Re: [Asrg] C/R Thoughts: Take 1

"Jon Kyme" <jrk@merseymail.com> Tue, 13 May 2003 14:29 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14675 for <asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 13 May 2003 10:29:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h4DDtq227183 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 13 May 2003 09:55:52 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4DDtqB27180 for <asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Tue, 13 May 2003 09:55:52 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14664; Tue, 13 May 2003 10:29:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19FaoE-0004TV-00; Tue, 13 May 2003 10:31:14 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19FaoE-0004TS-00; Tue, 13 May 2003 10:31:14 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4DDsDB26936; Tue, 13 May 2003 09:54:13 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4DDlCB26520 for <asrg@optimus.ietf.org>; Tue, 13 May 2003 09:47:12 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14328 for <asrg@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 May 2003 10:20:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19Fafr-0004N4-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 13 May 2003 10:22:35 -0400
Received: from argon.connect.org.uk ([193.110.243.33]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19Fafq-0004N0-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 13 May 2003 10:22:34 -0400
Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 19Fagt-0001Ou-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 13 May 2003 15:23:39 +0100
Subject: Re: [Asrg] C/R Thoughts: Take 1
To: ASRG <asrg@ietf.org>
From: Jon Kyme <jrk@merseymail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--------=_ConnectMail.3.5.3.argon"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.5.3]
X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3
Message-Id: <E19Fagt-0001Ou-00@argon.connect.org.uk>
Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/asrg/>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 15:23:39 +0100

>> Issues like this:
>> http://www.toyz.org/SpamArrestSpams.html
>>
>> Summary: Alleges SpamArrest harvests sender addresses
>
>I see privacy issues for challenge/response systems, but that's not
>one.  

Perhaps I should have said "data protection" (as we call it in the UK).


>Ths SpamArrest abuse is a potential problem in any system where
>you let a third party with handle your mail.  It is a consideration
>in any system where that involves asking a third party anything about
>mail, including DNS blacklists.
>

Of course the *sender* isn't aware (in advance) that this particular
3rd party is handling the mail. 



>
>I think any spam filtering RFC ought to have a section on privacy
>like the required section on security.
>

That would be nice.  No negative privacy impact is a "requirement".
I think we had a fairly good consensus on the
Requirements...



--