Re: [Gendispatch] Updated draft: Policy experts are IETF stakeholders

[Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]>]

>>> While policy advice on technical documents can certainly be helpful,
>>> it is simply not possible to provide useful policy advice without a
>>> clear understanding of the technology. That's how you end up with
>>> cryptographers repeatedly explaining why we can't put back doors in
>>> cryptosystems and policy people telling us we have to, just nerd
>>> harder.
>> 
>> Don't misunderstand me, I do think that backdoors in crypto are a bad
>> idea, but: is the cryptographers' explanation of why we can't have them
>> a technical or a policy argument? I always understood it as "if we do,
>> there is no way to eliminate the risk that they will fall into the wrong
>> hands", but whether that risk is acceptable or not and under which
>> conditions is a policy decision, not a technical one.
>
> I think this shows that there is not a separation between “policy” and
> “technology”.   Many (perhaps most) technology decisions are also
> policy decisions.   It doesn’t work to think that they are separate domains.   

It's an issue with the problem specification / requirements.
The technology is developed to address the spec.
If the spec says, "Don't allow anyone else to read the data," that is different from, "Generally keep it safe, but allow law enforcement to read it."

So, the problem definition is a policy thing.
The solution technology is just that: a solution.

The problem definition may need iteration with feedback from the technologists: "We cannot solve this problem as stated, because xyz. But we could solve it if you stated it like this or that."

Having wide input (user communities, societies, governments, et al.) on the problem statement is surely a good thing. It is kind of nice to be developing solutions that will make things people want to use.

Engineers, are, however, free to limit which projects they work on within the constraints of their governments.
Engineers' employers are, also within the constraints of their governments, free to choose how their staff spend their work time.

Adrian