Technologies LtdPhoenix House, 6th FloorP O Box 55806 Nairobi, 00200Kenya Tel: +254722511225, +254202010696 _______________________________________________kictanet mailing listkictanet@lists.kictanet.or.kehttp://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet _________________________________________________________________ Discover the new Windows Vista http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE

9 17

Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications (amendment)Bill: Is media overacting?
by Mike Theuri 15 Dec '08

15 Dec '08

David, The top level meetings apparently yielded some results. Apart from the Minister, it would be interesting to see how the legislators who were consulted voted or if they even attended the session. The efforts with the parliamentary committee did not go to waste, Hon. Rege did attempt to introduce amendments based on the meetings, but it has been reported that only 25 MPs were present. The media could have done better in lobbying MPs to be present for the vote. Had the media managed to locate 30 legislators in favour of the amendments and ensured they attended the proceedings, the matter would not be in its current state. I think it would be quite reasonable if the media accepted to have a compromise on the issues. It would not be right for the media to declare that it is for 'all or nothing at all', it would be selfish and self serving to deny the public of the bill's greater benefits by failing to compromise. The controversial clause has been present for many years now, if someone wanted to lynch the media, they would not need the new bill to do so. At the same time is the media aware of an event that will certainly occur that could be termed a national emergency resulting in 'raids'? Does the media have something up its sleeve that it is not keen to reveal publicly? I believe the answer to both of these questions is no. The media has nothing to worry about if it self regulates and exercises good judgement. The media has had many opportunities to self regulate, but some content that is broadcast or published is appalling, inappropriate and is certainly a factor that had led many to believe that the media needs hand holding. Sensationalism is not a prerequisite for good journalism, neither do newspapers need to turn into tabloid publications in order to sell. Professional and objective journalism will always sell itself without having to stoop low. As the saying goes, chema chajiuza, kibaya chajitembeza. The media might be surprised to find that favour can be found by approaching the issue in a positive rather than in a doom and gloom manner. The media/activists are reported to have spent Ksh 2m to advertise a 'prayer meeting' this past weekend. Wouldn't the media have done well to use such resources to educate the public positively and not engage in what borders on incitement? It is not necessary to label everything 'bad'. For example, why not publish or explain, what clause 88 is, its history, what is means for the industry and offer a number of alternative scenarios and recommendations on what should be done. A good example would be how commercial concerns express their views in opposition to legislative proposals without appearing to be antagonistic, given the focus of this forum, an ICT example would fit in well: http://www.ebaymainstreet.com/federal/net-neutrality/ The failure to recommend or offer suggestions as to what should be done does not help the media's case. If the President does not sign the bill, he will have to send the bill back to Parliament with a memorandum, how are the public, legislators and concerned parties supposed to know what the media would like the memorandum and bill to contain? By embracing the positive aspects of the bill, the media is likely to find allies in both the public and private sectors willing to support their position. When businesses, banks, investors are turned off by the media's approach of 'killing' the entire bill and wading in dangerous territory, the media is bound to seen as a villain of the very parties it relies on for some of its revenue. It is not an extraordinary effort for the media to seek out 50 MPs even 100 or more if need be, some of whom may not have read the bill, put forward the media's case while also advocating the same for the memorandum. A little more restrategizing and reorganisation on this could accomplish a lot more than engaging in uncivil disruptions. Diplomacy is never dead, it can fail, but it can also be revived. There is an opening for a revival to take place if the media seizes the opportunity. On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 1:35 PM, <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Theuri > Very well put. The media has certainly not handled the aftermath well but I > see it as a reaction to the failure of diplomacy. To be fair, the media did > quite a bit of that. Top level meetings were held one after another with > pogisho, ndemo, kalonzo, karua, raila, and twice with rege and his parl > committee. That's quite an effort. > Truth is, at this pt, better the bill fell apart, regrettably to the > detriment of the ict components, and we have the sect 88 intact, than pass a > new law with all those flaws and inherent danger. Some1 is waiting to latch > on to that law soon as its assented, to lynch the media. > Yet I totally appreciate we need some urgent regulation of the broadcast > sector. But not such crass controls as the bill provides. > The trouble is that the media can't dedicate too much time to the good > parts because, well, that won't help to cure the bad! And our suggestion was > to drop the broadcast parts and have the ict and comm parts sail but > ministry people don't want that! They want to force it through and the mps > who have been swearing to tame the media even didn't want to consider the > minor changes the committee and ministry had proposed. That's malice > aforethought. That's why this has turned into a free for all betwn > supporters and opponents of the media. > Am inclined to think this is a battle the media shouldn't lose in the > interest of our democracy and civil liberties. > David > > Sent from my BlackBerry(R) wireless device > > ------------------------------ > *From*: "Mike Theuri" > *Date*: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 13:19:01 -0600 > *To*: <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> > > *Subject*: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications > (amendment)Bill: Is media overacting? > David, > > What happens if the media campaign succeeds, the bill is not signed and > Parliament fails to override thus killing the bill? Section 88 will remain > where it is and neither the media nor the public will have gained. > > The media could gain some traction by objectively covering the bill in its > entirety. The media could do well to inform readers of what's new, what's > positive and what's negative. A well reasoned approach would reveal for > instance concerns revolving around the appointment of officials to the > commission or positives such as the bill's approach to e-crimes. The media's > approach needs to embrace diplomacy and be willing to engage in compromise. > For instance instead of calling for the deletion of section 88, the media > could seek common ground and offer among its alternative suggestions to > deletion, provisions that prevent abuse of section 88. > > While the media did not mobilise the masses, the media appears to be > engaged in what could end up inciting those who have already "self > mobilised" or are united as a result of food insecurity and related economic > issues. The media and the public stand to gain nothing by taking advantage > to fuel a volatile situation. > > The media already has painted a bad image of itself, through the actions of > a few. It is likely that the chief executives of media establishments could > have sought audience with the President and/or the PM to discuss their > concerns and made more traction in getting the bill sent back to Parliament > than have individuals engage in disruptions and heckling. A rational > approach has a better chance of succeeding than an antagonistic one. The > media hopefully has that in mind as they plan their next move. > > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:37 AM, <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> That's not true. You have obviously exaggerated in trying to put across >> your cheap propaganda. Ndemo was on k24 this morning and he was of course >> not opposing the bill. Plus, you should ask yourself, who has come out to >> support the bill and not been given airtime. >> Yes, the media is campaigning, but it has not yet agreed or employed any >> of the strategies you have listed. Their time is coming. And we don't need >> to go to previous regimes to show brutal attacks against the media. The >> worst have taken place under the current regime! >> You have more to be grateful than disgusted with the media. Be just a >> little more reflective and considerate otherwise your diabolical hatred of >> the media lacks foundation. >> David >> Sent from my BlackBerry(R) wireless device >> >> >

1 0

Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications (amendment) Bill: Is media overacting?
by emko＠internetresearch.com.gh 14 Dec '08

