[Community-Discuss] WHOIS data base access

Ronald F. Guilmette rfg at tristatelogic.com
Fri Dec 25 03:41:17 UTC 2020

Merry Christmas to all!

In message < at elandnews.com>,
"S. Moonesamy" <sm+af at afrinic.net> wrote:

>{... response snipped...}

I am not sure that it would be productive for me to try, yet again,
to make the points that I have tried to make on the topic of WHOIS
data base access, both historical and, in bulk. For whatever reasons,
I have not been entirely successful at getting across my fundamental

Nishal Goburdhan has posted to support my view that these records
*are* in fact already public... at least the present day versions
thereof... and that it is thus self-evident that AFRINIC's publication
of these records is *not* any kind of violation of Mauritian law.
(If it were, then Mr. Moonesamy and he fellow board members would
likely have been in jail long before now, because AFRINIC has been
publishing these same records that I am requesting, not just for
years, but indeed, ever since the beginning of AFRINIC, way back
in 2004.)

I have not asked for any information that was not, at some point in
time, being published, by AFRINIC, and via its publicly-accessible
port 43 WHOIS service. Neither have I asked for any information
that AFRINIC legal counsel has not already agreed may be made public,
under Mauritian law.

My requests have been far more modest. I have only requested that the
exact same unredacted records that are today accessible, albeit only
bit-by-bit, from the AFRINIC WHOIS server, be provided to me in a
more convenient and easy-to-process single large clump.

My other request, which is exactly as Nishal Goburdhan has accurately
described it, is just to have access also to those exact same public
records, but including even the prior versions of those records, and
including also even deleted records that *AFRINIC policy* and *only*
AFRINIC policy has decided should not be made available.

Nishal Goburdhan has quite rationally stated that the one and only
impediment to the fulfillment of these modest requests is *not*
Mauritian law, but only current AFRINIC policy... with emphasis on
the "current" part.

It is my hope that this current stumbling block, AFRINIC policy, will
be removed, so that I may make further progress in researching issues
relating to the misappropriation of valuable IP address space which is
under the administration of AFRINIC. Given that my investigations have
already resulted in the return, to the community, of millions upon
millions of dollars worth of valuable property, I believe that it is,
or at any rate should be, self-evident that it would be in the best
interests of the AFRINIC community to allow me to inspect *all* current
and historical public WHOIS records, and that any current AFRINIC policy
or policies that prevent this should be revised, via a consensus of the
membership, to instead permit it.


P.S. I cannot help but note also that Charman Moonesamy's opinions
regarding the legality of allowing parties outside of AFRINIC staff to
access both current and historical WHOIS records appear to depend on
who, exactly, is either asking for or receiving that access.

I, apparently, am unworthy of this information. By contrast the technical
representatives of APNIC that have been assisting the CEO to perform
the allegedly ongoing "audit" of these same records have been given full
carte blanche access to all of those same records.

If Charman Moonesamy is sincerly concerned about the possibility of violating
Mauritian law by allowing "outsiders" access to this same data, then I
suppose that he now has no choice but to file a police report and to
arrange to have Eddy Kayihura arrested for his wanton and abundant violations
of Mauritian privacy law, i.e. allowing the APNIC people to have a look see.

Of course, that would be a perfectly silly and absurd result of Charman
Moonesamy's interpretation of Mauritian law, and one that no one would
either expect or want. But I feel compelled to throw this absurd
hypothetical out onto the table, first to demonstrate just how absurd the
results would be if in fact Charman Moonesamy's interpretation of Mauritian
law were even remotely correct, but second and also, to ask the next
obvious question:

If Mauritian privacy law prohibits all except AFRINIC staff from seeing
all of the WHOIS records, then how did it come to pass that technical
representatives from APNIC were shown *all* of these same records?
And where was Charman Moonesamy's highly restrictive interpretation of
Mauritian law when THAT happened?

Charman Moonesamy cannot have it both ways. He cannot on a Sunday condone
the act of providing all of the WHOIS records, both past and present, to
his helpful friends from APNIC, and then on the following Monday declare
that it has somehow magically become illegal to give me the exact same
WHOIS records.

If the glaring inconsistancy here is not now obvious and apparent to all,
then the English language has lost all of its meaning.

More information about the Community-Discuss mailing list