Executive Summary

The Internet infrastructure ecosystem is a foundational, but fragile, component of the global networked economy. The current state of this infrastructure is characterized by fragmentation, opacity, and legacy systems that undermine ethical and secure Internet operations. Participants in the meeting discussed critical challenges facing these infrastructure providers, including outdated technology, lack of accountability, governance gaps, and jurisdictional inconsistencies.

While Internet infrastructure operators are being called to take a more proactive role in combating harmful activity and enhancing trust, they encounter persistent obstacles such as vague regulations, commercial pressures, and geopolitical constraints. There was broad agreement that achieving a safer and more ethical Internet requires an inclusive, open, approach that ensures underserved communities are supported and that ethical values are embedded in infrastructure governance.

Key Themes and Discussion Points

1. Understanding the Internet Infrastructure Ecosystem

WSIS Alignment: C2 (Information and Communication Infrastructure), C6 (Enabling Environment)

The Internet infrastructure ecosystem is complex and often misunderstood.  A user’s request to view a website is typically processed by 4 or 5 entities who are generally unrelated to each other.  This process makes alignment on policy, regulatory, security and combatting harmful activity difficult.  To outside observers, it often appears that one participant in this process is simply avoiding accountability for an issue, when the reality is that the participant has no ability to address the issue.

Participants also discussed how underserved regions may be burdened by outdated and unsustainable systems. Entities in underserved regions may not have the resources to purchase the most current hardware or software, or entities providing equipment and software at lower costs may not provide the most current versions.

Key Takeaways:

• Visibility and modernization across infrastructure layers are urgently needed.
• Environmentally unsustainable and legacy hardware increase security and upgrade challenges.
• Fragmentation in infrastructure design and governance results in uneven capacity and accountability.

2. Defining and Implementing Responsible Internet Practices

WSIS Alignment: C6 (Enabling Environment), C10 (Ethical Dimensions)

Infrastructure providers must extend their responsibilities beyond the DNS layer, with support from governments through incentives and clearer policy frameworks. However, real-world implementation is challenged by legal ambiguities, commercial disincentives, and inconsistent cross-border laws.

Key Takeaways:

• Ethical responsibility should inform infrastructure decisions, not just commercial interests.
• Cross-jurisdictional legal fragmentation limits cohesive global responses.
• Proactive frameworks need to be built into infrastructure operations to mitigate harmful activity and promote responsibility.

3. Enhancing Cooperation and Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration

WSIS Alignment: C1 (Role of Governance Authorities), C11 (International and Regional Cooperation)

Participants emphasized that stakeholder collaboration—particularly between operators, governments, and civil society—is crucial to addressing complex issues like harmful activity and censorship. However, trust-building is hampered by regulatory barriers, commercial competition, and legal uncertainties.

Key Takeaways:

• Multi-stakeholder trust and collaboration are essential for a resilient Internet.
• Existing legal and competitive constraints hinder open dialogue.
• Unified policy and regulatory frameworks are needed to enhance cooperation.

4. Security and Harmful activity Mitigation in Practice

WSIS Alignment: C5 (Building Confidence and Security in the Use of ICTs)

Ethical operators are already taking steps to mitigate threats such as phishing, botnets, and malware. Yet, the response capacity remains uneven across regions, especially where infrastructure is outdated or lacks institutional support.

Key Takeaways:

• Harmful activity mitigation is essential for maintaining trust and security online.
• Timely and coordinated responses are critical but hard to achieve without infrastructure modernization.
• Capacity-building initiatives are needed in underserved regions to ensure equitable security and infrastructure resilience.

5. Inclusivity and Ethical Dimensions

WSIS Alignment: C3 (Access to Information), C8 (Cultural Diversity), C10 (Ethical Dimensions)

Creating a more inclusive Internet requires greater representation of community voices in decision-making. Rising digital authoritarianism and centralized control threaten Internet openness and equity.

Key Takeaways:

• Infrastructure decisions are dominated by narrow, commercially focused groups.
• Global disparities must be addressed through inclusive, community-informed governance.

Conclusion and Next Steps

The meeting concluded with a consensus on the urgent need to strengthen ethical responsibility and inclusivity in Internet infrastructure governance. Stakeholders called for coordinated action aligned with WSIS principles, particularly in promoting an enabling legal environment, enhancing trust and security, and ensuring inclusive digital development.

Recommended Actions:

• Develop frameworks for ethical governance of infrastructure, emphasizing inclusivity.
• Encourage international regulatory harmonization to ease cross-border collaboration.
• Support capacity building in underserved regions to ensure equitable security and infrastructure resilience.
• Facilitate regular multi-stakeholder forums for shared learning and collaborative problem-solving.

WSIS Action Line Summary Alignment