Re: [hrpc] re history lessons

Niels ten Oever <mail@nielstenoever.net> Mon, 03 May 2021 14:52 UTC

Return-Path: <mail@nielstenoever.net>
X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C050A3A16E9 for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 May 2021 07:52:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.92
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 yuPkQ8VzyIM6 for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 May 2021 07:52:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.88]) (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 E3DA23A16ED for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Mon, 3 May 2021 07:52:28 -0700 (PDT)
To: hrpc@irtf.org
References: <mailman.2330.1620051780.7119.hrpc@irtf.org> <CAB2unbM8viRjU_eE2gyAFYS14=3DVUthDbnDHVaUZhp97d606w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Niels ten Oever <mail@nielstenoever.net>
Message-ID: <8b4d062e-6295-420e-016c-f80f35ce16af@nielstenoever.net>
Date: Mon, 03 May 2021 16:52:25 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAB2unbM8viRjU_eE2gyAFYS14=3DVUthDbnDHVaUZhp97d606w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Authenticated-As-Hash: f1842a279235a42f6aa2a2a81130733515c5a4ec
X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.greenhost.nl
X-Scan-Signature: a2d32f98be707cbcda8602d5fffa976a
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hrpc/mtya2nbxTi_cashYcJsVTjJMMHI>
Subject: Re: [hrpc] re history lessons
X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: hrpc discussion list <hrpc.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/hrpc>, <mailto:hrpc-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/hrpc/>
List-Post: <mailto:hrpc@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hrpc-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc>, <mailto:hrpc-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 May 2021 14:52:34 -0000

On 03-05-2021 16:43, Sandra Braman wrote:
> Point taken, Niels, re the archive -- have read most of it but will ensure it is all read and reviewed for its attention to this particular question; will return to the list if questions remain.

One of the reasons was that security considerations are mandatory for RFCs since 1989, and privacy consideration are not obligatory. Thus referring to security considerations could have set the bar too high for the work on human rights considerations guidelines. More on the relation between security and privacy considerations can be found in the excellent work by Nick Doty on this:

Doty, Nick. “Reviewing for Privacy in Internet and Web Standard-Setting.” In Security and Privacy Workshops (SPW), 2015 IEEE, 185–92. IEEE, 2015.

Doty, Nick. “Enacting Privacy in Internet Standards.” University of California, Berkeley, 2020. https://npdoty.name/enacting-privacy/.

> 
> Another, if I may -- It turns out, according to Mallory and others, code 451 has not actually been useful. What do members of this group make out of the fact that only one RFC since publication of 8280 has addressed human rights considerations, and that was the right to bear arms?  Is it expected that publication of the guidelines document currently in progress will make a difference?  Any advice regarding where I can turn for explanations of this?

Many more drafts have actually been reviewed (with the methodology that is described in the guidelines document), which has impacted drafts. The end-goal is not to get a section, but for the actual considerations to have been made [0].

Best,

Niels

[0] A couple of examples can be found here: https://gitlab.com/gurshabad/documents/-/tree/master


> 
> Thanks again --
> 
> Sandra
> 
> _______________________________________________
> hrpc mailing list
> hrpc@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
> 

-- 
Niels ten Oever, PhD
Postdoctoral Researcher - Media Studies Department - University of Amsterdam
Research Fellow - Centre for Internet and Human Rights - European University Viadrina
Associated Scholar - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - Fundação Getúlio Vargas
Affiliated Factulty - Digital Democracy Insitute - Simon Fraser University

https://nielstenoever.net - mail@nielstenoever.net - @nielstenoever - +31629051853
PGP: 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3

Read my latest article on Internet infrastructure governance in New Media & Society here: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1461444820929320