[dmarc-ietf] DMARCbis Privacy Considerations was: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-17.txt

[Scott Kitterman <[e-mail]>]

On Monday, August 29, 2022 11:09:50 AM EDT Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday, August 29, 2022 10:59:55 AM EDT Todd Herr wrote:
> > Version created from the pull request John mentioned on-list on August 28.
> 
> Thanks.
...
> 
> Also, I am reminded that since this document will obsolete RFC 9091 if
> approved, we need to incorporate the Privacy Considerations from that
> document instead of referencing them.  I'll prepare a recommend change for
> that.

I looked into this a bit and it turns out to be more complicated than I 
expected.

Currently DMARCbis has no Privacy Considerations section at all.  Generally, I 
think this is correct since the DMARC relevant privacy issues are tied to 
reporting, which is in separate drafts.  I do think though that since we are 
covering all aspects of DMARC record publishing in DMARCbis, there are a few 
specifics that should go in the main draft with pointers to the reporting 
drafts for relevant details.

RFC 9091 Privacy Considerations (which are currently incorporated by reference 
in DMARCbis) say that for PSDs, feedback MUST be limited to Aggregate Reports.  

I think it would be appropriate that DMARCbis have a short Privacy 
Considerations section which points out that putting an rua or ruf tag in your 
DMARC record may have privacy implications for organizations with pointers to 
the reporting drafts for details.  I would include something like if psd=y, 
MUST NOT also have an ruf= value in DMARCbis.

The bulk of the RFC 9091 Privacy Considerations text would then go in I-
D.ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting.  All that would be needed in I-D.ietf-dmarc-
aggregate-reporting Privacy Considerations is a relatively simple admonition 
to not send failure reports for PSDs.

If that seems reasonable to people, I'll prepare specifics for review.

Scott K