- KICTANet - KICTANet

Re: [kictanet] Request for Attachment by Patrick Kariuki
by gathuri njorohio 12 Feb '10

12 Feb '10

Hi all listers Patrick Kariuki is seeking assistance to get attachment for his Diploma course in ICT which he is taking at Nairobi Institute of Business Studies. He is due to complete this June and would appreciate if he can get some industry experience. Kariuki can be reached on patkirio(a)yahoo.com Kindly assist Eng. Njorohio ________________________________ From: gathuri njorohio <gathuri_njorohio(a)yahoo.com> To: kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke Sent: Thu, February 11, 2010 1:50:26 PM Subject: Hi all listers Patrick Kariuki is seeking assistance to get attachment for his Diploma course in ICT which he is taking at Nairobi Institute of Business Studies. He is due to complete this June and would appreciate if he can get some industry experience. Kariuki can be reached on patkirio(a)yahoo.com Kindly assist Eng. Njorohio

2 1

ICANN and Its Responsibilities to the Global Public Interest
by alice 12 Feb '10

12 Feb '10

http://www.circleid.com/posts/icann_and_its_responsibilities_to_the_global_… ICANN and Its Responsibilities to the Global Public Interest By David Maher In 1998, the United States government might have taken a different path in asserting its control over the technical administration of the DNS. It might have asserted full U.S. governmental control, or it might have turned over the functions to an international body such as the International Telecommunications Union. Instead, it created a "private-public partnership", incorporated as a California "nonprofit public benefit corporation", with a charter giving the company a dual mission of quasi-governmental functions combined with responsibility for operational stability of the Internet. In all its deliberations, the ICANN Board must maintain a balance in its mission of lessening the burdens of government and promoting the global public interest in the operational stability of the Internet. ICANN has the responsibility to draw the fine line dividing two contrasting areas, one where it should not go, and the other where it risks not doing enough. On the one hand, ICANN cannot become involved in areas such as content control and rule making in areas unrelated to operational stability. On the other hand, ICANN's self image as technical coordinator has at times constrained it from taking action necessary to discharge its public interest obligations, such as, for example, requiring registrars to comply with their contractual obligations. ICANN's recent attempts to find a way to insert new top level domains in the root zone file illustrate the difficulties of achieving this balance. From a purely technical point of view, there is room for many additional new gTLDs in ASCII and in IDN.IDN versions. There are concerns about stress on the root zone, but it appears that this is a manageable risk, and ICANN is taking responsible steps to deal with it. On the other hand, the whole question of how new generic top level domains would serve the public interest has never been openly considered by ICANN. The current proposal for an Expression of Interest proceeding illustrates this. Instead of being a straightforward determination of who might want to apply, the proceeding risks becoming an avenue for well-financed commercial applicants who treat the domain name system as a species of investment opportunity comparable to real estate. This is a far cry from the public interest in making names available to people who want to use them. The proposals for selection of new top level domains present even more serious problems. There will very likely be multiple applicants for some popular strings, and ICANN has the job of selecting from among the competitors. There will also likely be applicants for strings that are obscenities or phrases intended to inflame social or religious conflict. >From the standpoint of ICANN's obligation to serve the "global public interest in the operational stability of the Internet", ICANN cannot allow these into the root. In addition, there is the continuing problem of minimizing trademark infringement opportunities. For better or worse, the United States government demanded in 1998 that ICANN become the enforcer of a global system of trademark rights. This quasi-governmental function, in the form of the UDRP, became part of the otherwise more technical duties assigned to ICANN. The extension of this involvement with trademarks is possibly the most serious test of ICANN's abilities to promote the public interest. ICANN's Draft Application Guidebook (the "DAG") for new gTLDs attempts to find the appropriate mechanisms for taking into account the sometimes conflicting responsibilities described above. The first and second drafts, issued in October 2008 and February 2009, respectively, were not successful in many respects. These drafts demonstrate, all too clearly, ICANN's reluctance to face its public interest responsibilities. ICANN proposes to create a system of independent decision makers to decide such questions as likelihood of confusion between different proposed strings for new gTLDs, alleged infringement of legal rights by a proposed string, and objections based on morality, public order and community objections. Of these, the first and second are probably amenable to objective determinations based on internationally recognized principles of trademark law, although there are serious questions as to how far ICANN should go in creating what amounts to international law. As to the questions of morality, public order and community objections to applications for new gTLDs, these can only be tested against conceptions of the public interest. ICANN apparently believes that getting a third party to do this work relieves ICANN of its responsibilities. There are two problems with this approach. First, there is nothing to indicate that any third party has either the expertise or authority to make these judgments better than ICANN, and second, ICANN's mission to serve the public interest does not allow it to delegate its responsibilities to outsiders. Further, ICANN apparently hopes that its self-serving requirement that all gTLD applicants waive all legal claims against ICANN will insulate it from litigation. ICANN is certainly justified in its fear of litigation. As a creature of California law and subject to US federal law, this risk is always present. However, attempts to pass off to third parties ICANN's obligations to make judgments about the public interest will not lessen this risk, and may in fact increase it. The waiver of legal claims applies only to applicants for new TLDs, not to third parties that may be adversely affected by the process. As another example of ICANN's failure to face up to its responsibilities, ICANN proposes to create independent evaluation panels to choose from among conflicting applicants for the same new gTLD string. The call for expressions of interest states that evaluators must be capable of exercising subjective judgment. ICANN may have a legitimate need to consult with outside experts, but they cannot be allowed to make the final decisions. There are no grounds for a belief that a third party's subjective judgment would give better results than decisions made by ICANN's Board. The Board clearly must face up to its responsibility to make judgments in the public interest, based on the experience and expertise of the Board members. To ICANN's credit, it finally realized that there is a connection between the creation of large numbers of new gTLDs and the public interest in preventing a vast increase in cybersquatting and the spread of fraudulent practices. The first two drafts of the DAG neglected to deal this issue in any serious way, but since then ICANN has taken steps "to develop and propose solutions to the over-arching issue of trademark protection..." It is still an open question whether or not ICANN's current proposals will be adequate to serve the public interest in protection of the legitimate rights of trademark owners. ICANN has not been so successful in dealing with other overarching issues. In October, 2006, ICANN's Board asked that a comprehensive economic study be completed before the introduction of new gTLDs, but it was never made. Instead, ICANN produced economic studies that purport to justify its proposals for a radical change in the policy of separation of registry and registrar functions. Whether or not this change will serve the public interest will apparently be judged by the results of the experiment, and not by a considered weighing of relevant evidence. Even when ICANN grasps the concept of its public interest responsibility, it does not always come up with a reasonable approach to a particular problem. For example, the current proposed base agreement for new registries includes a provision allowing ICANN to amend the agreement unilaterally. While there may be a need from time to time to take account of changing circumstances, this brute force approach can hardly be justified as serving the public interest in a stable relationship between ICANN and the new registries. Despite the concerns outlined here, ICANN has done most of the right things it was created to do and it continues to deserve our support. It is very unlikely that a single government or international organization could better fulfill the obligations undertaken by ICANN. However, a lot of work remains to be done, and ICANN must pay a great deal more attention to its global public interest responsibilities.

