Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #64 - Contained Data PII Concerns

Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Mon, 15 February 2021 13:31 UTC

Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 746D13A09C9 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 05:31:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1152-bit key) header.d=tana.it
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NkBYmA2S0she for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 05:31:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14CF83A09C7 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 05:31:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=delta; t=1613395857; bh=ygYt6sleBUZRVQNugVCI0zM1CZg6TwCHQ+uSlvNUA8k=; l=1685; h=To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=Cc5aP3V95Q438h9MPPS9TaqsAH3uk4Ba/BcFTfJ0h650pNOkqNtbJE+Mg+YprfffM e9gAp66wkXo7ypWp56t7RmmxhFVc/D6Lcv2Bb7bl7lROfkoPs0K1r3GroHa0ug1if9 LsQv/USF1MquRFkhUa3LdJWShn7YZ/iBXDFO1Q9B9/skILBayTegKddj4mIj1
Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted)
Original-From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Received: from [172.25.197.111] (pcale.tana [172.25.197.111]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k, TLS: TLS1.3, 128bits, ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA id 00000000005DC050.00000000602A7791.00004EDE; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 14:30:57 +0100
To: dmarc@ietf.org
References: <MN2PR11MB435185A171029EF4282A2BF4F78B9@MN2PR11MB4351.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Message-ID: <7086a5e4-2a9c-bbdc-1969-f77d0d00fa38@tana.it>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2021 14:30:57 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR11MB435185A171029EF4282A2BF4F78B9@MN2PR11MB4351.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/Nb8Hv538l_li9_WEsyI0JYxcbmI>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #64 - Contained Data PII Concerns
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc/>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2021 13:31:04 -0000

On Fri 12/Feb/2021 21:30:38 +0100 Brotman, Alex wrote:
> Hello folks,
> 
> In ticket #64 (https://trac.ietf.org/trac/dmarc/ticket/64), it was suggested that a Privacy Considerations section may alleviate some concerns about the ownership of the data.  I created an initial attempt, and thought to get some feedback.  I didn't think we should go too far in depth, or raise corner cases.  Felt like doing so could lead down a rabbit hole of trying to cover all cases. This would go within a "Privacy Considerations" section.
> 
> * Data Contained Within Reports (#64)
> 
> Within the reports is contained an aggregated body of anonymized data pertaining
> to the sending domain.  The data is meant to aid the report processors
> and domain holders in verifying sources of messages pertaining to the
> 5322.From Domain.


I'd replace all those 5322.From Domain with main DMARC identifier.


> The data should not contain any identifying
> characteristics about individual senders or receivers.


The aggregated data refers to names and IP addresses of SMTP servers.  It 
cannot be used to identify individual users.


>  An entity
> sending reports should not be concerned with the data contained as
> it should not contain PII (NIST reference for PII definition), such as email addresses or
> usernames.


I'd substitute /should not/does not/.  Even if a server has a unique user, the 
domain name and the IP address are those of a public entity, not those of a 
private citizen.

The term Personally Identifiable Information (PII) is US-national.  I think 
just personal information is of broader use.  Personal data is also a valid 
alternative.


jm2c
Ale
--