14 Dec '08

Murigi, I stand correct........ Thanks for the assurance that all is well, really thats what we all want so we can build our Africa. Have a goodnight. Eric here > Eric, > > To the contrary, things are very good in Kenya. Two unrestrained animals > (parliament and the media) are tying a noose around each others neck. > Few of us have little sympathy for either side and expect them to tame > each other. > > Murigi > > emko(a)internetresearch.com.gh wrote: >> Good people, >> >> At this point, finger pointing does not help and really "two wrongs does >> not make a right" because tempers are going high and Bill established >> what >> i was driving at, things could get back like before and you dont want >> that. >> >> Please lets appeal to the voice of reasoning and apply measures that >> would >> retract this track because all you need is like what happened in Greece >> the other day, a police officer deliberately or not shot a teenager and >> that country has not known peace. >> >> For Kenya, we dont even have the luxury of the Greece situation given >> the >> legacy so please i would put my weight behind Bill's proposals below, >> lets >> move quickly to calm tempers and defuse the tension. >> >> I left Nairobi this morning for Accra and trust me, the atmosphere was >> not >> good for my liking. >> >> Eric here >> >> >> >>> Wainaina/Alice et al, >>> >>> 1. How can Kictanet help package the following for consumption in the >>> public >>> domain?? >>> 2. How can stakeholders in this forum help guide this paradigm >>> shift...i.e...that there is a different school of thought that cares >>> about >>> the rest of the bill and is willing to champion dialogue rather than >>> fighting the Media?? >>> 3. At Mediacorp, we can support Kictanet with 1/2page space in a >>> leading >>> daily (if need be) to pioneer dialogue and consensus building >>> activities. >>> We >>> believe that kictanet can help cool temparatures before our businesses >>> are >>> affected for the second time this year. >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:15 PM, Wainaina Mungai >>> <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> To add to Alice's point, it is clear the media is determined to >>>> exclude content that would inform and empower the public...if the said >>>> content does not serve short-term interests of the media owners. The >>>> freedom of the media should not be at the expense of public interests. >>>> >>>> For instance, it is common knowledge that many objective and >>>> professional editors find themselves at the mercy of their employers >>>> whenever a news piece does not favour a friend of the owner. That is >>>> how we ended up with a media with blood in it's hands during the >>>> post-election crisis. It's all about the biased reporting the media >>>> has resorted to in fighting the Bill. >>>> >>>> So who should determine the direction and nature of content? An >>>> independent government regulator or the media owners? Maybe a mix of >>>> the two would be a step forward...which is what the amendments would >>>> result in. >>>> >>>> If the President passes the Bill, the big change for media would be on >>>> matters of programming codes. The other big issue of Section 88 is >>>> neither here nor there because failure by the President to ascent will >>>> leave us with the same provision under KCA (1998). >>>> >>>> Wainaina >>>> >>>> On 12/14/08, alice <alice(a)apc.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> David, >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps the media could start by reporting accurately. Some of the >>>>> sections the media find so offensive already exist in the 1998 >>>>> communications act. So why not present the big full picture to all >>>>> and >>>>> especially the public? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> alice >>>>> >>>>> (Views expressed are personal and not a reflection of any of the >>>>> organizations I am affiliated with) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> dmakali(a)yahoo.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Wainaina >>>>>> I can't argue against your sources but am certain that stage of >>>>>> black >>>>>> >>> out >>> >>>>>> for mps hasn't been reached at all. In fact we are meeting tue to >>>>>> >>> evaluate >>> >>>>>> exactly the import of the passage of that bill and bring every1 on >>>>>> the >>>>>> same page. >>>>>> Of course blacking out not just some 25 mps but all is very much a >>>>>> possible line of action. And for good reason- these mps did not >>>>>> consider >>>>>> ANY of the changes we proposed. That gang approach doesn't lend >>>>>> itself >>>>>> >>> to >>> >>>>>> decent engagement frm the media. They have abused their power and >>>>>> >>> ignored >>> >>>>>> our views, not reasonably but glibly. >>>>>> I am totally in agrment with thoz who argue the broadcast media >>>>>> needs >>>>>> regulation, because it is true. I don't even share some defensive >>>>>> views >>>>>> about ownership held by moa- I see no value in nmg getting more >>>>>> radio >>>>>> or >>>>>> tv frequencies for eg coz they already have too many, or royal media >>>>>> having all thoz frequencies. Its simply obscene. But that is a diff >>>>>> >>> story >>> >>>>>> frm govt getting into micro management of media conent or , the >>>>>> minister >>>>>> having power to raid and confiscate equipment or occupy or take over >>>>>> a >>>>>> media house. There was no emergency wen michuki used mercenaries to >>>>>> raid >>>>>> standard. >>>>>> Plus the ethical issues being raised about content can and are >>>>>> already >>>>>> addressed under the media act. The worst thing you want is to invite >>>>>> >>> govt >>> >>>>>> fiat into content matters. You will rue the day you get a >>>>>> dictatorial >>>>>> govt. Examples are many. >>>>>> Similarly, how do you allow the minister to give directions to a >>>>>> commission that's supposd to be independent? He shud take its advice >>>>>> not >>>>>> rubber stamp his decisions. And how do you have a commission >>>>>> appointed >>>>>> solely by the minister without any guidelines? Criteria to follow? >>>>>> Finally did you see the clause about kbc? Nothing about its roles, >>>>>> and >>>>>> obligations? Even the principal act is beta! >>>>>> Well, wainaina and other kictanets, it would be useful to speak to >>>>>> these >>>>>> issues even as you condemn the media for obviously lopsided >>>>>> reporting >>>>>> >>> and >>> >>>>>> wailing. >>>>>> David >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my BlackBerry(R) wireless device >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: "Wainaina Mungai" <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> >>>>>> >>>>>> Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:53:55 >>>>>> To: <dmakali(a)yahoo.com>; KICTAnet ICT Policy >>>>>> Discussions<kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications (amendment) >>>>>> Bill: >>>>>> >>> Is >>> >>>>>> media overacting? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> David, >>>>>> >>>>>> I am very much involved the media and you & I know that it was >>>>>> agreed >>>>>> that the Action Plan includes a "blackout to..." as well as all the >>>>>> issues I indicated.The point is clear. I have told the truth >>>>>> relating >>>>>> to the content of the Action Plan. >>>>>> >>>>>> The question of execution is separate. Ndemo having been on K24 is >>>>>> does not change much but it is not in line with the Action >>>>>> Plan....meaning, we need to complement K24 for that step. >>>>>> >>>>>> Let's be honest in our submissions especially concerning such >>>>>> >>> revelations. >>> >>>>>> Wainaina >>>>>> >>>>>> On 12/14/08, dmakali(a)yahoo.com <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> That's not true. You have obviously exaggerated in trying to put >>>>>>> across >>>>>>> your >>>>>>> cheap propaganda. Ndemo was on k24 this morning and he was of >>>>>>> course >>>>>>> >>> not >>> >>>>>>> opposing the bill. Plus, you should ask yourself, who has come out >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> support the bill and not been given airtime. >>>>>>> Yes, the media is campaigning, but it has not yet agreed or >>>>>>> employed >>>>>>> >>> any >>> >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> the strategies you have listed. Their time is coming. And we don't >>>>>>> >>> need >>> >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> go to previous regimes to show brutal attacks against the media. >>>>>>> The >>>>>>> worst >>>>>>> have taken place under the current regime! >>>>>>> You have more to be grateful than disgusted with the media. Be just >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> little >>>>>>> more reflective and considerate otherwise your diabolical hatred of >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> media lacks foundation. >>>>>>> David >>>>>>> Sent from my BlackBerry(R) wireless device >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: "Wainaina Mungai" <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:08:09 >>>>>>> To: <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> >>>>>>> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions<kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications >>>>>>> (amendment) >>>>>>> Bill: Is media overacting? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The truth is that the "supporters" you see on TV, hear on radio, >>>>>>> read >>>>>>> in papers are not by accident. The Media Owners Association (MoA) >>>>>>> crafted a campaign strategy that includes the "media blackout to >>>>>>> all >>>>>>> MPs who supported the Bill and The Ministry of Information & >>>>>>> Communications". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> According to persons privy to the media campaign strategy, we have >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> big problem here and it's about time Kenyans were told the >>>>>>> objective >>>>>>> truth. Unfortunately, the people who own the media houses are >>>>>>> determined to use every possible means to ensure the Bill is not >>>>>>> signed. You will not hear a supporter of the Bill being given >>>>>>> coverage. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The strategy is clearly not intended to yield an objective result. >>>>>>> The >>>>>>> intention is to shape public opinion even through biased reporting. >>>>>>> The strategy includes: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Ensure President dioesn't sign the Bill, by publicly petitioning >>>>>>> >>> him. >>> >>>>>>> 2. Take advantage of Jamhuri Day to show images of raids conducted >>>>>>> by >>>>>>> previous regimes. >>>>>>> 3. Run a media campaign that includes 'same headline' in all papers >>>>>>> and similar headlines on electronic media. >>>>>>> 4. Shape public opinion through campains and show that the Bill is >>>>>>> unconstitutional...etc etc >>>>>>> 5. Blackout all supporters of the Bill, Ministry & only invite >>>>>>> civil >>>>>>> society players who support the interests of the media. Keep >>>>>>> watching >>>>>>> and you'll notice the biased reporting. >>>>>>> 6. The coverage of the issue in the weekend papers (circulation) is >>>>>>> also part of the strategy. This will not stop until the President >>>>>>> yields to the Media's agenda. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The media has the right to petition the President but the problem >>>>>>> with >>>>>>> their campaign is that Media Owners have actually agreed not to >>>>>>> cover >>>>>>> the issue objectively. They have conspired to shape public opinion >>>>>>> by >>>>>>> all possible means including excluding all those who have a >>>>>>> different >>>>>>> opinion. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In doing so, they demonstrate the need for legislative regulation. >>>>>>> The >>>>>>> nation is now at the mercy of the media and the public will only be >>>>>>> fed with one side of the story. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Over to you. >>>>>>> Wainaina >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 12/14/08, Kinuthia Muchane <muchanek(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Habari, >>>>>>>> Maybe the media is overacting, maybe the the MPs are wrong... But >>>>>>>> one >>>>>>>> interesting thing about this issue is the timidity of the MPs, to >>>>>>>> >>> begin >>> >>>>>>>> with, in the news all I am hearing are our dear elected >>>>>>>> >>> representatives >>> >>>>>>>> vowing their undying support for all sorts of freedom, including >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> >>> of >>> >>>>>>>> Press, so my question is, isn't there one, single MP who supported >>>>>>>> passing of the Bill who can come out in defence of his or her >>>>>>>> stand? >>>>>>>> >>> Or >>> >>>>>>>> is it because they always pander to the Press, they do not want to >>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>> seen in 'bad' light . >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On the other hand, most of us take what we hear on the radio or >>>>>>>> watch >>>>>>>> >>> on >>> >>>>>>>> TV as gospel truth, and the unfortunate fact of life is that the >>>>>>>> majority of us have no other source of information, or do not >>>>>>>> seek >>>>>>>> other >>>>>>>> avenues of >>>>>>>> getting information, a fact very well >>>>>>>> known by members of the so called "Fourth Estate". So when they >>>>>>>> drench >>>>>>>> us with "details" about the dangers of the bill's amendment no >>>>>>>> matter >>>>>>>> how >>>>>>>> skewed their >>>>>>>> opinion is, we will believe them hook, line and sinker! >>>>>>>> If you ask me, in a country like ours with a very shaky social, >>>>>>>> political and economic foundation, these merchants of >>>>>>>> "information" should be very closely and regularly monitored, a >>>>>>>> Radio >>>>>>>> Mille Collines can happen here very easily... >>>>>>>> In any case, ain't all these media 'houses' just commercial >>>>>>>> >>> enterprises >>> >>>>>>>> out to make a tidy profit? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kinuthia... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> ke-internetusers mailing list >>>>>>>> ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net >>>>>>>> http://www.bdix.net/mailman/listinfo/ke-internetusers >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Sent from my mobile device >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> http://www.bungesms.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> TWITTER - http://www.twitter.com/bungesms >>>>>>> >>>>>>> KABISSA.org - >>>>>>> http://www.kabissa.org/about/news/member-spotlight-made-kenya-network >>>>>>> >>>>>>> KAMPALA Workshop presentation - >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> http://m4d.kcl.co.ug/sites/default/files/presentations/BungeSMS_MadeinKenya… >>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> kictanet mailing list >>>>>>> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >>>>>>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This message was sent to: dmakali(a)yahoo.com >>>>>>> Unsubscribe or change your options at >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/dmakali%40yahoo.com >>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> kictanet mailing list >>>>> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >>>>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >>>>> >>>>> This message was sent to: wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org >>>>> Unsubscribe or change your options at >>>>> >>>>> >>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wainaina%40madeinkenya… >>> >>>> -- >>>> Sent from my mobile device >>>> >>>> --- >>>> http://www.bungesms.com >>>> >>>> TWITTER - http://www.twitter.com/bungesms >>>> >>>> KABISSA.org - >>>> >>> http://www.kabissa.org/about/news/member-spotlight-made-kenya-network >>> >>>> KAMPALA Workshop presentation - >>>> >>>> >>> http://m4d.kcl.co.ug/sites/default/files/presentations/BungeSMS_MadeinKenya… >>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> kictanet mailing list >>>> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >>>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >>>> >>>> This message was sent to: billkagai(a)gmail.com >>>> Unsubscribe or change your options at >>>> >>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/billkagai%40gmail.com >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Bildad Kagai >>> MD - MediaCorp Limited >>> Nairobi Stock Exchange Authorised Information Vendor >>> Suite B2, Tetu Court, State House Avenue >>> P. O. Box 20311 - 00200 >>> Nairobi, Kenya >>> Tel. 254 20 272 8332 >>> Fax. Rendered Obsolete >>> S - 1°17'13.8" >>> E - 36°48'22.7" >>> www.mediacorp.co.ke >>> --- >>> _______________________________________________ >>> kictanet mailing list >>> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >>> >>> This message was sent to: emko(a)internetresearch.com.gh >>> Unsubscribe or change your options at >>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/emko%40internetresearc… >>> >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> kictanet mailing list >> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >> >> This message was sent to: murigi.muraya(a)gmail.com >> Unsubscribe or change your options at >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/murigi.muraya%40gmail.… >> >> > >

1 0

Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications (amendment) Bill: Is media overacting?
by Wainaina Mungai 14 Dec '08

14 Dec '08

Bw. Ndemo, Agreed. I have even challenged Editors at one media house to call in experts to explain the provisions of the Bill. First, the Media should rise to the "statemanship" they demand of the rest of us and accept the offer to openly and fairly debate the issues. They may televise this live on all channels since they have proved they can easily agree on collective approach. Secondly, we need to lobby individual media owners to tone down aspects of their campaign that have degenerated to an abuse of the national resources delegated to them. Genuine dialogue will be possible after they put their weapons away and pursue what is in the longterm interest of Kenya. Regards Wainaina On 12/15/08, bitange(a)jambo.co.ke <bitange(a)jambo.co.ke> wrote: > Dear Wainaina, > If Media is as objective as David says, I will avail myself for a debate > with whoever they select in order to help Kenyans understand these > amendments. > We must move from petty arguments to discussing real issues. I want to take > this opportunity to thank the many jounalists who have expressed solidarity > with Government to regulate electronic media. Reading through their smss > and e_mails it is clear that the greatest threat to media freedom are media > owners. > > They rightfully point out that: > The KCA ammendments is not a media bill as it seeks to introduce electronic > transactions and broadcast; > Electronic Media world over is regulated and this is what the bill seeks to > achieve: > Noone should be above the law; and > We must salvage our moral standing by regulating content. > > The rightful body that should be raising issues in this saga is the Media > Council but instead it is the MOA. Just ask yourself what it is that MOA > has to do with the rights of a journalist? > > Ndemo. > > > Sent from my BlackBerry(R) > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Wainaina Mungai" <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> > > Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:53:55 > To: <bitange(a)jambo.co.ke> > Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions<kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> > Subject: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications (amendment) > Bill: Is media overacting? > > > David, > > I am very much involved the media and you & I know that it was agreed > that the Action Plan includes a "blackout to..." as well as all the > issues I indicated.The point is clear. I have told the truth relating > to the content of the Action Plan. > > The question of execution is separate. Ndemo having been on K24 is > does not change much but it is not in line with the Action > Plan....meaning, we need to complement K24 for that step. > > Let's be honest in our submissions especially concerning such revelations. > > Wainaina > > On 12/14/08, dmakali(a)yahoo.com <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> That's not true. You have obviously exaggerated in trying to put across >> your >> cheap propaganda. Ndemo was on k24 this morning and he was of course not >> opposing the bill. Plus, you should ask yourself, who has come out to >> support the bill and not been given airtime. >> Yes, the media is campaigning, but it has not yet agreed or employed any >> of >> the strategies you have listed. Their time is coming. And we don't need >> to >> go to previous regimes to show brutal attacks against the media. The >> worst >> have taken place under the current regime! >> You have more to be grateful than disgusted with the media. Be just a >> little >> more reflective and considerate otherwise your diabolical hatred of the >> media lacks foundation. >> David >> Sent from my BlackBerry(R) wireless device >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: "Wainaina Mungai" <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> >> >> Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:08:09 >> To: <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> >> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions<kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> >> Subject: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications >> (amendment) >> Bill: Is media overacting? >> >> >> The truth is that the "supporters" you see on TV, hear on radio, read >> in papers are not by accident. The Media Owners Association (MoA) >> crafted a campaign strategy that includes the "media blackout to all >> MPs who supported the Bill and The Ministry of Information & >> Communications". >> >> According to persons privy to the media campaign strategy, we have a >> big problem here and it's about time Kenyans were told the objective >> truth. Unfortunately, the people who own the media houses are >> determined to use every possible means to ensure the Bill is not >> signed. You will not hear a supporter of the Bill being given >> coverage. >> >> Why? >> >> The strategy is clearly not intended to yield an objective result. The >> intention is to shape public opinion even through biased reporting. >> The strategy includes: >> >> 1. Ensure President dioesn't sign the Bill, by publicly petitioning him. >> 2. Take advantage of Jamhuri Day to show images of raids conducted by >> previous regimes. >> 3. Run a media campaign that includes 'same headline' in all papers >> and similar headlines on electronic media. >> 4. Shape public opinion through campains and show that the Bill is >> unconstitutional...etc etc >> 5. Blackout all supporters of the Bill, Ministry & only invite civil >> society players who support the interests of the media. Keep watching >> and you'll notice the biased reporting. >> 6. The coverage of the issue in the weekend papers (circulation) is >> also part of the strategy. This will not stop until the President >> yields to the Media's agenda. >> >> The media has the right to petition the President but the problem with >> their campaign is that Media Owners have actually agreed not to cover >> the issue objectively. They have conspired to shape public opinion by >> all possible means including excluding all those who have a different >> opinion. >> >> In doing so, they demonstrate the need for legislative regulation. The >> nation is now at the mercy of the media and the public will only be >> fed with one side of the story. >> >> Over to you. >> Wainaina >> >> >> On 12/14/08, Kinuthia Muchane <muchanek(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Habari, >>> Maybe the media is overacting, maybe the the MPs are wrong... But one >>> interesting thing about this issue is the timidity of the MPs, to begin >>> with, in the news all I am hearing are our dear elected representatives >>> vowing their undying support for all sorts of freedom, including that of >>> Press, so my question is, isn't there one, single MP who supported >>> passing of the Bill who can come out in defence of his or her stand? Or >>> is it because they always pander to the Press, they do not want to be >>> seen in 'bad' light . >>> >>> On the other hand, most of us take what we hear on the radio or watch on >>> TV as gospel truth, and the unfortunate fact of life is that the >>> majority of us have no other source of information, or do not seek >>> other >>> avenues of >>> getting information, a fact very well >>> known by members of the so called "Fourth Estate". So when they drench >>> us with "details" about the dangers of the bill's amendment no matter >>> how >>> skewed their >>> opinion is, we will believe them hook, line and sinker! >>> If you ask me, in a country like ours with a very shaky social, >>> political and economic foundation, these merchants of >>> "information" should be very closely and regularly monitored, a Radio >>> Mille Collines can happen here very easily... >>> In any case, ain't all these media 'houses' just commercial enterprises >>> out to make a tidy profit? >>> >>> Kinuthia... >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ke-internetusers mailing list >>> ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net >>> http://www.bdix.net/mailman/listinfo/ke-internetusers >>> >> >> -- >> Sent from my mobile device >> >> --- >> http://www.bungesms.com >> >> TWITTER - http://www.twitter.com/bungesms >> >> KABISSA.org - >> http://www.kabissa.org/about/news/member-spotlight-made-kenya-network >> >> KAMPALA Workshop presentation - >> http://m4d.kcl.co.ug/sites/default/files/presentations/BungeSMS_MadeinKenya… >> >> _______________________________________________ >> kictanet mailing list >> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >> >> This message was sent to: dmakali(a)yahoo.com >> Unsubscribe or change your options at >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/dmakali%40yahoo.com >> > > -- > Sent from my mobile device > > --- > http://www.bungesms.com > > TWITTER - http://www.twitter.com/bungesms > > KABISSA.org - > http://www.kabissa.org/about/news/member-spotlight-made-kenya-network > > KAMPALA Workshop presentation - > http://m4d.kcl.co.ug/sites/default/files/presentations/BungeSMS_MadeinKenya… > > _______________________________________________ > kictanet mailing list > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > > This message was sent to: bitange(a)jambo.co.ke > Unsubscribe or change your options at > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/bitange%40jambo.co.ke > > ---------------------------------------------- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by Jambo MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > --------------------------------------------- > "easy access to the world" > > -- Sent from my mobile device --- http://www.bungesms.com TWITTER - http://www.twitter.com/bungesms KABISSA.org - http://www.kabissa.org/about/news/member-spotlight-made-kenya-network KAMPALA Workshop presentation - http://m4d.kcl.co.ug/sites/default/files/presentations/BungeSMS_MadeinKenya…