3 3

Re: [kictanet] New Information related to ICANN Nairobi Meeting
by McTim 12 Feb '10

12 Feb '10

Harry, all; This seems to be the latest update: On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 5:47 AM, <no-reply(a)icann.org> wrote: > Updated Security Information as of 11 February 2010 > Date: > Thursday, 11 February 2010 > > Dear ICANN Community, > > Within the last 24 hours, we received an unclassified report from the United States’ Department of State related to the Kenyatta International Conference Center, the venue for our upcoming meeting (attached below). > > The types of threats outlined in that communication are difficult to assess. ICANN is now reaching out to different parties in Kenya and elsewhere to see if it is possible to better assess the situation, and of course will share any further information with you. > > Sammy Buruchara, Chairman of the ICANN 2010 Local Steering Committee in Nairobi has already provided the following information: > > “In relation with the Security threat by Al Shabaab to US Embassy and KICC, I wish to on behalf of ICANN 2010 Local Organizing committee and on behalf of the relevant Kenya Government Security Agencies state the following: > > The Kenya Government is aware of the Security Threat by Al Shabaab on KICC and on the United States Embassy in Nairobi. Our security organs that include National Security Intelligence Service (NSIS) and Kenya Anti-Terrorism Police have been alerted and will make appropriate security responses to deal with this threat. Through their network of security agents, they have made contingency plans to thwart any possible terrorist plot that will target Nairobi City, including KICC and all the Hotels in which delegates will be hosted, and the US Embassy. > > I wish to assure ICANN Community that the Kenya Government is committed to ensure your safety during the ICANN event and will take necessary security measures to guarantee the safety of all participants during the Conference.” > > In the most transparent manner possible, ICANN will continue to share information as it becomes available. Just like you, we’re processing this information, and seeing how and if we need to update procedures and plans for the upcoming meeting. > > Sincerely, > ICANN > > Information from U.S. State Department > > “As of early February 2010, individuals affiliated with al-Shabaab al-Islamiya were planning suicide bombing attacks on the US Embassy and Kenyan International Conference Center in Nairobi, Kenya. The individuals were targeting the KICC because it was deemed the largest and oldest building associated with the Kenyan government. The US Embassy was targeted for its support of the Kenyan government. As of early February, the individuals planning to carry out the attacks were living in Somali communities in Kenya. We have no additional information regarding the possible individuals involved in the plot, timing, or method of the attack. > > This is all the information we have at this time, and we will continue to keep you updated if there are any potential updates.” > > > -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel

1 0

Invitation to a workshop: Getting a hold on Cybercrime against women: at the University of Nairobi, Chiromo Campus Arziki restaurant, 16th Feb, 2010
by alice 11 Feb '10

11 Feb '10

(Apologies for cross posting) Dear colleague /*_ Invitation to a workshop: Getting a hold on Cybercrime against women: at the University of Nairobi, Chiromo Campus Arziki restaurant, 16th Feb, 2010 from 7.00-10.30 a.m. _*/ Cybercrime against the person and in this case the woman is real and is rising. Unfortunately, all the efforts to understand the vice focus on the cyber crime against property and against governments. The only other notable effort against the person is against the child. While cyberspace have provided secure tools and spaces where women can enjoy their freedom of expression, information and privacy of communication, the same benefits of anonymity and privacy also extend to those who employ ICTs for criminal activities and use the internet to commit violence against women. The use of mobile phones and internet to stalk, abuse, traffic, intimidate and humiliate women is palpable in developing countries including Kenya. The lack of specific cybercrime/cyber security legislation makes it even more difficult to punish those who use ICTs tools to conduct violence against women. Kenya Communications (Amendment) Act 2009 focused on the cybercrime against property and not the person. Kenya is not alone but that is not a consolation. With increased use of internet in Kenya with the onset of broadband, it is necessary to create the necessary policy / regulatory and the operational framework to reign in the vice. KICTANET and IDRC has launched a study on the vice whose research questions are: 1. What is the prevalence of cybercrime against women in terms of degree, level, quantity, and distribution? 2. How does cyber crime affect women differently? (Demonstrate spiral effect and determine if women are already intimidated by cyber space e.g. mailing lists, how active do women participate in debates? Is the design of the cyber already woman unfriendly?) 3. What are the current measures and gaps (technological, legal, social, and psychological) to address cyber crime against women (local, regional, and global)? Map the efforts (lessons of best practice). 4. What mechanisms are appropriate for addressing cyber crime against women? Kictanet, with support from the IDRC will mount a validation workshop to review literature as well as the research strategy on Feb 16th, 2010 as detailed below We have limited spaces (free) for you or your colleague at the workshop. Kindly confirm attendance (off line) by Friday 13th, for planning purposes. *Programme* Venue: University of Nairobi, Chiromo Campus Arziki restaurant Date: Feb 16th, 2009 7.00-715: Welcome and introductions 7.15-9.00: presentation of concept Presentation of Literature review study Presentation of Data collection tools/methodology Discussions 9.00-9.30 Way forward

1 0

Fw: [i-network] Makerere University the Best in East Africa(Webometric Rankings(
by Walubengo J 11 Feb '10

11 Feb '10

Another gem from the Perl of Africa (.UG), Looks like in Kenya Strath Univ was 1st at No. 22 followed closely by UoN at No. 28....check this out @ http://www.webometrics.info/top100_continent.asp?cont=africa walu. --- On Thu, 2/11/10, Drake Patrick Mirembe <dmirembe(a)cit.mak.ac.ug> wrote: From: Drake Patrick Mirembe <dmirembe(a)cit.mak.ac.ug> Subject: [i-network] Makerere University the Best in East Africa To: "I-Network Uganda" <i-network(a)dgroups.org> Cc: "Francis Otto" <fotto(a)technology.ucu.ac.ug> Date: Thursday, February 11, 2010, 6:32 PM According to the new web-metric ranking, Makerere University is the highest ranked in East, Central and West Africa. I hope by July when the new ranking are released we will be at least among the best 5 in Africa. The disappointing issues is that their is no other Ugandan University in the top 100 in Africa. http://www.webometrics.info/top100_continent.asp?cont=africa Drake ________________________ Visit the I-Network website - www.i-network.or.ug The I-Network Dgroup is a platform for ICT Knowledge Sharing --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit [web site]( http://d2.dgroups.org/iicd/i-network/ ) Click [here]( mailto:[email protected] ) to unsubscribe The email is intended only for the recipients. The owners of the Dgroups cannot be held responsible for the contents of the email message.

