Fwd: (CGN) European Commission PQ response
The Co-operation WG may be interested in the following report of a reply by a European Commissioner to a European Parliamentary question about Carrier Grade NAT - not least because the reply refers to this WG by name. -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: (CGN) European Commission PQ response Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 08:37:47 +0000 From: Owen Bennett <owen@euroispa.org> To: DG-Euroispa cybersecurity <cybersecurity@euroispa.org> Dear EuroISPA Cybersecurity committee, The European Commission has published its answer to a recent European Parliament parliamentary question*concerning ISPs’ deployment of CGN (carrier-grade network access translation) and the so-called ‘going-dark’ problem.* To remind, ISPs are under increasing pressure from law enforcement with regard to their use of CGN technology – the fact of putting multiple users behind individual IP addresses is said to stifle law enforcement investigations of crimes with an online component. The Commission’s response to the parliamentary question is pertinent for EuroISPA in that it is one of the first times where the Institution has addressed the CGN matter in an official /on the record /capacity. As you will see, the Commission’s response falls short of calling for regulatory intervention to limit CGN deployment, and even goes as far as to label CGN deployment ‘unavoidable’. We will continue to monitor this matter at EU-level and keep members updated. Kind regards, Owen *** *Question of MEP Agnew (EFDD, UK), Carrier Grade Network Access Translation <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fTEXT%2bWQ%2bE-2017-001101%2b0%2bDOC%2bXML%2bV0%2f%2fEN&language=EN>, 17 February 2017* /[Europol recently held a meeting to discuss CGN technologies that have long been used by ISPs to delay the capex required to extend the current pool of IP addresses (CGN technologies are used by ISPs to share one single IP address among multiple subscribers at the same time)./ /Does the Commission agree that restricting the continued use of CGN, simply on the grounds that Europol finds it inconvenient to monitor, is a retrograde step and an unacceptable interference with current commercial practice and freedom of technological choice?]/ *Answer given by Commissioner Avramopoulos <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E-2017-001101&language=EN> on behalf of the European Commission, 26 June 2017 * /[The Commission is aware that law enforcement authorities have raised certain concerns regarding the increasing use of Carrier-Grade Network Address Translation (CGN) technology. CGN enables a single Internet Protocol (IP) address to be shared by potentially thousands or hundreds of thousands of subscribers at the same time since there is not enough capacity under the current IP version 4 (IPv) to meet demand. This makes it technically very difficult for an internet service provider to identify an individual subscriber in response to legitimate requests from law enforcement authorities. Consequently, it is difficult to attribute crime and identify criminals using that particular IP address. Europol thus has legitimate concerns regarding CGN or other forms of address sharing, which may also have a negative impact on fraud detection or intrusion detection systems. They may also have other negative consequences, such as overall performance degradation of connections or even, in some cases, certain applications not working at all. / / / /The expedited deployment of IP version 6 (IPv6)//on a global scale and by all stakeholders would mitigate the problems and also offer new opportunities to service providers. In the short term, however, the use of IPv4 address-sharing is unavoidable, as there are still a significant number of users, services and applications that function only with IPv4. At the same time, the Commission is not aware of any proposals to restrict the continued use of CGN, but rather of efforts being made to raise awareness about the issue, share best practices and find ways to facilitate the attribution of crime. It intends to raise the issue to RIPE (Réseaux IP Européens) via its representative who is chairing RIPE's Cooperation Working Group.]/ *** *Owen Bennett* Policy Executive *EuroISPA - European Internet Services Providers Association * Rue du Commerce 124/5 - 1000 Brussels T: +32 (0)2 550 41 22 www.euroispa.org <http://www.euroispa.org/> Follow us on Twitter *@euroispa <https://twitter.com/euroispa>* *EuroISPA is the world's largest association of Internet Services Providers, representing over 2500 ISPs across Europe.* EU Transparency Register ID Number: 54437813115-56
Hi Malcolm, all: Thanks for sharing this. I encourage anyone interested in this topic and potential areas of collaboration to check out a session organized by the RIPE NCC's own Richard Learning at EuroDIG 2017 earlier this month: https://eurodigwiki.org/wiki/Criminal_justice_on_the_Internet_%E2%80%93_iden... Best, -Michael __________________ Michael J. Oghia Independent #netgov consultant & editor Belgrade, Serbia Skype: mikeoghia Twitter <https://www.twitter.com/MikeOghia> *|* LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/mikeoghia> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Malcolm Hutty <malcolm@linx.net> wrote:
The Co-operation WG may be interested in the following report of a reply by a European Commissioner to a European Parliamentary question about Carrier Grade NAT - not least because the reply refers to this WG by name.
-------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: (CGN) European Commission PQ response Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 08:37:47 +0000 From: Owen Bennett <owen@euroispa.org> To: DG-Euroispa cybersecurity <cybersecurity@euroispa.org>
Dear EuroISPA Cybersecurity committee,
The European Commission has published its answer to a recent European Parliament parliamentary question*concerning ISPs’ deployment of CGN (carrier-grade network access translation) and the so-called ‘going-dark’ problem.*
To remind, ISPs are under increasing pressure from law enforcement with regard to their use of CGN technology – the fact of putting multiple users behind individual IP addresses is said to stifle law enforcement investigations of crimes with an online component.
