Re: [DNSOP] DNS privacy draft

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Sun, 01 December 2013 20:13 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FB811AE036 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 12:13:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
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 yIMy_mAUk7J6 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 12:13:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.bortzmeyer.org (aetius.bortzmeyer.org [217.70.190.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA07E1AE007 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 12:13:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 562A53B76F; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 20:13:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 288A6190A36; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 21:09:31 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2013 21:09:31 +0100
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Message-ID: <20131201200931.GA31672@sources.org>
References: <20131127114007.GA3082@nic.fr> <1ACF9F7F-8D5B-4671-8DD4-213A984CBB3F@vpnc.org> <20131127153627.GA30675@nic.fr> <F033D08E-E08F-41FB-B6B1-C3B0F3417C94@vpnc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <F033D08E-E08F-41FB-B6B1-C3B0F3417C94@vpnc.org>
X-Transport: UUCP rules
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 7.2
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNS privacy draft
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2013 20:13:12 -0000

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 09:42:16AM -0800,
 Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote 
 a message of 52 lines which said:

> Ummm, yes, but your message (and the Introduction) made it sound
> like the emphasis of the draft is on listing the privacy
> implications, and not the suggested changes to deal with
> them. Choose a story and stick to it. :-)

Let me rephrase it to be sure I've understood: I should split the
draft in two, one draft only exposing the privacy issues and another
one (or several?) describing the proposed solutions. Correct? If so,
what is the opinion of the rest of this working group?

> We haven't gotten into commenting on the stuff in section 5. When we
> do, I'll point out the futility of gratuitous queries.

Please go ahead, you can discuss any part of the draft you want.

> "has a relationship" is fairly weak. Rendering the web page returned
> by a browser query can easily generate 50 DNS queries to places the
> user has never heard of. Your document needs to cover the privacy
> implications of DNS requests that were done without
> intention. Further, the world is more than browsers. The fact that
> an app I am using is doing a lookup for imap.badplace.org is also
> important. 

Send text :-) I suggest not to do this myself but to point to the
various studies using the DNS traffic to find out what the people are
doing. Would it address your request?