1 0

Media Institute on Recent Media furore
by Brian Longwe 14 Dec '08

14 Dec '08

The price of negligence and incompetence [image: PDF]<http://www.eastafricapress.net/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=573> [image: Print]<http://www.eastafricapress.net/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5…> [image: E-mail]<http://www.eastafricapress.net/index2.php?option=com_content&task=emailform…> OUR VIEW While the Media Institute condemns the outrageous selfishness exhibited by Members of Parliament in passing what is clearly a retrogressive law, the media must not escape culpability for what has befallen it. It has become norm for the media to cry wolf when faced with any encroachment on its turf, especially its own welfare. In fact, in the public domain, the strident wailing of the media has become all too familiar and sympathy is waning. And why not; there are many sectors of our society whose cry for attention when their welfare is similarly threatened by government action or legislation hardly get a fraction of the interest the media devotes to its own selfish interests. Truth be told, the media is insensitive and uncaring most of the time. And it gets worse. The media are not even competent in superintending over their own matters either because they are out of depth, they cant fathom the implications of some developments - such as the just enacted Bill - or they are just consumed by their pursuit of profit and basic competition to comprehend the threats to their survival or operations. That cannot be said of the ICT sector, which too is the subject of the same Communications Amendment Bill 2008, but which has had its issues discussed and thrashed out in numerous online lists and discussion forums. Not surprisingly, some media chiefs only came to grips with the implications of the Bill when it had sailed through the First Reading in Parliament a month ago. They long left the job of minding the rights enjoyed by the media almost exclusively to non-governmental organisations that the media cares less about. Consider this: A fortnight before the Bill went to the Third and final phase in the House, an alarmed International Commission of Jurists (Kenya) called a meeting to sensitize the media about the impending law. And when they turned up, some of the media chiefs not only knew zilch about the Bill but what they did after that was even more scandalous. All of them were unavailable for the action proposed to forestall the passage of the law. Even when a press conference was called to raise the alarm, all of them were either busy or conveniently absent. Rather than mobilize the sector, they retreated to their usual boardrooms and adopted the ineffective strategy of molly-coddling MPs, ministry of information officials and other emissaries through informal methods to drop selective clauses deemed to be threatening to commercial interests (principally, the prohibition of cross-ownership). The media did not even give adequate publicity to the Bill prior to the brouhaha, let alone the other aspects relating to ICT. Needless to say, we failed spectacularly and now we are back in our regular dark pit of moaning. What was a clear case of an attempt to abridge freedom of speech was conveniently couched in terms of commercial interests, protection of frequencies, turfs, and so forth. The reporting of the aftermath itself has been terribly wanting. The Communications Bill has all of a sudden become ICT Bill, Media Bill, and other names we have baptised it. How is the public to keep track of our lamentations? In our bid to attract sympathy, ok appeal, to the public, we have also pressed the sensational button, and the inaccuracies are staggering. For one, the offending Sect. 88 was not introduced by the new Bill. It is already in the existing Communications Act and what was on the table was whether to repeal it. That of course, is clouding issues and confusing the bigger picture. At stake is an attempt by the political class to equip itself with the ammunition to circumscribe the fundamental freedom of expression, and arm itself with the ammunition to control the media if it is deemed as unbecoming or threatening to its interests, diverse as they may be. In this regard one cant help but sympathise with the wing of the coalition that is always crying about being shortchanged in the power sharing deal - of what benefit is this new law to the objective of freedom of information in this country? Yes, to be candid, the media is far from innocent. Some of the vulgar content on the airwaves at supposedly neutral hours should not be allowed. Yes, on their own they have demonstrated utter irresponsibility in setting standard thanks to the greed for profit. But to sit and wait for government to legislate their content is perhaps the worst demonstration of lack of leadership among the media management. While the Media Institute joins others in appealing to the Head of State to demonstrate statesmanship and respect for democracy by not assenting to the law, it must be observed that the media has overspent its goodwill and earned its just fruits. Our hope is that the President will not be motivated by short-term parochial interests to endorse a bad law. The Bill clearly impinges on freedom of expression and the media, which are democratic principles that he and other leaders have professed to respect. To turn around and begin to claw back on that at a time when the country is on the democratic assent and awaits proper constitutional reform will be both anachronistic and an undeserving of his legacy. http://www.eastafricapress.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=57…

1 0

Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications (amendment) Bill: Is media overacting?
by Mike Theuri 14 Dec '08

14 Dec '08

Alex, The issues that present themselves are multifaceted in nature and cover many matters. The protests in question however appeared to cover two areas 1) The KCA Amendment Bill 2) Rising Food Prices and Taxation matters Mars Group is part of a coalition of numerous groups numbering over 2000 across the country. Mars Group has been known for exposing matters relating to governance, malfeasance and corruption and has in turn transformed itself into a form of alternative internet based media which is likely to speedily grow if the traditional print media reverts to the oppressed position it was in the 90s leading up to 1997. http://www.marsgroupkenya.org/partnershipforchange/ Mars Group sent out a message on behalf of the "partnership for change" on Dec 10 which stated in part: "All our actions are legal and non-violent. We can get the change we want without heckling or losing self-control. We are in charge of our country and its destiny. We don't need to heckle or misconduct ourselves if we are in charge. Change starts with us changing our behaviour and as we change so too will our country change. Our leaders will follow our lead. >From now on." Mars Group's actions were apparently aimed at protesting issue # 2. It is apparent that because protesters of both issues were at the same venue, the two issues became intertwined. At least one can conclude that Mars Group did not ask those participating to engage in disruptive conduct prior to the event. Has the media been irresponsible? Indeed they have, with media freedom reaching unprecedented levels. What were once professional media turned reputable papers into tabloid publications, and some journalists fabricated stories or accepted brown envelopes to write stories on behalf of interested parties. Naturally such occurrences are scattered and there are still a number of professional members of the media who uphold journalistic ethics. The industry needs to reign in the elements who bring a bad name to the industry. The below provides an insight into some of the decay in media standards in the country: http://okongospolicy.com/?p=127 Had the industry done a better job at self policing, chances are that they may have had more support in getting section 88 deleted. Some sections of the media today are under the control or ownership of personalities with vested political interests some of them in elected office today. What Alex has predicted happening in 2012 will almost certainly take place then and it has happened in the past before on a smaller scale both politically and for commercial reasons. The government is by the people for the people. High handedness in government and obliviousness to what one's employer is saying is a dangerous catalyst for chaos when the employer acts out of desperation. Now the media has become the scapegoat for supposedly mobilising the masses! Issue #2's seriousness should not be underestimated for what seemingly has the early makings of a massive movement with economic hardship being the common denominator. Would the masses adopt the media issue if they were not vested in issue #2? It would be difficult if not unlikely considering that it is apparent that the media issue is a relic from the past and what the media appear to be protesting is its non removal rather than what the general public believes to be an addition. What is clear is that this "relic" manifested in section 88 does not have favour with the public and will soon join the long list of grievances associated with issue #2. It is said that a hungry man is a angry man, blaming the media for mobilising the masses when the truth of the matter is that the proponents (the general public) of issue #2 will adopt any issue that shows disaffection with those perceived to be in a position to determine whether one can put food on the table or not, is what one could term as acting oblivious or what the proverbial ostrich would do were a lion to approach. Can the 'masses' be calmed downby deleting section 88? Temporarily, yes, but only until the next feelings of hunger propel issue #2 back to the forefront. On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 1:53 AM, Alex Gakuru <gakuru(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Grace, > > This is a difficult subject but I guess keeping quiet about it does not > make it > go away;) Let me start with an excerpt on recent conversation with a media > practitioner. > > --excerpt-- > > But a professional journalist cannot accommodate judgmental or > pre-concluded opinion diagonally opposite to their trade fundamentals > [for @newbies http://blogs.salon.com/0002007///2003/08/17.html and > http://jonswift.blogspot.com/2007/11/journalism-101.html ]. > > After internalising "independence" pretexts when their respective > coverage were biased towards certain differing quarters, recent > lessons have now led to our media houses contemplating declaring their > political ideological alignments (parties or candidates) in future. Do > not be surprised to find such declarations on TV and radio stations > or on Newspapers come 2012. > --excerpt-- > > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 8:40 AM, Grace Bomu <nmutungu(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I had signed up for the mars group protest yesterday on the > > representation that it was a protest on food prices and MP'S refusal > > to pay taxes. > > I am disgusted that the media have used our voices for their causes > > exclusively, disregarding ours. > > What does the Mars Group say about this? Are you likely to participate > on a similar other initiative under the same circumstances? Do you trust > our media as mere conduits of information to consumers? > > > As a Kenyan, i think there should be a review on cross-ownership of > > media if democracy is to thrive. Also, considering the role of the > > media in fueling ethnic/ regional backlash since 2003, isn't there > > need for a check on them? > > Part One: > Imagine a situation where one 'Private Sector' tycoon owned *all* > media outlets. His/her network of companies is chasing a lucrative > government contract. Some Public Procurement and Disposal Act > law-abiding Civil Servant detects fraudulent practices, collusions, > etc (and as a reminder these are presently worth 700 billion/year) > and disqualifies the bid. > > The tycoon's network of media outlets decides it's time that Public > Servant was sacked! Do you think he/she can survive the adverse > orchestrated negative media coverage? Would the successor be as > stringent when it came to the bids from the tycoon networks? > > Part Two: > It would be mistaken for anybody to try and defend the media on > their polarising role towards last years elections and their coverage. > Clearly, they all had candidates they wanted in power, why?above? > > What is "media" is it countable big media houses. Remember they > are businesses and if something adversely affects their revenue lines > they will either silently kill it, massage the opinion and expressions > to conform to (or at least not threaten) their business interests. This > is what happened to your Mars Group representation? > > > There may be misgivings on the arbitraly powers conferred to the > > Minister in charge of security but media has to be checked. > > The media should give suggestions on alternative ways to check them > > instead of using all their airtime and acres of newspapers to win > > public sympathy. > > I am concerned with 'arbitrary powers' implications on expression > I have not read the new version thus I am speculative here... > > The last I heard about this was that it had been agreed to BUT a > committee (not an individual minister) would make that decision. > The thinking was that a committee would make a fairer decision. > > Imagine a situation where the police were denied powers to raid > any premises where crimes were ongoing? > > > Finally, they should stop branding it ' media bill' as the bill is not > > a conspiracy against media but a bill to amend the communications act. > > > > Our society amazes on its ways of corrupting things, people, ideas, > movement, even concepts.... > > Conclusion: > If either government or the media were left alone, the public would > suffer badly. > Excessive government powers+high handedness plunged us into dictatorships. > Unchecked media excesses gone wild on "Fourth Estate" public watchdog role > pursuing purely commercial interests would be a very bad thing for > democracy. > Between media and government, consumer interests are better served by the > media. But recall a recent post to the effect that the internet > remains consumers > best saviour? For these reasons, I hope our media away from seeking > "pity" tries > "earning" public respect.Only then can we rise up aggressively defending > media. > > In the meantime, kindly email to me the "Blue Copy" for my perusal. > _______________________________________________ > ke-internetusers mailing list > ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net > http://www.bdix.net/mailman/listinfo/ke-internetusers >