1 0

(no subject)
by gathuri njorohio 11 Feb '10

11 Feb '10

Hi all listers Patrick Kariuki is seeking assistance to get attachment for his Diploma course in ICT which he is taking at Nairobi Institute of Business Studies. He is due to complete this June and would appreciate if he can get some industry experience. Kariuki can be reached on patkirio(a)yahoo.com Kindly assist Eng. Njorohio

2 1

Fw: [i-network] Kenyan Students Win Prestigious Cisco Networking Competition
by Walubengo J 11 Feb '10

11 Feb '10

mmmh, pinched this one from the neighbors in .UG. Nice to know your neighbors can celebrate your achievements... walu. --- On Wed, 2/10/10, Derek Sejjuko <dsejjuko(a)yahoo.com> wrote: From: Derek Sejjuko <dsejjuko(a)yahoo.com> Subject: [i-network] Kenyan Students Win Prestigious Cisco Networking Competition To: "I-Network Uganda" <i-network(a)dgroups.org> Date: Wednesday, February 10, 2010, 9:21 PM Hello All you might find this interesting to read; http://www.cisco.com/web/offer/em/pdfs_innovators/NAL/fy10/netriders.pdf?si… and about the contest http://newsroom.cisco.com/dlls/2009/prod_070709b.html Visit the I-Network website - www.i-network.or.ug The I-Network Dgroup is a platform for ICT Knowledge Sharing Visit web site Click here to unsubscribe The email is intended only for the recipients. The owners of the Dgroups cannot be held responsible for the contents of the email message.

1 0

Re: [kictanet] TECHNOPARK ALREADY ATTRACTS LOCAL INVESTORS
by charles nduati 11 Feb '10

11 Feb '10

hi listers, Take a look at today thursday 11/02/10 daily nation page 51 and see an advert by a local investor selling 1000 acres , near the technopark. this is very much in line with PS ndemo's vision and indeed they have even quoted the PS and have not bothered to ask for any feasability studies. well done PS and team. why do people wonder why kenyans out do their other african brothers? they are pretty fast in unlockng opportunities. we need to emulate this guys charles

1 0

lessons, snippets, from the visit by the Singaporeans
by Paul Kukubo 10 Feb '10

10 Feb '10

Dear listers lessons, snippets, from the visit by the Singaporeans<http://www.paulkukubo.com/?p=179> On behalf of the Kenya ICT Board I would like to thank those invited guests who made it to the Breakfast Presentation by the Singapore IDA International team. I have captured what I consider the gist of that presentation on my blog http://www.paulkukubo.com (which also updates my Facebook notes page). The actual presentation will only be up on the ICT Board website Friday morning once the Singapore team has made additions to it when the get back home. Otherwise visit, www.ida.gov.sg. Singapore provides an interesting benchmark for all nations when it comes to technology for better citizens services by government. Key to note is the 'whole-of-government' approach, 'many agencies, one government' strategy with an emphasis on delighting the customer (citizen, resident). For example it takes 2 hours to register a company and start trading with a single license. Government spending has also helped develop the industry cluster of high end technology service firms comprising big name multinationals, local firms and combinations of both. Thank you Paul Kukubo Chief Executive Officer, Kenya ICT Board PO Box 27150 - 00100 Nairobi, Kenya 12th Floor, Teleposta Towers Koinange Street Tel +254 20 2089061, +254 20 2211960 Fax: +254 20 2211962 Cell: + 254 735 180001 website: www.ict.go.ke skype: kukubopaul googletalk: pkukubo ____________________ Vision: Kenya becomes a top ten global ICT hub Mission: To champion and actively enable Kenya to adopt and exploit ICT, through promotion of partnerships, investments and infrastructure growth for socio economic enrichment Sent from Nairobi, Kenya

1 0

Jonathan B. Postel Technical Academy Created to Extend Internet Technical Skills in Kenya
by McTim 10 Feb '10

10 Feb '10

http://isoc.org/wp/newsletter/?p=1580 -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel

2 1