The Commission’s response to the parliamentary question is pertinent for EuroISPA in that it is one of the first times where the Institution has addressed the CGN matter in an official /on the record /capacity.
As you will see, the Commission’s response falls short of calling for regulatory intervention to limit CGN deployment, and even goes as far as to label CGN deployment ‘unavoidable’.
We will continue to monitor this matter at EU-level and keep members updated.
Kind regards,
Owen
***
*Question of MEP Agnew (EFDD, UK), Carrier Grade Network Access Translation <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-% 2f%2fEP%2f%2fTEXT%2bWQ%2bE-2017-001101%2b0%2bDOC%2bXML% 2bV0%2f%2fEN&language=EN>, 17 February 2017*
/[Europol recently held a meeting to discuss CGN technologies that have long been used by ISPs to delay the capex required to extend the current pool of IP addresses (CGN technologies are used by ISPs to share one single IP address among multiple subscribers at the same time)./
/Does the Commission agree that restricting the continued use of CGN, simply on the grounds that Europol finds it inconvenient to monitor, is a retrograde step and an unacceptable interference with current commercial practice and freedom of technological choice?]/
*Answer given by Commissioner Avramopoulos <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do? reference=E-2017-001101&language=EN> on behalf of the European Commission, 26 June 2017 *
/[The Commission is aware that law enforcement authorities have raised certain concerns regarding the increasing use of Carrier-Grade Network Address Translation (CGN) technology. CGN enables a single Internet Protocol (IP) address to be shared by potentially thousands or hundreds of thousands of subscribers at the same time since there is not enough capacity under the current IP version 4 (IPv) to meet demand. This makes it technically very difficult for an internet service provider to identify an individual subscriber in response to legitimate requests from law enforcement authorities. Consequently, it is difficult to attribute crime and identify criminals using that particular IP address. Europol thus has legitimate concerns regarding CGN or other forms of address sharing, which may also have a negative impact on fraud detection or intrusion detection systems. They may also have other negative consequences, such as overall performance degradation of connections or even, in some cases, certain applications not working at all. /
/ /
/The expedited deployment of IP version 6 (IPv6)//on a global scale and by all stakeholders would mitigate the problems and also offer new opportunities to service providers. In the short term, however, the use of IPv4 address-sharing is unavoidable, as there are still a significant number of users, services and applications that function only with IPv4. At the same time, the Commission is not aware of any proposals to restrict the continued use of CGN, but rather of efforts being made to raise awareness about the issue, share best practices and find ways to facilitate the attribution of crime. It intends to raise the issue to RIPE (Réseaux IP Européens) via its representative who is chairing RIPE's Cooperation Working Group.]/
***
*Owen Bennett*
Policy Executive *EuroISPA - European Internet Services Providers Association * Rue du Commerce 124/5 - 1000 Brussels T: +32 (0)2 550 41 22 www.euroispa.org <http://www.euroispa.org/>
Follow us on Twitter *@euroispa <https://twitter.com/euroispa>*
*EuroISPA is the world's largest association of Internet Services Providers, representing over 2500 ISPs across Europe.*
EU Transparency Register ID Number: 54437813115-56
The commissioner in question is not in charge of DG Connect, as one might have expected, but DG Migration and Home Affairs. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/commissioners/2014-2019/avramopoulos_en https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/ But I believe Connect gave some input. :-) Gordon
On 28 Jun 2017, at 12:04, Malcolm Hutty <malcolm@linx.net> wrote:
The Co-operation WG may be interested in the following report of a reply by a European Commissioner to a European Parliamentary question about Carrier Grade NAT - not least because the reply refers to this WG by name.
////snip
On 28/06/2017 20:18, Gordon Lennox wrote:
The commissioner in question is not in charge of DG Connect, as one might have expected, but DG Migration and Home Affairs.
If the European Commission were minded to intervene to force operators to improve the traceability of online communications to facilitate law enforcement investigations, I would expect DG HOME would likely be the lead on that, or at least the prime instigator. So in this context I take it as a more interesting to hear from the Commissioner for Home Affairs that he accepts CGN is "unavoidable" than to hear the same thing from the Commissioner for the Digital Single Market. It seems a stronger signal that no regulatory intervention is likely, at least for the time being. -- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/ London Internet Exchange Ltd Monument Place, 24 Monument Street London EC3R 8AJ Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
Dear WG Members, I can confirm that DG HOME are the lead in the context of this messaging on CGN and LEA. Of course there are overlaps on this issue with other DG’s but Europol (EC3) come under the responsibility of DG HOME. Kind regards Richard Richard Leaning External Relations RIPE NCC
On 29 Jun 2017, at 09:39, Malcolm Hutty <malcolm@linx.net> wrote:
On 28/06/2017 20:18, Gordon Lennox wrote:
The commissioner in question is not in charge of DG Connect, as one might have expected, but DG Migration and Home Affairs.