2 1

I have seen the future of the marine cable
by robert yawe 13 Dec '08

13 Dec '08

Today I saw the future of Kenya after the fiber land and I feel duty bound to share the experience. For many years my business has provided server solutions to multinationals for groupware, our main selling point for having servers located locally was always the unreliable internet links. Today one of my clients, a multinational company has moved their servers to Europe and are using thin client technology to connect the desktop user. I saw a similar scenario when multinationals where allowed VSAT terminals, as many technical activities got consolidated either at head office in Europe/USA or regional processing centers in India. What we were left with was clerical and other none core activities. With the downturn in the world financial markets expect more centralised control of corporate activites and offshoring of currently local functions. I assure the advocates of BSP and call centers that they will achieve their objective of turning Kenya into a clerical hub for the rest of the world. Which is historically what Kenya's role was always meant to be within the British Empire. We are soon to become a nation of overqualified call center operated involved in an activity that does not provide skills transfer. Come January I will have lost a prime revenue earner as all that will be expected from us will be blowing the computers and offering 1st level support on productivity applications and printing issues. This will mean that I have no need to retain high skilled personnel. What use is it then for us to be setting up Universities all over the country yet all we shall need are large armies of fellows with good spoken english, maybe french or chinese with an average IQ and basic level of education. Am I an alarmist? I do not think so I am a realist, I am reengineering to meet the challenge but can someone provide a condusive environment. Ndemo can we get collocation centers made available, the newly redressed ISPs are not about to add value in this direction. Can the government take the lead in outsourcing its activites, we are ready to setup a call centre for the Government in ISIOLO or at RIAT in Kisumu, I dare you to give me the challenge. Have a god filled christmas & a proserous new year Robert Yawe KAY System Technologies Ltd Phoenix House, 6th Floor P O Box 55806 Nairobi, 00200 Kenya Tel: +254722511225, +254202010696

7 7

Re: [kictanet] " Houston : We have a problem... "
by aki 12 Dec '08

12 Dec '08

Thats right, we do and I speak for data. > > My sincere apology for the cross posting and am just sharing my > experience that the situation on network quality in our country is getting > out of hand. I cannot expect telco CEOs / MDs like the Mr Joseph, > Mr Saint-Jean or Mr Murray or even from any Network Operators etc to roll up > their sleeves and go down to their respective Network Centres or Operations > and reboot caching servers or load balancers! > > Network management of data services has reached a point where I'm forced to > use strong words that either most of kenyan networks are run by people who > do not undestand them or that there are no quality of service systems in > place. This is scary given that we hope to provide at least some tiered > services to a potential audience in the near future. Most technology > equipment is useless and awaits data entry from skilled operator to turn > devices into anything meaningful. Are the skilled personell or systems doing > their jobs? I'd highly recommend to the management of network companies to > re-evaluate their technologies or even staff and put in place systems that > allow for real time analysis of their systems and performances. Even a 1% > packet loss in a modern network is totally unacceptable. Local loop > latenices must be maintained within 50-200ms and not the 1000-2000ms seen. > Just one simple question : If it was done right the first time then why keep > tinkering with it?! > > Even if we received some out of the world super submarine fiber, the whole > process is useless if we cannot maintain/run internal networks to > international standards. Which leads to a further question : how stable is > the fiber between Mombasa, Nairobi to kisumu? We need some serious thoughts > on quality by respective players in the industry so that in future marketing > as say eg a telecom hub, some investor somewhere does not ask an insulting > question : how reliable are your networks? > > Asante and Happy Jamhuri Day. > > > > > > > >

1 0

Re: [kictanet] IGF 2008 Highlights - Day 4
by mwende njiraini 10 Dec '08

10 Dec '08

*Day 4: 6th December 2008* *Theme: Emerging Issues* * * *09:00 - 10:30 Workshop 84: The role and mandate of the IGF* * * *Main success of IGF* - Success of multi-stakeholder forum that provides a informal and flexible structure for engagement. - Regional and national meetings such as the Kenya IGF, UK IGF and EAIGF are creating more opportunities for exchange of information, focus on development and issues in the governance realm. These meetings should be fostered. - Capacity building at an individual and national level - Sharing of best practices - Enabled participation on the demand side - Multilingualism – local language use extends access - Human rights advocacy– formation of the global network initiative (GNI) - Formation of the multi-stakeholder advisory group (MAG) that is dynamic and flexible - Discussion of issues relating to the environment and sustainability - Avenue for information sharing between different regions *Criticisms of the IGF* · Idea of IGF developed by the civil society – the forum when established would not issue recommendations or guidelines (not a policy conference) – consequently maintaining the status quo – this however is not what the civil society had bargained for. · The forum has not provided an equal footing of civil society participants with government and business · The GNI is not a multi-stakeholder in nature as governments do not buy into its outputs · Meaningful change is required in the MAG and secretariat – the MAG should be more representative and accountable – representatives should be nominated, while the secretariat should be accountable to the MAG · The IGF should develop policy proposals as well as briefing material to facilitators · The plenary sessions are a waste of time – instead small group discussions on specific issues should be organised to make policy proposals/recommendations to the MAG for formalization. · Recommendations approved by the MAG (which is representative of all stakeholders) · There is a need for a re-look of the mandate of the IGF as given by the Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) · Format of the IGF needs to be changed to increase interactive between the audience and panel – sitting arrangements should be changed · Remote participation and documentation needs to be improved · Need for discussion on cross cutting theme of development including issues such as o Migration to digital technologies o Frequency licensing/frequency policy o Creating access · The phrase workshop is a misnomer · Need for a feedback mechanism *Challenges* - Continued support and funding – should be provided by all stakeholders - Avoid capture by one stakeholder group - Capacity building for new attendees and creation of advanced sessions for more experienced participants *1030 -1300 Diplo Session: IGF'08 Negotiation Simulation* Facilitated by Ambassador Kishan S Rana and Dr. Jovan Kurbalija *Importance... * * * *Objectives* Issues of conflict Common interest Cannot be solved unilaterally Commitment to issue Willingness to compromise Goal – concede to what you want and * * *Concepts* * * - *ZOPA* – zone of possible agreement - range within which agreement possible - *BATNA*– best alternative to a negotiated agreement – threshold below which one will not go not worthwhile - *Win-sets* same as zopa - *Ripe moment* – in a complex negotiation – time when negotiation can be concluded – time when there is a meeting of minds – Negotiations* *implicitly involves trust *Stages* - preparation - negotiation - pre-negotiation - follow *Harvard method principle negotiation * - project of negotiation power – Harvard university – whole range of negotiations – Books recommended "Getting to yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In" by Roger Fisher and William L. Ury and "Getting past no" * * *Four cardinal principles of negotiation * - separate people from the problem – don't personalize an issue – build trust – never be caught telling a lie – someone should not push you to a corner - behind adversarial position may lie common interest e.g. in the case of the IGF – building a secure internet - trying to share pie -only looks to one dimension - search options – creativity encouraged - common search to secure agreement - look to criteria that may offer solution *Meetings and chairmanship* - preparation – training everyone on how to chair a meeting for example after the Chec republic Slovakia republic chairman ship of the European - every meeting has core group that runs the show – observe the body language - observe and identify them - you want to join that core group gradually - study body language dynamics listen - join drafting group learn the rules procedure and how to manipulate draft - chair must constantly monitor mood meeting - chair – authority and tact – should not offend but more move along - anticipate problems before they arise observe - invest in relationships win trust esp of key problems = main capital gained - master the show *Questions/Discussions* - How do you separate people from the problem? – try create a relationship through common interest e.g. music – make it clear that you don't agree – don't take it personality – if you don't agree don't retaliate personality – junior members of a delegation are invaluable in negotiations – "float a balloon" – because they don't speak with authority. - Negotiations largely take place in the corridors and during coffee – its important to realize when negotiations are a formality – however each case is unique – realize when you are at the end of the road. - What happens when there is a stronger party in the negotiation process? – Weakness and power are in the eye of the beholder – 'sufficient incentive' –for small country apply leverage in a negotiation – the example of the treaty between Mauritius and India on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) - How are cultural differences managed during negotiations? - Cultural differences always exist, however negotiations utilise a common language – English – Translation of negotiations in different languages may be available – however the English text is considered the authoritative version/definitive text/principle text. - It is important to master the English language as an adjunct to your skills – for example be involved in the drafting group - There is usually an established common code of conduct during negotiations. - Chairmanship is a skill that is learnt – the chair has to be a member of the group. * * *Simulation Exercise on Internet Governance * Objective – reaching a zone of possible agreement (ZOPA) between the USA, G77, India, China, Russia, the Business Community and Civil society before 2011 on key IG issues including: - *The form/name of document * - Press communiqué - Chairman's statement - Declaration of principles - Code of practice - Operational declaration - Framework convention - Substantive convention - Formal treaty - *Net neutrality* - Single internet - Mixed system - Regular internet as public facility - Private internet - Multiple internet (no regulation; market driven) - *Cyber security* - Bilateral - G8 framework - G20 framework - Regional - Global - *Jurisdiction/dispute resolution * - Regular courts - Public arbitrations - Private arbitrations - *Content policy * - National - Regional - Global *Main lesson learnt*: it is important to bargain/trade-off in order to reach the ZOPA otherwise a negotiation that is not concluded could mean a win to another participant. *Closing ceremony* Transcript available at http://igf.wgig.org/cms/index.php/hyderabadprogramme On 12/10/08, mwende njiraini <mwende.njiraini(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > *Day 2: 4th December 2008* > > * * > > *Theme: Promoting Cybersecurity and Trust * > > * * > > *0930-1100 Panel discussions: Dimensions of Cybersecurity and Cybercrime* > > The internet was not originally designed with security features however > with increased use of the internet security considerations arise. > > > > It is important to recognize regional, local and cultural issues that may > affect cyber security and develop a relationship of trust in order to > develop a framework that determines - what happens in a crisis, how to > engage in law enforcement. This is important as security issues need to > be addressed before there is a crisis and should be done at all levels. > > > > *Computer Emergency Response Team* > > * * > > The use of the Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT) at a regional and > national level based on the framework developed by the Carnegie Mellon > University (www.cert.org) as follows: > > > > 1. *Organisational * > > At an organisational level there should be a person responsible for > security – the response to security threats need to be formalized – that is > organizational incident response should be formalized. > > > > 1. *National* > > Formation of national CERT is necessary but not sufficient. Channels for > relaying of information, mitigating threats need to be organised and tested > on a regular basis. The national CERT should work with regional CERT as > well as have links with law enforcement organisations. > > There is need for development of a strategy as well as testing of the > system. Any incidents should be reviewed. > > > > The goals of CERT should include: > > - early detection, > - short response time, > - reduction of impact, > - recognition of liability issues, > - analysis techniques – which are forensically safe, need to be > developed in advance not when time is of the essence > - Alignment of with partners > > > > ITU-D study group 1 Q 22/1 is studying issues on: *Securing information > and communication networks: best practices for developing a culture of > Cybersecurity* > > > > The security should be implemented without damaging the nature of the > internet, and protecting vulnerable groups > > > > *Introduction of cybercrime and terrorism* > > Traditional crime has moved online for example harassment and money > laundering however there are new forms of crime in the virtual world > including: > > - phishing, virus/malware, etc > > - Critical infrastructure threats – banking, transport, banking, > energy, government and national security > > - Terrorist use of the internet to publish ideologies, raise > funds, recruit new members > > > > The challenges in combating cybercrime and terrorism: > > - The crime scene and who is in charge with dealing with the > threat. > > - Relevance of geographic distance > > - Investigative cost and the need to carry out real time > investigations > > - Legal framework > > - Procedural legal problems > > - Complex search and seizure laws > > - Responsibility and data > > - It complex due to numerous operators involved > > > > *Questions and discussions* > > - Global issue – which needs coordinated effort and cooperation - > in order to avoid the development of cyber havens. > > > > - Action, feedback and reaction necessary in order to update > prevention mechanisms with regard to recent incidents > > > > - A relationship of trust important between the CERT and ISPs > –ISPs need to provide data – this should a bottom up process > > > > - Organisations work in an eco-system –sharing of information – > collecting statistics before, during and after an incident > > > > - Access (usage and querying) to the data base at the CERT should > be controlled – because of privacy issues > > > > - A mutual Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) and formal structures > should be created through a formal bottom-up process. > > > > - Network based crime raise issues associated with creating an > appropriate balance between the needs of those investigating and prosecuting > and rights and interests. > > > > - Need for coordination is a challenge to governments because of > the lack of expertise – therefore have to rely on academia and private > sector > > > > - The CERT should be an independent group of experts that should > be fully empowered > > > > - Appropriate safeguards to protect the functioning of the > organisation necessary as they give confidence and ensure business > continuity during investigation > > > > - New institutional models based on hybrid frameworks – for > example Sri-Lanka CERT was set up in June 2006 and involves government as > well as skilled incident handlers (http://www.slcert.gov.lk/) > > > > - Need for increased cooperation as cyber crime is > multi-jurisdiction issue – harmonization of enforcement processes and > legislation approach such as that of the council of Europe. > > > > * * > > *Indian CERT* > > - The internet is used for numerous activities leading to an > increase cyber attacks consequently there is a need for training on best > practices and implementation. > > - India's legislation includes computer related offences and is > currently being amended to be in line with the European cyber convention. > > - National CERT operates in partnership with Asia and pacific > CERTs > > - The Indian CERT is a government lead industry initiative – that > aims at creating awareness and compliance to best practices > > - Training of law enforcement officers on analysis of computer > related crime a challenge and undertaken through PPP. > > - A secure national cyberspace – requires collaboration, research > in technologies through a bottom-up process. > > - Areas of conflicting interest need to be addressed as > cybercrime is a global phenomenal – these areas include conflict with > individual rights, unnecessary censorship and society issues > > - Establishment of global alliances essential to ensure stability > of internet > > - Sharing to data about cyber attacks is a challenge > > - Establishment of a CERT takes time – needs to include > participation of private sector partners > > > > The ITU has identified five pillars with regard to internet security which > include: > > > > 1. Legal issues > 2. Technical procedural issues, Organisational structures including > CERTs > 3. Capacity building > 4. International cooperation > > > > There is need for proactive approach to provide an early warning system for > example that used in the event of natural disasters as well as need for > organisation and cooperation between all stakeholders. > > > > With regard to initiating internet security measures – start with an issue > where there is a common understanding for example child protection which was > the basis of the launch of the child line protection. > > > > *Capacity building* > > *Issues* > > - Lack of capacity in of ISPs > > - Inter-south cooperation required as challenges and > infrastructure similar > > - Retention of skilled human resources a challenge > > - Use of network operator groups for capacity building > > - Need to utilize the existing educational framework by > integration of cybersecurity into curriculum – this creates sustainability > in capacity building > > - Training should be relevant to the environment – appropriate > use of technology, cost, concentrate on getting the maximum benefit – > innovation in order to derive the maximum value will be based on training > received > > - Need for collaboration platform – so as to continue sharing > information > > - Need to focus on reality on the ground > > > > *Kind of training* > > - technical training > > - policy issues – IPv4/6 > > > > *Technical challenges* > > - operators need to be profitable – environment liberalized – > however still certain monopolized areas – international connectivity – > imbalanced competition – therefore profitability issue- cant invest in new > technologies – limited investment in training > > > > *My comment*: Urgent need create of culture of cybersecurity (end-users, > at organisation level and nationally) and establishment of national, > regional CERTs. > > > > *14:30 - 16:00 Workshop 76 Neutrality Debate Important for You? (Network > Neutrality Debate: The Implications for Development) * > > * * > > *Technical issues* > > All networks need to be managed > > > > High broadband connectivity principles > > ( > http://www.tiaonline.org/gov_affairs/issues/internet_services_applications/… > ) > > > > - transparency > > - ability to attach any device > > - right to access any legal content > > - right to download any legal content > > > > *Economic issues* > > Net neutrality has significant micro and macro implications. Broadband > investment influenced by the broad economic environment because of the > massive investment required > > - Regulation is viewed more beneficial in view of the current > economic crisis > > - More users create value to the platform > > - Optimal pricing structure – a possibility - may not want to > charge content providers to contribute to access > > - Mandatory net neutrality/unbundling expected to depress > investment in broadband plus may have a significant negative effect on > investment NGN. > > - Centre for European Policy Studies – research titled: "I own > the pipes, you call the tune: The net neutrality debate and its (ir) > relevance for Europe" available at > http://shop.ceps.eu/BookDetail.php?item_id=1755 – argues that the internet > is not neutral – pro-neutrality rules/changes being proposed should be > evaluated > > - The analogy of the roads and vehicles was used to describe net > neutrality – the roads represent the pipes while the cars represent the > packets/traffic – which are not regulated and may be of any shape or size. > However there is regulation with regard to speed. > > - issue of convergence – important for users > > - internet to drive innovation and economic growth > > - activism issues are important to understand the issues > > - slowing down the traffic and packets on internet has a > consequence of slowing down the development internet > > > > *Issues from a user perspective* > > - no consensus on the issues exists > > - Users do not necessarily want free/unlimited control – however > what they want is: what they access should not be controlled > > - They do not want to be forced to buy their store brands or > services of preferred service providers of the broadband connectivity > provider. > > - There is no value in packaging/bundling of services – rather it > is designed to sell services at a high price > > - Users question whether a free market would help as suppliers > are out to make money – there is an economic motivation to invest – which > means there is no one to look out for consumers > > - Need for establish anti trust/anti monopoly regulations > > - ISPs must be made to know that users are not willing to give up > their rights thus should develop internet usage plans that are favourable to > the users - suppliers must listen to consumers > > - Users have the power to demand what we want if only they > demanded it > > - The investment on the internet should be allowed in all areas – > core and edges without fragmenting it - networks should be built using open > interfaces - end to end principle protection is significant > > - Users want the internet to encourage innovation > > - Use of restaurant analogy where the chairs, tables and food are > outsourced > > - Users should have the ability to have access to the content > they want as long as it is connected to open interfaces > > - Users have concern on the future of the internet; content > equality and its ability to deliver content in different ways thus > encouraging local innovation > > > > *My comment:* significance of net neutrality with reference to developing > countries was not addressed – taking into consideration that the motivation > for investment in broadband connectivity is socio-economic development thus > deployment of both local and international for example submarine cable is > being done by governments rather than the private sector. > > > On 12/8/08, mwende njiraini <mwende.njiraini(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> *5th December 2008* >> *930-1100 Panel Discussion Transition from IPv4 to IPv6* >> Based on several studies it is projected that IPv4 addresses will be >> globally exhausted by 2011 however address space will still be available at >> a local level. Seamless take up of IPv6 is expected with the exhaustion of >> IPv4 and there is on going discussion – to define policy to facilitate >> smooth transition for operators and ensure that new comers have minimum IPv6 >> address space allocation to start up business. >> >> The following issues were discussed from different perspectives: >> >> *Issues from operators' perspective*: >> - Deployment of IPv6 enabled equipment in the core networks should be done >> increment – however uptake is low because there is no extra revenue >> generated with the implementation of IPv6 i.e. the lack of commercial >> drivers. However this is expected to change with the as customer numbers >> grow. >> >> - Need for upgrade – therefore operators from developed countries stand at >> an advantage as they have the resources and are nearly exhausted their local >> allocations. >> >> - Getting operational experience is a challenge – there is need to invest >> in operational tools to run IPv6 in terms of software configuration >> utilities management and trouble shooting >> >> - Participation in standardization – where users have equipment that >> supports only IPv4 – how do they access services that are available only on >> IPv6-based networks? The IETF is working on the transition mechanisms >> however the co-existence of both protocols is expected for a long time >> >> - Operators are pushing for IPv6 support in customer premise equipment >> (CPE) as well as software that supports the new protocol version. However it >> is expected that legacy applications will be