Enforcement of Non-Public Registration Data Disclosure Request Obligations
October 2025
Percentage of Complaints Received by Reporter Type
Complaints Received by Reporter Type
| Complaint Type | Reporter Type | OCT 2025 | SEP 2025 - Present |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disclosure of gTLD Registration Data | Authorized Representative of Registrant | 1 | |
| Disclosure of gTLD Registration Data | Information Security Researcher | 1 | 1 |
| Disclosure of gTLD Registration Data | IP Lawyer/Brand Protection | 4 | |
| Disclosure of gTLD Registration Data | LEA, Consumer Protection, Government or Data Protection Agency | 6 | 11 |
| Disclosure of gTLD Registration Data | Other | 4 | 6 |
| Disclosure of gTLD Registration Data | Registrant - Former | 1 | 3 |
| DNS Abuse and Other Types of Abuse | Other | 1 | |
| DNS Abuse and Other Types of Abuse | UDRP/URS - Respondent | 1 | |
| Total | 12 | 28 |
Reporter type is selected by the complainant at the time the complaint is submitted and is not determined by ICANN Contractual Compliance.
Complaint received totals include all complaints in which the complainant specifically selected the disclosure complaint webform, as well as complaints identified by ICANN Contractual Compliance as involving a request for disclosure, even if they were submitted through a different webform. In the latter situation, complaints submitted under a different webform (e.g., abuse or UDRP) may not appear in the report until ICANN Contractual Compliance has completed its review and determined that they involve allegations related to disclosure requirements.
Due to rounding, percentages may not always appear to add up to 100%.
Invalid Complaints Received Against Registrars by Complaint Type
| Complaint Type | Reason(s) Why Complaints Were Deemed Invalid | OCT 2025 | SEP 2025 - Present |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disclosure of gTLD Registration Data | The complaint is invalid or not actionable because the full registration data of the Proxy Service registrant is published in the RDDS. | 3 | 4 |
| Disclosure of gTLD Registration Data | The complaint is invalid or not actionable because there is no evidence of a Disclosure Request submitted to a registrar or registry. | 1 | 1 |
| Disclosure of gTLD Registration Data | The complaint is out of scope because customer service issues are outside of ICANN's contractual authority. | 1 | |
| Disclosure of gTLD Registration Data | The complaint is out of scope because it is a duplicate of a closed complaint. | 1 | 1 |
| Disclosure of gTLD Registration Data | The complaint is out of scope because it is regarding a country-code top-level domain. | 1 | |
| Disclosure of gTLD Registration Data | The complaint is out of scope because the complainant did not provide the requested information. | 1 | 2 |
| DNS Abuse and Other Types of Abuse | The complaint is out of scope because the complainant did not provide the requested information. | 2 | |
| DNS Abuse and Other Types of Abuse | The domain is suspended and suspension is a reasonable response to the abuse report. | 1 | |
| Total | 6 | 13 |
Complaints Resolved with Registrars
| Complaint Type | Reason(s) Why Complaints Were Resolved | OCT 2025 | SEP 2025 - Present |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | ||
| Total | 0 | 0 |
Percentage of Closed Complaints Displaying Privacy, Proxy or Redacted Data in RDDS
Closed Complaints Displaying Privacy, Proxy or Redacted Data in RDDS
| Complaint Category | OCT 2025 |
|---|---|
| Privacy | 1 |
| Proxy | 4 |
| Total | 5 |
This chart includes all valid and invalid complaints that Contractual Compliance determined were concerning domain names utilizing a Privacy Service, Proxy Service or were otherwise redacted under Section 9.2 of the Registration Data Policy in the RDDS. It does not include complaints where ICANN Contractual Compliance was unable to make such determination or the requested contact information was publicly available in the RDDS.
As of September 2025, disclosure requirements do not extend to underlying contact information of Privacy and Proxy Customers. Such requirements are currently contemplated by the recommendations of the Privacy & Proxy Services Accreditation Issues (PPSAI) Policy Development Process, the recommendations of which have been adopted by the ICANN Board but not yet implemented into Consensus Policy. An explanation as to how current disclosure requirements apply to the categories within this chart is provided below:
Privacy: A Privacy Customer uses substitute contact information (e.g., address, email, etc.) of a privacy service for display in the RDDS but remains the registrant of record. The Registrant Name and/or Organization are redacted in the RDDS and disclosure requirements under Section 10 of the Registration Data Policy apply as to those redacted fields only.
Proxy: A Proxy Customer licenses the use of a domain name from a Proxy Service. The Proxy Service is the registrant of record. In accordance with the Registration Data Policy publication requirements, the full Proxy Service (and registrant) information is published in the RDDS, and is therefore, not subject to disclosure requirements under Section 10 of the Registration Data Policy.
Redacted: Non-public registration data that is redacted in the RDDS is subject to disclosure requirements under Section 10 of the Registration Data Policy.