If the European Commission were minded to intervene to force operators to improve the traceability of online communications to facilitate law enforcement investigations, I would expect DG HOME would likely be the lead on that, or at least the prime instigator.
So in this context I take it as a more interesting to hear from the Commissioner for Home Affairs that he accepts CGN is "unavoidable" than to hear the same thing from the Commissioner for the Digital Single Market. It seems a stronger signal that no regulatory intervention is likely, at least for the time being.
-- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/
London Internet Exchange Ltd Monument Place, 24 Monument Street London EC3R 8AJ
Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
Many thanks for signalling to the Group the answer to the PQ mentioned during the Budapest meeting. Group members might be interested to know there is also a second PQ on CGN for written answer, E-002829-17: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fTEXT%2bWQ%2bE-2017-002829%2b0%2bDOC%2bXML%2bV0%2f%2fEN&language=EN Achilleas -----Original Message----- From: cooperation-wg [mailto:cooperation-wg-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Malcolm Hutty Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 12:04 PM To: cooperation-wg@ripe.net Subject: [cooperation-wg] Fwd: (CGN) European Commission PQ response The Co-operation WG may be interested in the following report of a reply by a European Commissioner to a European Parliamentary question about Carrier Grade NAT - not least because the reply refers to this WG by name. -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: (CGN) European Commission PQ response Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 08:37:47 +0000 From: Owen Bennett <owen@euroispa.org> To: DG-Euroispa cybersecurity <cybersecurity@euroispa.org> Dear EuroISPA Cybersecurity committee, The European Commission has published its answer to a recent European Parliament parliamentary question*concerning ISPs’ deployment of CGN (carrier-grade network access translation) and the so-called ‘going-dark’ problem.* To remind, ISPs are under increasing pressure from law enforcement with regard to their use of CGN technology – the fact of putting multiple users behind individual IP addresses is said to stifle law enforcement investigations of crimes with an online component. The Commission’s response to the parliamentary question is pertinent for EuroISPA in that it is one of the first times where the Institution has addressed the CGN matter in an official /on the record /capacity. As you will see, the Commission’s response falls short of calling for regulatory intervention to limit CGN deployment, and even goes as far as to label CGN deployment ‘unavoidable’. We will continue to monitor this matter at EU-level and keep members updated. Kind regards, Owen *** *Question of MEP Agnew (EFDD, UK), Carrier Grade Network Access Translation <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fTEXT%2bWQ%2bE-2017-001101%2b0%2bDOC%2bXML%2bV0%2f%2fEN&language=EN>, 17 February 2017* /[Europol recently held a meeting to discuss CGN technologies that have long been used by ISPs to delay the capex required to extend the current pool of IP addresses (CGN technologies are used by ISPs to share one single IP address among multiple subscribers at the same time)./ /Does the Commission agree that restricting the continued use of CGN, simply on the grounds that Europol finds it inconvenient to monitor, is a retrograde step and an unacceptable interference with current commercial practice and freedom of technological choice?]/ *Answer given by Commissioner Avramopoulos <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E-2017-001101&language=EN> on behalf of the European Commission, 26 June 2017 * /[The Commission is aware that law enforcement authorities have raised certain concerns regarding the increasing use of Carrier-Grade Network Address Translation (CGN) technology. CGN enables a single Internet Protocol (IP) address to be shared by potentially thousands or hundreds of thousands of subscribers at the same time since there is not enough capacity under the current IP version 4 (IPv) to meet demand. This makes it technically very difficult for an internet service provider to identify an individual subscriber in response to legitimate requests from law enforcement authorities. Consequently, it is difficult to attribute crime and identify criminals using that particular IP address. Europol thus has legitimate concerns regarding CGN or other forms of address sharing, which may also have a negative impact on fraud detection or intrusion detection systems. They may also have other negative consequences, such as overall performance degradation of connections or even, in some cases, certain applications not working at all. / / / /The expedited deployment of IP version 6 (IPv6)//on a global scale and by all stakeholders would mitigate the problems and also offer new opportunities to service providers. In the short term, however, the use of IPv4 address-sharing is unavoidable, as there are still a significant number of users, services and applications that function only with IPv4. At the same time, the Commission is not aware of any proposals to restrict the continued use of CGN, but rather of efforts being made to raise awareness about the issue, share best practices and find ways to facilitate the attribution of crime. It intends to raise the issue to RIPE (Réseaux IP Européens) via its representative who is chairing RIPE's Cooperation Working Group.]/ *** *Owen Bennett* Policy Executive *EuroISPA - European Internet Services Providers Association * Rue du Commerce 124/5 - 1000 Brussels T: +32 (0)2 550 41 22 www.euroispa.org <http://www.euroispa.org/> Follow us on Twitter *@euroispa <https://twitter.com/euroispa>* *EuroISPA is the world's largest association of Internet Services Providers, representing over 2500 ISPs across Europe.* EU Transparency Register ID Number: 54437813115-56
participants (5)
-
Achilleas.KEMOS＠ec.europa.eu -
Gordon Lennox -
Malcolm Hutty -
Michael Oghia -
Richard Leaning