available in the foreseeable >> future >> >> *Issues from a vendor perspective* >> - Transition has been going on for some time in the vendor world. The >> transition has been a long process for vendors and operators – in terms of >> getting the technology and standards ready >> >> - As IP is the core of the internet – transition to ipv6 – is significant >> particularly with the increase of IPv6 enabled devices connected to the >> internet specifically mobile phones >> >> - need to understand technology and therefore need for operational and >> implementation experience >> >> - managing customer demand/expectations for IPv6 enabled services and >> devices >> >> - cost of staff training >> >> - there are mistakes that will be made – therefore need for mutual support >> in the implementation of v6 >> >> *Social and economic perspectives*- >> - Transition should be cooperative endeavour with social and economic and >> policy considerations >> >> - Gradual implementation and interoperability between IPv4 and v6 expected >> so as to preserve the investment already made >> >> - There is a general understanding that IPv6 will compliment and >> supplement the existing IPv4 as well as provide improved routing, >> multicasting, efficient infrastructure. The following questions however >> arise: >> >> o The advantages that IPv6 offer are good reasons to invest in the new IP >> version. >> o Would transition be transparent and would backward compatibility >> required >> >> - Users want the stability of the internet to be maintained and hope that >> IPv6 will offer opportunities for addition to personality features on the >> internet – this is what makes the business case >> >> - In the India case there are a large number of service providers – and >> there is only a 1/8 usage – therefore demand is low – the need to enhance >> cultural diversity however provides opportunities to create demand through >> local content development including E-government programme and Info-tainment >> >> - It is important to break the myth that IPv6 is a new internet - It is >> not a new internet rather continuation of the internet >> >> - The main benefit is the address space addition- which may allow for >> efficiency >> >> - There is no need to establish a deadline or regulate the implementation >> of IPv6 – as it will be market driven. Additionally users should have rights >> to use IPv4 and IETF is working on coexistence >> >> *Policy perspective* >> - With the impending exhaustion of IPv4 – further implementation will be >> problematic – as not all players will support transition therefore it is >> important to examine measures – for continued use of IPv4 and possible >> migration of users to private IPv4 address space >> >> - creation of action plan to be implemented by 2010 – for example offering >> of incentives such as tax exemption and capacity building >> >> - examination of existing programmes and mechanisms >> >> - establishment of taskforce of IPv4 exhaustion >> >> - the messages of ISPs is that they must carry IPv6 >> >> - IPv4 scarcity and demand for more security are the 2 major challenges >> driving the uptake of IPv6 >> >> - Institution of market transfer or reclamation mechanisms of IPv4 >> resources not required by local internet registries to the regional internet >> registries when transition to IPv6 is implemented. However this would be a >> challenge as RIRs have no contractual authority this may create a grey >> market. This challenge may be overcome through a loose membership >> association that allows others to use others resources >> >> - Institution of secure routing objects including PKI to authenticate >> users raises governance/control issues – RIRs have centralized control which >> may make it efficient and better able to address security issues this makes >> an RIR an central governance institution. Membership of security/government >> associations in the RIR would result in infiltration of technical, policy >> agendas that may make the transition to IPv6 complicated >> >> - However it is argued that RIRs should remain neutral and trans-national >> institutions which: >> o maintain a homogenous technical group >> o maintain a bottom-up approach in policy making >> o guarantee the stability of the internet and business continuity of >> members >> >> - main challenges in the deployment of IPv6 include: >> o lack of public education, information and skill >> o limited network policy decisions to make deployment happen >> o lack of incentive to deploy ipv6 >> >> *1100-1230 Workshop 59:Building a global capacity building curriculum >> framework and premier* >> >> - Integration of IG capacity building in existing ICT and public policy >> courses was advocated. >> >> - The training may be offered either online, offline or through short term >> executive courses. >> >> - Collaboration between different stakeholders who have different needs is >> imperative in order create an understanding of the issues arising from >> increased used of the internet particularly those that transcend the >> geographical, and cultural borders. >> >> - internet security awareness programme set up in India >> >> - Presentations on the Diplo IG capacity building programme ( >> www.diplomacy.edu/ig) – including a demonstration of the online platform. >> >> - The Diplo approach includes the training course (foundation and >> advanced), policy research, policy immersion and community interaction. >> >> - The impact associated with the IG capacity building programme have been >> varied and impressive including the establishment of IG governance masters >> programme in Srilanka and the use of telecentres to disseminate IG related >> information. >> >> - Diplo has successfully offered the training to professional worldwide >> for the last 4 years leading to the establishment of national, regional and >> global community >> >> *1400-1530 Workshop 29: Building confidence and security in the use and >> security in the use of ICTs for African countries >> >> *Main challenges in Africa >> - lack of infrastructure >> - lack of services >> >> Therefore opportunity to learn from mistakes in developing countries and >> establish of computer emergency response team currently there is only one >> active CERT in Africa in Tunisia, South Africa is in the process of setting >> up a CERT with the deadline of 2010 before the FIFA world cup. While >> countries such as Morocco, Kenya and Ivory Coast are thinking about set in >> up CERTs. >> >> The approach in dealing with Cybersecurity in developing countries >> >> Success of Cybersecurity is based on 3pillars >> >> 1. *Technology pillar* – ICT/security tools –including: >> o PCs / networks, physical security tools, data tools (storage media and >> cryptography), availability of infrastructure and application (redundant >> servers and PKI) >> >> 2. *Methodology pillar* – policy, procedures and regulations on three >> levels: >> o managerial level (security policy, management procedures and capacity >> building, audit) Legislative level (law and regulation) >> o operational level (acces control rules, implementation plans, >> monitoring, watch, incidence handling) >> o continuity of services level ( business continuity plan, crisis >> management, drill exercises) >> - actors in this pillar include the government, security professionals and >> users >> >> 3. *Social behaviour pillar* – creating a culture of cyber security >> o cultivate culture of cyber security through continuous action of raising >> awareness using diverse media/channels >> o the target audience includes managers, decision makers, security, >> children, parents, teachers >> >> >> *Case study: CERT-TCC - Tunisia* >> >> *The functions of the CERT include*: >> >> - Watch- collect information from different sources eg CISCO, HP. >> Microsoft, network of CERTs, community of hackers >> - Training >> - Coordination >> - Response >> - Incidence handling >> - Incident analysis >> - Awareness >> - Warning alert >> >> *Key issues*: >> >> • Information, warning and alert – carried out to in collaboration with >> ISPs, managers decision makers, internet community through mailing list, >> call centre, media >> >> • Oriented campaign – utilizing prospectus, posters, email, radio, >> cartoons, video, attack simulation and guides >> >> • Incident handling - training in new tools >> >> • Coordination important in the effective functioning of the CERT – >> incident coordination procedures and information including regional CERTs, >> other CERTs within the country (for example Brazil has more than one CERT), >> ISPs and operators, vendors and integrators, and national authorities. >> >> Need for the formation of CERTs in Africa however the challenges of lack >> of "know how" in IT security need to be overcome through: >> - capacity building >> - encouragement of the development of national solutions based on open >> source components >> - improved R&D capabilities and making it more responsive to urgent needs >> - encouraging academic research in the important topics of security >> (cryptography, methodologies…) >> >> *The following questions and comments were raised*: >> >> - the need for social engineering through the creation of a culture of >> cyber security to be addressed specifically because of the increased >> requirements by government to obligate to provide subscriber identification >> information >> >> - how can African countries start up a cert- through collaboration for >> example with existing CERTs >> >> - in establishing a culture of cybersecurity – consideration should be >> given to the fact that there are different social cultures in different >> countries however there is consensus on issues such as child pornography, >> identity theft >> >> - how can a regional approach be developed where there are differences in >> level of ICT infrastructure and use of infrastructure in the delivery of >> services, what tools can be used to encourage decision makers to be involved >> in the issues of cyber security? >> >> o It was recognised that funding and expertise was required for example >> AFDB, World Bank and Islamic Bank while ITU have regional workshops on cyber >> security >> >> o As African countries build on infrastructure and services – there is an >> opportunity to learn from those that have already developed CERTs. >> >> - How does the CERT monitor traffic: with the collaboration of ISP and >> operators as well as supporting legislation >> >> - Regulators need to advice the government to use ICT in development – >> this is a manifestation of government commitment >> >> - The role of policy making was emphasized – as it provides government >> commitment to using ICT for social economic development and governance and >> consequently support for cyber security initiatives – including the >> formulation of legislation. >> >> - There should not use a piece meal approach to cyber security to prevent >> ineffectiveness for example Mauritius has electronic transaction act but PKI >> not yet established >> >> >> >> On 12/5/08, mwende njiraini <mwende.njiraini(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Following our recent online discussions on Internet governance issues in >>> Kenya, the Kenya IGF and East African IGF; you may wish to follow the >>> discussion currently ongoing at the global IGF 2008 in Hyderabad India at >>> http://www.intgovforum.org. >>> >>> Below are highlights from workshops I attended on Day 1 December 3rd): >>> *0930-1100 hrs Workshop 43: Legal aspects of governance critical >>> internet Policy issues of public relevance* >>> *1st presentation* >>> The issues on that have legal implications include: >>> • internet security intellectual property rights, infringement, privacy >>> and protection mechanisms >>> • IP domain name protection, conflicts arising out of data and content >>> ownership privacy therefore increasing role of P2P in growth of internet 2 >>> • Consumer status and rights in relation to e-commerce cross border and >>> domestic online trade >>> • Telecom issue viz backbone deployment and interconnection costs >>> • Freedom of expression – the extent of censorship and control on online >>> content >>> >>> There is need for capacity building to create meaningful participation of >>> individual and SMEs as well as increasing connectivity through building IXPs >>> and local content development >>> >>> The question was raised as to whether there a need of alternative >>> institutional mechanism. >>> The salient features of the MOU between ICANN and the department of >>> commerce (DoC) include: >>> - The affirmation of the role of private sector leadership >>> - The role of DoC in ensuring transparency and accountability and >>> effective GAC participation >>> - Ensure accountability and publish by-laws and strategic and operational >>> plans >>> - Agreement can be terminated in 120 days >>> >>> The MOU has been criticized because of the following reasons: >>> - US governmental control on root server administration >>> - Inconsistent with WSIS principle where no single government should have >>> a pre-eminent role >>> - Domain name allocation policies need better development >>> - IPv4 address allocation have been imbalanced need to ensure IPv6 >>> address allocation does not suffer the same effects -This assertion was >>> however refuted as IP addresses allocation based on need. The need for >>> prudent management and keeping barriers low for the transition to IPv6 was >>> emphasised. >>> >>> To overcome this WGIG proposed 4 models: >>> - Global policy council >>> - Intenational internet council with leading government role to fulfil >>> the ICANN/IANA functions >>> - GAC to be strengthened with enhanced coordination function >>> - Replace US govt role by general internet council or with world ICANN >>> (in lieu of GAC) >>> >>> The common features of these models were the overwhelming government lead >>> and the presupposition of the possibility of international treaties. During >>> the discussion the viability of these models was questioned given that speed >>> is of essence in the management of internet resources. It normally takes a >>> long time to negotiate international agreements; including treaties instead >>> a set of principles should be endorsed. >>> >>> The speaker recommended on the management of critical internet >>> infrastructure should take into consideration the following >>> • Treatment of technical resources of the internet and global economic, >>> social and legal aspects arising out the internet should be at par >>> • The development and implementation of polices and standards and >>> solutions to various internet issues should be done in a coordinated manner >>> for example telecommunication standard development is done in a hierarchical >>> and predictable way. >>> • New structure would be a supreme authority over internet >>> >>> In conclusion the speaker asked: Does the internet as we know it need to >>> be altered radically? Should the status quo be maintained? Should a Red >>> Cross model of recognition by international community states be given to an >>> international entity like ITU, INTELSAT. However fundamental change is not >>> necessary as failure has not been identified. >>> >>> *My comment*: this presentation was descriptive and despite the fact >>> that an alternative model was proposed the principles, mechanisms that would >>> need to be put in place in order to make it work were not discussed >>> >>> *2nd presentation* >>> The next speaker spoke about the ccTLDs in latin Amercia which are >>> broadly organised into two main groups: non-governmental and governmental >>> organisations. A contribution from the floor however clarified that the >>> Brazilian ccTLD is a multi-stakeholder – coordinated by government – but on >>> a day by day basis operates as a non-governmental organisation. The Indian >>> ccTLD is managed by government and private sector – sovereign interest taken >>> care of through government representation. >>> >>> The rules and regulations under which the institutions that manage the >>> ccTLDs are managed determinate legal framework under which they operate. >>> Consequently ccTLDs are regulated under national law while ICANN regulates >>> gTLDs – The possibility of self regulation is based on the assumption that >>> private sector would act in the public interest. >>> >>> In the discussions some felt that there was need for increased attention >>> of government in the management of ccTLDs – as it was critical >>> infrastructure while on the other hand other felt that there was the risk of >>> excessive regulation with increased involvement of government. >>> >>> *1130 -1200 hrs Workshop 36: Strategies to prevent and fight child >>> pornography in developing countries* >>> Child pornography in Brazil has grown out of the popularity of social >>> networking. However the main challenge has been issues related to >>> jurisdiction as content is resident in ISP based in the USA and >>> trans-national ISPs like Yahoo, Microsoft and Google which have branches in >>> strategic markets and have tailored the services for these markets in terms >>> of language and content. >>> >>> Brazil was therefore unable to deal with serious offences related to >>> content – specifically child pornography - committed by Brazilians using >>> Brazilian IP addresses. The government has been able to sign an agreement >>> with Google to fight child pornography on Google's orkut social network. >>> >>> The following are consideration taken in drawing up the agreement >>> 1. Which criteria should be used to define the ability of a particular >>> country to legislate over and sanction conducts committed on the internet? >>> - Where the data is located? >>> - International law principles (territoriality or nationality) shall be >>> used to define the sovereignty of a state regarding – cyber space – which is >>> a network of networks >>> - Define some reasonable standard – for example managed by Brazilians and >>> is local content and local language >>> - Access points in Brazil, harmful conduct felt in the country – taken >>> obligation under international law to take offence – country of origin >>> approach would force thousands of users to unfamiliar rules and travel – >>> offence under human rights therefore apply local legislation >>> >>> 2. It is legitimate to enforce the conduct of local office –as it >>> impracticable to send legal request to the US. >>> >>> >>> New tools have been implement that have reduced number of images uploaded >>> and increase in number of reported cases- subject to investigation. It was >>> inspiring to listen to parliamentarian talk about the need to have >>> legislators engaged in the process as they ultimately pass the laws. I >>> appreciated the fact that in there is great cooperation between the >>> parliament, government, police, civil society and private sector. >>> >>> The main challenges are: >>> • Lack of awareness and participation by parliamentarians who are >>> critical in the formulation of legislation >>> • how to obligate ISPs to provide information without infringing on >>> freedom of expression and privacy, >>> • what criteria should be used to deal with these offences >>> • the creation of awareness of ISPs in developing countries of the need >>> for judicial cooperation as well as social initiatives to deal with cyber >>> crime. >>> • Insufficient infrastructure to deal with this issue – law enforcement >>> does not have the human resources and technology >>> • Material produced to fight child pornography are not evaluated – they >>> should be inline with the demand >>> >>> *My comment*: I would have like to know if initiatives have reduced >>> offences, what is the success rate registered in prosecution, ability of the >>> law enforcement and judicial system to deal with offences. There was no >>> mention of where initiatives had been launched to fight child pornography on >>> the financial front. >>> >>> >>> *1530-1700 Workshop 45: Opening to diversity and competition of the DNS >>> system* >>> >>> >>> >>> There were 3 presentations in this session: >>> >>> >>> - *1st presentation* - alternate DNS system used in library systems >>> >>> >>> - *2nd presentation* - implementation of security in the Handle system >>> >>> >>> - *3rd presentation –* discussed the Net4D >>> >>> >>> >>> Net4D- provides the technical solution to the political concern on the >>> control of root servers. Net4D networks enable the following: >>> >>> • Empower the second generation of the web: the semantic web. >>> >>> • Multi-stakeholder governance of DNS >>> >>> • Net4D classes should be open and interoperable >>> >>> DNS 1.0 – was a monopoly of ICANN web 1.0 html with USA parentage and >>> English only while DNS 2.0 is open allowing for competition including inter >>> alia: >>> >>> • Net4D semantic web >>> >>> • Open coherent approach to linguistic diversity >>> >>> • Allow technological innovation with value added services >>> >>> >>> >>> Concern was however raised on the: >>> >>> • Investment/implementation cost required to implementation of different >>> DNS systems depending on the BIND implemented and root servers enabled >>> >>> • relinquishing of the political control of root servers >>> >>> • Value to end users >>> >>> • Awareness and understanding of the issues by different stakeholders >>> necessary – delivered in a way that they can understand >>> >>> >>> >>> *My comment*: the session was technical – I hope the techies on the >>> mailing list can help us understand the governance issues associated with >>> the introduction of DNS competition and the impact on developing countries >>> :)! >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards >>> >>> mwende >>> >> >> >

