Re: [hrpc] My suggestion for the attribution paragraph

[Mark Perkins <[e-mail]>]

An annoying P.S.: just for the record I hope this paragraph does not 
encourage protocol developers to design protocols that can attribute 
certain action to an individual or lead to identification of people. I 
hope it doesn't legitimize attribution using protocols, with no 
accountability or checks and balances. Attribution features can be 
abused. I still don't think attribution should have been included at 
all, but that ship has sailed. So, I compromise.

MP>> This is exactly my fear, excepting that I disagree that "that ship 
has sailed", and am still not sure that consensus has been reached on 
this issue...

Mark P.

Le 12/03/2021 à 05:34, farzaneh badii a écrit :
> Thank you Gurshabad,
>
> Yes this is fine, though I would have removed "may.. be" from the 
> following sentence and replace it with "is".
> attribution on an individual level [may] *is not [*be] consistent with 
> those particular human rights.  and would have removed individual from 
> "i.e. mechanisms in protocols or architectures
> that are designed to make communications or artifacts attributable to 
> acertain computer*or individual)*"
>
> I can't think of a text that captures Mallory's suggestion right now 
> but I am not insistent on further changes to be applied. So don't want 
> to hold you back.
> All good and thank you for your hard and excellent work.
>
>
> An annoying P.S.: just for the record I hope this paragraph does not 
> encourage protocol developers to design protocols that can attribute 
> certain action to an individual or lead to identification of people. I 
> hope it doesn't legitimize attribution using protocols, with no 
> accountability or checks and balances. Attribution features can be 
> abused. I still don't think attribution should have been included at 
> all, but that ship has sailed. So, I compromise.
>
>
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 1:00 PM Gurshabad Grover 
> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>     Thanks, Farzaneh.
>
>     I was referring to these suggestions (which came through well to
>     my mail
>     at least), which I mostly incorporated. I realised from your chat
>     messages during hrpc today that you were highlighting the
>     importance of
>     removing the reference to 'law enforcement agencies'. Taking that and
>     the recent suggestions into account, would this text be fine?
>
>     """
>     Question(s): Can your protocol facilitate a negatively impacted
>     party's
>     right to the appropriate remedy without disproportionately impacting
>     other parties' human rights, especially their right to privacy?
>
>     Explanation: Attribution (i.e. mechanisms in protocols or
>     architectures
>     that are designed to make communications or artifacts attributable
>     to a
>     certain computer or individual) may help victims of crimes in seeking
>     appropriate remedy.  However, attribution mechanisms may impede the
>     exercise of the right to privacy.  The Special Rapporteur for
>     Freedom of
>     Expression has also argued that anonymity is an inherent part of
>     freedom
>     of expression. [Kaye] Considering the adverse impact of attribution on
>     the right to privacy and freedom of expression, enabling
>     attribution on
>     an individual level may not be consistent with those particular human
>     rights.
>     """
>
>     On a finer point: I do not think that it is appropriate to remove 'the
>     right to remedy' from the 'Impacts' section, because it is precisely
>     what this section about (regardless of the final position it takes).
>
>     -Gurshabad
>
>
>     On 3/11/21 11:19 PM, farzaneh badii wrote:
>     > Seems like the suggestion I made did not come through because I
>     > strike-through
>     > Screen Shot 2021-03-11 at 12.44.34 PM.png
>     >  that didn't appear on the mailing list archive so I took a
>     screenshot
>     > of the changes I suggested which is attached.
>     >
>     > I will rewrite it here.
>     > Farzaneh
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > hrpc mailing list
>     > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>     <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc>
>     >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> hrpc mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc


-- 
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus