Before: Arbitrator name arbitor (A), Respondents: Sherlock H(R1), J H(R2), Claimant: CAcert (C1), Case: a20120331.1

Former parties: Werner D. for Support (C2).

History Log

Link to Arbitration case a20120331.1 (Private Part), Access for (CM) + (A) only)

EOT Private Part

Original Dispute

Discovery 1

Discovery 2

FrOSCon 2016 session - future of 25 arbitration cases from leaving team members

At FrOSCon 2016 members of Arbitration, Board and Support took part in a session on possible withdrawal of cases by CAcert(Support)/CAcert and prior clarification about claimants. On 2016-08-23 the initial report of that FrOSCon 2016 session, Protocol - FrOSCon session - future of 25 arbitration cases from leaving team members, was posted on the board and arbitration mailing lists for review and discussion.

The executive "decisions" taken during the FrOSCon 2016 Session (and also regarding additional cases) were confirmed by board motion m20160921.2 on 2016-09-25:

Resolved, that board withdraws the cases as mentioned in the emails https://lists.cacert.org/wws/arc/cacert-board/2016-08/msg00009.html and https://lists.cacert.org/wws/arc/cacert-board/2016-08/msg00017.html acting for CAcert as claimant of that cases.

The detailed background, proceedings and the initial report of the FrOSCon 2016 session are publicly available as FrOSCon 2016 Session Report.

FrOSCon 2016 session - review of case a20120331.1 - "Bogus Account"

At the FrOSCon 2016 Session case a20120331.1 - "Bogus Account" was put up for review as all who were present at the session agreed that it fitted the criteria for review:

For this case this meant that Support would now assume the role of claimant and that the original claimant should be considered as former claimant, having been dismissed from the dispute.

The subsequent review of this case at FrOSCon 2016 made Support decide to withdraw the case as claimant as shown by the relevant section of the FrOSCon 2016 report posted on the board and arbitration mailinglists on 2016-08-23:

6. https://wiki.cacert.org/Arbitrations/a20120331.1
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Bogus Account"

 * summary of dispute:
"at the "List of Tverify Admins" I stumbled over the entry "The Most
Reverend Sherlock H[...]. He even has 150 points, yet from one single
TTP assurance."
dispute against user to change to ral name and to revoke certificates,
though they are expired, maybe delete account
dispute against assurer to warn him for giving wrong assurances.

 * support: analogue as above, no CCA, no AP, please hand back to support
 * board: ok

[note of [...] when preparing protocol:
Further below there is a note by the filing person, that it was a known
fake account "that will be deleted anyway in the near future, so there
is no special action needed"
- unclear if and if yes how this was done - no arbitration case known
for this]

FrOSCon 2016 session - review of case a20120331.1 - "Bogus Account" - comments received

The review of this case as reported on the board and arbitration mailinglists led to minor comments posted on the board and arbitration mailinglists on 2016-08-24 (only relevant part included here for brevity). None of the comments came from the original claimant:

[...]

> - unclear if and if yes how this was done - no arbitration case known
> for this]

Okay, and you asked for samples of fake account data previously ...

[...]

The reply tries to explain to the member that Support has no inherent reason for looking at a name nor does Support has any means to determine whether a name actually belongs to a person or not:

[...]

> Okay, and you asked for samples of fake account data previously ...

No, I did not. And neither [...] nor [...] did. They knew about the nature
of the names in the cases that we touched. And they knew about this one.

The questions [...] asked were:
- with which authority did support look at those data
- which authority does support have to know that something really is not
the name of a person. A lot of names are allowed in some countries.

[...]

Ruling

None - claimant C1 withdrew case on 2016-08-20.

Similiar Cases

a20080702.1

User requests to delete account with Assurance Points

a20090618.3

Assurer requests to delete account

a20090618.5

User requests to delete account with no Assurance Points

a20090826.1

User wants account deleted, no Assurance Points, no certificates

a20090926.1

User wants account deleted, no Assurance Points, no certificates

a20110120.2

Account Removal w/ intermediate ruling

a20110110.1

Please Delete my Account (Is Assurer)

a20110131.1

Account Removal Olivier F (Is Assurer)

a20090510.3

Assurer with alter-ego even assured himself more than once

a20110221.1

PII and problematical sys settings on 1057 of 1074 deleted accounts cases still remains in database

a20110315.1

Domain dispute/Adminitrative Delete Account

a20091124.1

Arbitration request: wrong DoB moved to Administrative Delete Account

a20100420.1

Name dispute, User did not responded to supports emails

a20100701.1

violation of CCA 2.5.2

see also: Arbitrations Training Lesson 20 - Arbitration Case - Delete Account Request


Arbitrations/a20120331.1 (last edited 2016-10-22 12:56:36 by PietStarreveld)