1 0

Re: [kictanet] IGF 2008 Highlights - Day 2
by mwende njiraini 10 Dec '08

10 Dec '08

*Day 2: 4th December 2008* * * *Theme: Promoting Cybersecurity and Trust * * * *0930-1100 Panel discussions: Dimensions of Cybersecurity and Cybercrime* The internet was not originally designed with security features however with increased use of the internet security considerations arise. It is important to recognize regional, local and cultural issues that may affect cyber security and develop a relationship of trust in order to develop a framework that determines - what happens in a crisis, how to engage in law enforcement. This is important as security issues need to be addressed before there is a crisis and should be done at all levels. *Computer Emergency Response Team* * * The use of the Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT) at a regional and national level based on the framework developed by the Carnegie Mellon University (www.cert.org) as follows: 1. *Organisational * At an organisational level there should be a person responsible for security – the response to security threats need to be formalized – that is organizational incident response should be formalized. 1. *National* Formation of national CERT is necessary but not sufficient. Channels for relaying of information, mitigating threats need to be organised and tested on a regular basis. The national CERT should work with regional CERT as well as have links with law enforcement organisations. There is need for development of a strategy as well as testing of the system. Any incidents should be reviewed. The goals of CERT should include: - early detection, - short response time, - reduction of impact, - recognition of liability issues, - analysis techniques – which are forensically safe, need to be developed in advance not when time is of the essence - Alignment of with partners ITU-D study group 1 Q 22/1 is studying issues on: *Securing information and communication networks: best practices for developing a culture of Cybersecurity* The security should be implemented without damaging the nature of the internet, and protecting vulnerable groups *Introduction of cybercrime and terrorism* Traditional crime has moved online for example harassment and money laundering however there are new forms of crime in the virtual world including: - phishing, virus/malware, etc - Critical infrastructure threats – banking, transport, banking, energy, government and national security - Terrorist use of the internet to publish ideologies, raise funds, recruit new members The challenges in combating cybercrime and terrorism: - The crime scene and who is in charge with dealing with the threat. - Relevance of geographic distance - Investigative cost and the need to carry out real time investigations - Legal framework - Procedural legal problems - Complex search and seizure laws - Responsibility and data - It complex due to numerous operators involved *Questions and discussions* - Global issue – which needs coordinated effort and cooperation - in order to avoid the development of cyber havens. - Action, feedback and reaction necessary in order to update prevention mechanisms with regard to recent incidents - A relationship of trust important between the CERT and ISPs –ISPs need to provide data – this should a bottom up process - Organisations work in an eco-system –sharing of information – collecting statistics before, during and after an incident - Access (usage and querying) to the data base at the CERT should be controlled – because of privacy issues - A mutual Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) and formal structures should be created through a formal bottom-up process. - Network based crime raise issues associated with creating an appropriate balance between the needs of those investigating and prosecuting and rights and interests. - Need for coordination is a challenge to governments because of the lack of expertise – therefore have to rely on academia and private sector - The CERT should be an independent group of experts that should be fully empowered - Appropriate safeguards to protect the functioning of the organisation necessary as they give confidence and ensure business continuity during investigation - New institutional models based on hybrid frameworks – for example Sri-Lanka CERT was set up in June 2006 and involves government as well as skilled incident handlers (http://www.slcert.gov.lk/) - Need for increased cooperation as cyber crime is multi-jurisdiction issue – harmonization of enforcement processes and legislation approach such as that of the council of Europe. * * *Indian CERT* - The internet is used for numerous activities leading to an increase cyber attacks consequently there is a need for training on best practices and implementation. - India's legislation includes computer related offences and is currently being amended to be in line with the European cyber convention. - National CERT operates in partnership with Asia and pacific CERTs - The Indian CERT is a government lead industry initiative – that aims at creating awareness and compliance to best practices - Training of law enforcement officers on analysis of computer related crime a challenge and undertaken through PPP. - A secure national cyberspace – requires collaboration, research in technologies through a bottom-up process. - Areas of conflicting interest need to be addressed as cybercrime is a global phenomenal – these areas include conflict with individual rights, unnecessary censorship and society issues - Establishment of global alliances essential to ensure stability of internet - Sharing to data about cyber attacks is a challenge - Establishment of a CERT takes time – needs to include participation of private sector partners The ITU has identified five pillars with regard to internet security which include: 1. Legal issues 2. Technical procedural issues, Organisational structures including CERTs 3. Capacity building 4. International cooperation There is need for proactive approach to provide an early warning system for example that used in the event of natural disasters as well as need for organisation and cooperation between all stakeholders. With regard to initiating internet security measures – start with an issue where there is a common understanding for example child protection which was the basis of the launch of the child line protection. *Capacity building* *Issues* - Lack of capacity in of ISPs - Inter-south cooperation required as challenges and infrastructure similar - Retention of skilled human resources a challenge - Use of network operator groups for capacity building - Need to utilize the existing educational framework by integration of cybersecurity into curriculum – this creates sustainability in capacity building - Training should be relevant to the environment – appropriate use of technology, cost, concentrate on getting the maximum benefit – innovation in order to derive the maximum value will be based on training received - Need for collaboration platform – so as to continue sharing information - Need to focus on reality on the ground *Kind of training* - technical training - policy issues – IPv4/6 *Technical challenges* - operators need to be profitable – environment liberalized – however still certain monopolized areas – international connectivity – imbalanced competition – therefore profitability issue- cant invest in new technologies – limited investment in training *My comment*: Urgent need create of culture of cybersecurity (end-users, at organisation level and nationally) and establishment of national, regional CERTs. *14:30 - 16:00 Workshop 76 Neutrality Debate Important for You? (Network Neutrality Debate: The Implications for Development) * * * *Technical issues* All networks need to be managed High broadband connectivity principles ( http://www.tiaonline.org/gov_affairs/issues/internet_services_applications/… ) - transparency - ability to attach any device - right to access any legal content - right to download any legal content *Economic issues* Net neutrality has significant micro and macro implications. Broadband investment influenced by the broad economic environment because of the massive investment required - Regulation is viewed more beneficial in view of the current economic crisis - More users create value to the platform - Optimal pricing structure – a possibility - may not want to charge content providers to contribute to access - Mandatory net neutrality/unbundling expected to depress investment in broadband plus may have a significant negative effect on investment NGN. - Centre for European Policy Studies – research titled: "I own the pipes, you call the tune: The net neutrality debate and its (ir) relevance for Europe" available at http://shop.ceps.eu/BookDetail.php?item_id=1755 – argues that the internet is not neutral – pro-neutrality rules/changes being proposed should be evaluated - The analogy of the roads and vehicles was used to describe net neutrality – the roads represent the pipes while the cars represent the packets/traffic – which are not regulated and may be of any shape or size. However there is regulation with regard to speed. - issue of convergence – important for users - internet to drive innovation and economic growth - activism issues are important to understand the issues - slowing down the traffic and packets on internet has a consequence of slowing down the development internet *Issues from a user perspective* - no consensus on the issues exists - Users do not necessarily want free/unlimited control – however what they want is: what they access should not be controlled - They do not want to be forced to buy their store brands or services of preferred service providers of the broadband connectivity provider. - There is no value in packaging/bundling of services – rather it is designed to sell services at a high price - Users question whether a free market would help as suppliers are out to make money – there is an economic motivation to invest – which means there is no one to look out for consumers - Need for establish anti trust/anti monopoly regulations - ISPs must be made to know that users are not willing to give up their rights thus should develop internet usage plans that are favourable to the users - suppliers must listen to consumers - Users have the power to demand what we want if only they demanded it - The investment on the internet should be allowed in all areas – core and edges without fragmenting it - networks should be built using open interfaces - end to end principle protection is significant - Users want the internet to encourage innovation - Use of restaurant analogy where the chairs, tables and food are outsourced - Users should have the ability to have access to the content they want as long as it is connected to open interfaces - Users have concern on the future of the internet; content equality and its ability to deliver content in different ways thus encouraging local innovation *My comment:* significance of net neutrality with reference to developing countries was not addressed – taking into consideration that the motivation for investment in broadband connectivity is socio-economic development thus deployment of both local and international for example submarine cable is being done by governments rather than the private sector. On 12/8/08, mwende njiraini <mwende.njiraini(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > *5th December 2008* > *930-1100 Panel Discussion Transition from IPv4 to IPv6* > Based on several studies it is projected that IPv4 addresses will be > globally exhausted by 2011 however address space will still be available at > a local level. Seamless take up of IPv6 is expected with the exhaustion of > IPv4 and there is on going discussion – to define policy to facilitate > smooth transition for operators and ensure that new comers have minimum IPv6 > address space allocation to start up business. > > The following issues were discussed from different perspectives: > > *Issues from operators' perspective*: > - Deployment of IPv6 enabled equipment in the core networks should be done > increment – however uptake is low because there is no extra revenue > generated with the implementation of IPv6 i.e. the lack of commercial > drivers. However this is expected to change with the as customer numbers > grow. > > - Need for upgrade – therefore operators from developed countries stand at > an advantage as they have the resources and are nearly exhausted their local > allocations. > > - Getting operational experience is a challenge – there is need to invest > in operational tools to run IPv6 in terms of software configuration > utilities management and trouble shooting > > - Participation in standardization – where users have equipment that > supports only IPv4 – how do they access services that are available only on > IPv6-based networks? The IETF is working on the transition mechanisms > however the co-existence of both protocols is expected for a long time > > - Operators are pushing for IPv6 support in customer premise equipment > (CPE) as well as software that supports the new protocol version. However it > is expected that legacy applications will be available in the foreseeable > future > > *Issues from a vendor perspective* > - Transition has been going on for some time in the vendor world. The > transition has been a long process for vendors and operators – in terms of > getting the technology and standards ready > > - As IP is the core of the internet – transition to ipv6 – is significant > particularly with the increase of IPv6 enabled devices connected to the > internet specifically mobile phones > > - need to understand technology and therefore need for operational and > implementation experience > > - managing customer demand/expectations for IPv6 enabled services and > devices > > - cost of staff training > > - there are mistakes that will be made – therefore need for mutual support > in the implementation of v6 > > *Social and economic perspectives*- > - Transition should be cooperative endeavour with social and economic and > policy considerations > > - Gradual implementation and interoperability between IPv4 and v6 expected > so as to preserve the investment already made > > - There is a general understanding that IPv6 will compliment and supplement > the existing IPv4 as well as provide improved routing, multicasting, > efficient infrastructure. The following questions however arise: > > o The advantages that IPv6 offer are good reasons to invest in the new IP > version. > o Would transition be transparent and would backward compatibility required > > - Users want the stability of the internet to be maintained and hope that > IPv6 will offer opportunities for addition to personality features on the > internet – this is what makes the business case > > - In the India case there are a large number of service providers – and > there is only a 1/8 usage – therefore demand is low – the need to enhance > cultural diversity however provides opportunities to create demand through > local content development including E-government programme and Info-tainment > > - It is important to break the myth that IPv6 is a new internet - It is not > a new internet rather continuation of the internet > > - The main benefit is the address space addition- which may allow for > efficiency > > - There is no need to establish a deadline or regulate the implementation > of IPv6 – as it will be market driven. Additionally users should have rights > to use IPv4 and IETF is working on coexistence > > *Policy perspective* > - With the impending exhaustion of IPv4 – further implementation will be > problematic – as not all players will support transition therefore it is > important to examine measures – for continued use of IPv4 and possible > migration of users to private IPv4 address space > > - creation of action plan to be implemented by 2010 – for example offering > of incentives such as tax exemption and capacity building > > - examination of existing programmes and mechanisms > > - establishment of taskforce of IPv4 exhaustion > > - the messages of ISPs is that they must carry IPv6 > > - IPv4 scarcity and demand for more security are the 2 major challenges > driving the uptake of IPv6 > > - Institution of market transfer or reclamation mechanisms of IPv4 > resources not required by local internet registries to the regional internet > registries when transition to IPv6 is implemented. However this would be a > challenge as RIRs have no contractual authority this may create a grey > market. This challenge may be overcome through a loose membership > association that allows others to use others resources > > - Institution of secure routing objects including PKI to authenticate users > raises governance/control issues – RIRs have centralized control which may > make it efficient and better able to address security issues this makes an > RIR an central governance institution. Membership of security/government > associations in the RIR would result in infiltration of technical, policy > agendas that may make the transition to IPv6 complicated > > - However it is argued that RIRs should remain neutral and trans-national > institutions which: > o maintain a homogenous technical group > o maintain a bottom-up approach in policy making > o guarantee the stability of the internet and business continuity of > members > > - main challenges in the deployment of IPv6 include: > o lack of public education, information and skill > o limited network policy decisions to make deployment happen > o lack of incentive to deploy ipv6 > > *1100-1230 Workshop 59:Building a global capacity building curriculum > framework and premier* > > - Integration of IG capacity building in existing ICT and public policy > courses was advocated. > > - The training may be offered either online, offline or through short term > executive courses. > > - Collaboration between different stakeholders who have different needs is > imperative in order create an understanding of the issues arising from > increased used of the internet particularly those that transcend the > geographical, and cultural borders. > > - internet security awareness programme set up in India > > - Presentations on the Diplo IG capacity building programme ( > www.diplomacy.edu/ig) – including a demonstration of the online platform. > > - The Diplo approach includes the training course (foundation and > advanced), policy research, policy immersion and community interaction. > > - The impact associated with the IG capacity building programme have been > varied and impressive including the establishment of IG governance masters > programme in Srilanka and the use of telecentres to disseminate IG related > information. > > - Diplo has successfully offered the training to professional worldwide for > the last 4 years leading to the establishment of national, regional and > global community > > *1400-1530 Workshop 29: Building confidence and security in the use and > security in the use of ICTs for African countries > > *Main challenges in Africa > - lack of infrastructure > - lack of services > > Therefore opportunity to learn from mistakes in developing countries and > establish of computer emergency response team currently there is only one > active CERT in Africa in Tunisia, South Africa is in the process of setting > up a CERT with the deadline of 2010 before the FIFA world cup. While > countries such as Morocco, Kenya and Ivory Coast are thinking about set in > up CERTs. > > The approach in dealing with Cybersecurity in developing countries > > Success of Cybersecurity is based on 3pillars > > 1. *Technology pillar* – ICT/security tools –including: > o PCs / networks, physical security tools, data tools (storage media and > cryptography), availability of infrastructure and application (redundant > servers and PKI) > > 2. *Methodology pillar* – policy, procedures and regulations on three > levels: > o managerial level (security policy, management procedures and capacity > building, audit) Legislative level (law and regulation) > o operational level (acces control rules, implementation plans, monitoring, > watch, incidence handling) > o continuity of services level ( business continuity plan, crisis > management, drill exercises) > - actors in this pillar include the government, security professionals and > users > > 3. *Social behaviour pillar* – creating a culture of cyber security > o cultivate culture of cyber security through continuous action of raising > awareness using diverse media/channels > o the target audience includes managers, decision makers, security, > children, parents, teachers > > > *Case study: CERT-TCC - Tunisia* > > *The functions of the CERT include*: > > - Watch- collect information from different sources eg CISCO, HP. > Microsoft, network of CERTs, community of hackers > - Training > - Coordination > - Response > - Incidence handling > - Incident analysis > - Awareness > - Warning alert > > *Key issues*: > > • Information, warning and alert – carried out to in collaboration with > ISPs, managers decision makers, internet community through mailing list, > call centre, media > > • Oriented campaign – utilizing prospectus, posters, email, radio, > cartoons, video, attack simulation and guides > > • Incident handling - training in new tools > > • Coordination important in the effective functioning of the CERT – > incident coordination procedures and information including regional CERTs, > other CERTs within the country (for example Brazil has more than one CERT), > ISPs and operators, vendors and integrators, and national authorities. > > Need for the formation of CERTs in Africa however the challenges of lack of > "know how" in IT security need to be overcome through: > - capacity building > - encouragement of the development of national solutions based on open > source components > - improved R&D capabilities and making it more responsive to urgent needs > - encouraging academic research in the important topics of security > (cryptography, methodologies…) > > *The following questions and comments were raised*: > > - the need for social engineering through the creation of a culture of > cyber security to be addressed specifically because of the increased > requirements by government to obligate to provide subscriber identification > information > > - how can African countries start up a cert- through collaboration for > example with existing CERTs > > - in establishing a culture of cybersecurity – consideration should be > given to the fact that there are different social cultures in different > countries however there is consensus on issues such as child pornography, > identity theft > > - how can a regional approach be developed where there are differences in > level of ICT infrastructure and use of infrastructure in the delivery of > services, what tools can be used to encourage decision makers to be involved > in the issues of cyber security? > > o It was recognised that funding and expertise was required for example > AFDB, World Bank and Islamic Bank while ITU have regional workshops on cyber > security > > o As African countries build on infrastructure and services – there is an > opportunity to learn from those that have already developed CERTs. > > - How does the CERT monitor traffic: with the collaboration of ISP and > operators as well as supporting legislation > > - Regulators need to advice the government to use ICT in development – this > is a manifestation of government commitment > > - The role of policy making was emphasized – as it provides government > commitment to using ICT for social economic development and governance and > consequently support for cyber security initiatives – including the > formulation of legislation. > > - There should not use a piece meal approach to cyber security to prevent > ineffectiveness for example Mauritius has electronic transaction act but PKI > not yet established > > > > On 12/5/08, mwende njiraini <mwende.njiraini(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Following our recent online discussions on Internet governance issues in >> Kenya, the Kenya IGF and East African IGF; you may wish to follow the >> discussion currently ongoing at the global IGF 2008 in Hyderabad India at >> http://www.intgovforum.org. >> >> Below are highlights from workshops I attended on Day 1 December 3rd): >> *0930-1100 hrs Workshop 43: Legal aspects of governance critical >> internet Policy issues of public relevance* >> *1st presentation* >> The issues on that have legal implications include: >> • internet security intellectual property rights, infringement, privacy >> and protection mechanisms >> • IP domain name protection, conflicts arising out of data and content >> ownership privacy therefore increasing role of P2P in growth of internet 2 >> • Consumer status and rights in relation to e-commerce cross border and >> domestic online trade >> • Telecom issue viz backbone deployment and interconnection costs >> • Freedom of expression – the extent of censorship and control on online >> content >> >> There is need for capacity building to create meaningful participation of >> individual and SMEs as well as increasing connectivity through building IXPs >> and local content development >> >> The question was raised as to whether there a need of alternative >> institutional mechanism. >> The salient features of the MOU between ICANN and the department of >> commerce (DoC) include: >> - The affirmation of the role of private sector leadership >> - The role of DoC in ensuring transparency and accountability and >> effective GAC participation >> - Ensure accountability and publish by-laws and strategic and operational >> plans >> - Agreement can be terminated in 120 days >> >> The MOU has been criticized because of the following reasons: >> - US governmental control on root server administration >> - Inconsistent with WSIS principle where no single government should have >> a pre-eminent role >> - Domain name allocation policies need better development >> - IPv4 address allocation have been imbalanced need to ensure IPv6 address >> allocation does not suffer the same effects -This assertion was however >> refuted as IP addresses allocation based on need. The need for prudent >> management and keeping barriers low for the transition to IPv6 was >> emphasised. >> >> To overcome this WGIG proposed 4 models: >> - Global policy council >> - Intenational internet council with leading government role to fulfil the >> ICANN/IANA functions >> - GAC to be strengthened with enhanced coordination function >> - Replace US govt role by general internet council or with world ICANN (in >> lieu of GAC) >> >> The common features of these models were the overwhelming government lead >> and the presupposition of the possibility of international treaties. During >> the discussion the viability of these models was questioned given that speed >> is of essence in the management of internet resources. It normally takes a >> long time to negotiate international agreements; including treaties instead >> a set of principles should be endorsed. >> >> The speaker recommended on the management of critical internet >> infrastructure should take into consideration the following >> • Treatment of technical resources of the internet and global economic, >> social and legal aspects arising out the internet should be at par >> • The development and implementation of polices and standards and >> solutions to various internet issues should be done in a coordinated manner >> for example telecommunication standard development is done in a hierarchical >> and predictable way. >> • New structure would be a supreme authority over internet >> >> In conclusion the speaker asked: Does the internet as we know it need to >> be altered radically? Should the status quo be maintained? Should a Red >> Cross model of recognition by international community states be given to an >> international entity like ITU, INTELSAT. However fundamental change is not >> necessary as failure has not been identified. >> >> *My comment*: this presentation was descriptive and despite the fact that >> an alternative model was proposed the principles, mechanisms that would need >> to be put in place in order to make it work were not discussed >> >> *2nd presentation* >> The next speaker spoke about the ccTLDs in latin Amercia which are broadly >> organised into two main groups: non-governmental and governmental >> organisations. A contribution from the floor however clarified that the >> Brazilian ccTLD is a multi-stakeholder – coordinated by government – but on >> a day by day basis operates as a non-governmental organisation. The Indian >> ccTLD is managed by government and private sector – sovereign interest taken >> care of through government representation. >> >> The rules and regulations under which the institutions that manage the >> ccTLDs are managed determinate legal framework under which they operate. >> Consequently ccTLDs are regulated under national law while ICANN regulates >> gTLDs – The possibility of self regulation is based on the assumption that >> private sector would act in the public interest. >> >> In the discussions some felt that there was need for increased attention >> of government in the management of ccTLDs – as it was critical >> infrastructure while on the other hand other felt that there was the risk of >> excessive regulation with increased involvement of government. >> >> *1130 -1200 hrs Workshop 36: Strategies to prevent and fight child >> pornography in developing countries* >> Child pornography in Brazil has grown out of the popularity of social >> networking. However the main challenge has been issues related to >> jurisdiction as content is resident in ISP based in the USA and >> trans-national ISPs like Yahoo, Microsoft and Google which have branches in >> strategic markets and have tailored the services for these markets in terms >> of language and content. >> >> Brazil was therefore unable to deal with serious offences related to >> content – specifically child pornography - committed by Brazilians using >> Brazilian IP addresses. The government has been able to sign an agreement >> with Google to fight child pornography on Google's orkut social network. >> >> The following are consideration taken in drawing up the agreement >> 1. Which criteria should be used to define the ability of a particular >> country to legislate over and sanction conducts committed on the internet? >> - Where the data is located? >> - International law principles (territoriality or nationality) shall be >> used to define the sovereignty of a state regarding – cyber space – which is >> a network of networks >> - Define some reasonable standard – for example managed by Brazilians and >> is local content and local language >> - Access points in Brazil, harmful conduct felt in the country – taken >> obligation under international law to take offence – country of origin >> approach would force thousands of users to unfamiliar rules and travel – >> offence under human rights therefore apply local legislation >> >> 2. It is legitimate to enforce the conduct of local office –as it >> impracticable to send legal request to the US. >> >> >> New tools have been implement that have reduced number of images uploaded >> and increase in number of reported cases- subject to investigation. It was >> inspiring to listen to parliamentarian talk about the need to have >> legislators engaged in the process as they ultimately pass the laws. I >> appreciated the fact that in there is great cooperation between the >> parliament, government, police, civil society and private sector. >> >> The main challenges are: >> • Lack of awareness and participation by parliamentarians who are critical >> in the formulation of legislation >> • how to obligate ISPs to provide information without infringing on >> freedom of expression and privacy, >> • what criteria should be used to deal with these offences >> • the creation of awareness of ISPs in developing countries of the need >> for judicial cooperation as well as social initiatives to deal with cyber >> crime. >> • Insufficient infrastructure to deal with this issue – law enforcement >> does not have the human resources and technology >> • Material produced to fight child pornography are not evaluated – they >> should be inline with the demand >> >> *My comment*: I would have like to know if initiatives have reduced >> offences, what is the success rate registered in prosecution, ability of the >> law enforcement and judicial system to deal with offences. There was no >> mention of where initiatives had been launched to fight child pornography on >> the financial front. >> >> >> *1530-1700 Workshop 45: Opening to diversity and competition of the DNS >> system* >> >> >> >> There were 3 presentations in this session: >> >> >> - *1st presentation* - alternate DNS system used in library systems >> >> >> - *2nd presentation* - implementation of security in the Handle system >> >> >> - *3rd presentation –* discussed the Net4D >> >> >> >> Net4D- provides the technical solution to the political concern on the >> control of root servers. Net4D networks enable the following: >> >> • Empower the second generation of the web: the semantic web. >> >> • Multi-stakeholder governance of DNS >> >> • Net4D classes should be open and interoperable >> >> DNS 1.0 – was a monopoly of ICANN web 1.0 html with USA parentage and >> English only while DNS 2.0 is open allowing for competition including inter >> alia: >> >> • Net4D semantic web >> >> • Open coherent approach to linguistic diversity >> >> • Allow technological innovation with value added services >> >> >> >> Concern was however raised on the: >> >> • Investment/implementation cost required to implementation of different >> DNS systems depending on the BIND implemented and root servers enabled >> >> • relinquishing of the political control of root servers >> >> • Value to end users >> >> • Awareness and understanding of the issues by different stakeholders >> necessary – delivered in a way that they can understand >> >> >> >> *My comment*: the session was technical – I hope the techies on the >> mailing list can help us understand the governance issues associated with >> the introduction of DNS competition and the impact on developing countries >> :)! >> >> >> >> Kind regards >> >> mwende >> > >

1 0