Re: [apps-discuss] Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger-10.txt> (WebFinger) to Proposed Standard

Alissa,

It was suggested that we remove the word "implicit".  I'm OK with removing
it.  If we did that, would you want to add this new sentence or a modified
version of it?

Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:apps-discuss-
> bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alissa Cooper
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 11:31 AM
> To: ietf@ietf.org
> Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger-
> 10.txt> (WebFinger) to Proposed Standard
> 
> Given how little control Internet users already have over which
> information about them appears in which context, I do not have a lot of
> confidence that the claimed discoverability benefits of WebFinger
> outweigh its potential to further degrade users' ability to keep
> particular information about themselves within specific silos. However,
> I'm coming quite late to this document, so perhaps that balancing has
> already been discussed, and it strikes me as unreasonable to try to
> stand in the way of publication at this point.
> 
> Two suggestions in section 8:
> 
> s/personal information/personal data/
> (see http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-privacy-considerations-
> 06#section-2.2 -- personal data is a more widely accepted term and
> covers a larger range of information about people)
> 
> The normative prohibition against using WebFinger to publish personal
> data without authorization is good, but the notion of implicit
> authorization leaves much uncertainty about what I imagine will be a use
> case of interest: taking information out of a controlled context and
> making it more widely available. To make it obvious that this has been
> considered, I would suggest adding one more sentence to the end of the
> fourth paragraph:
> 
> "Publishing one's personal data within an access-controlled or otherwise
> limited environment on the Internet does not equate to providing
> implicit authorization of further publication of that data via
> WebFinger."
> 
> Alissa
> 
> On Mar 4, 2013, at 3:24 PM, The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> >
> > The IESG has received a request from the Applications Area Working
> > Group WG (appsawg) to consider the following document:
> > - 'WebFinger'
> >  <draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger-10.txt> as Proposed Standard
> >
> > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> > ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2013-03-18. Exceptionally, comments may
> > be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
> > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
> >
> > Abstract
> >
> >
> >   This specification defines the WebFinger protocol, which can be used
> >   to discover information about people or other entities on the
> >   Internet using standard HTTP methods.  WebFinger discovers
> >   information for a URI that might not be usable as a locator
> >   otherwise, such as account or email URIs.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The file can be obtained via
> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger/
> >
> > IESG discussion can be tracked via
> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger/ballot/
> >
> >
> > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > apps-discuss mailing list
> > apps-discuss@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss