Re: [hrpc] "Anonymity is hard" (Farrell, Andersdotter)

[Niels ten Oever <[e-mail]>]

Thanks for this.

@Stephane - have you considered what kind of input you want on
draft-anonymity ? Or would you rather first create a new version?

Best,

Niels

On 07/23/2018 03:57 PM, Harry Halpin wrote:
> 
> 
> The definitions in the Pfitzmann are the standard definitions, but also
> rather informal. Note anonymity can be measured quantiatively, so we can
> tell which protocols are more anonymous than others using information
> theory/simulations, etc.:
> 
> "Towards an Information Theoretic Metric for Anonymity"
> https://bib.mixnetworks.org/pdf/serjantov2002towards.pdf
> 
> or newer work that shows anonymity exists in tension with latency,
> building nicely off of and formalizing Pfitzmann's definitions:
> 
> AnoA: Framework for Analyzing Anonymous Communication Protocols 
> https://eprint.iacr.org/2014/087.pdf
> 
> In general, the best thing for any new protocols is to minimize
> identifiers, encrypt all parts of a payload (see cleartext SNI issue
> TLS), and -  which almost no protocols today actually do - in protocols
> that use additional data for routing with an encrypted payload, keep the
> routing data indistinguishable from the payload. If all packets are
> indistinguishable in transit, this would make it harder for censorship
> and any other network-level discrimination, and increase protection for
> intermediary liability.
> 
> It may be useful for the new RG to help formulate guidance for new
> protocols, with support from HPRC for a human-rights angle.
> 
>   yours,
>     Harry
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>     *De: *"Robin Wilton" <[e-mail]>
>     *À: *"hrpc" <[e-mail]>
>     *Envoyé: *Lundi 23 Juillet 2018 14:45:23
>     *Objet: *Re: [hrpc] "Anonymity is hard" (Farrell, Andersdotter)
> 
>     I still think one of the best reference texts on anonymity,
>     linkability, etc., is Marit Hansen and Andreas Pfitzmann’s paper: 
> 
>     "Anonymity, Unlinkability, Undetectability, Unobservability,
>     Pseudonymity, and Identity Management –
>     A Consolidated Proposal for Terminology" 
> 
>     The definitive version is (I believe) v.31, hosted at TU Dresden,
>     but you can find it at the following link, along with one of Marit’s
>     presentations on Privacy by Design (in German, but also has pictures
>     ;^)  )
> 
>     https://www.privacydesign.ch/?s=hansen
> 
>     HTH,
>     Robin
> 
>         On 20 Jul 2018, at 19:29, [e-mail]
>         <mailto:[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>         Send hrpc mailing list submissions to
>         [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> 
>         To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://www..irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>         or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         [e-mail]
> 
>         You can reach the person managing the list at
>         [e-mail]
> 
>         When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>         than "Re: Contents of hrpc digest..."
>         Today's Topics:
> 
>           1. Re: anonymity is hard (Amelia Andersdotter)
>           2. Re: new title for draft-tenoever-hrpc-political
>              (Amelia Andersdotter)
>           3. Re: Draft: Rights for restricted content ([e-mail])
>           4. Re: Human Rights relating to racism and xenophobia (Seth
>         Johnson)
> 
>         *From: *Amelia Andersdotter <[e-mail]>
>         *Subject: **Re: [hrpc] anonymity is hard*
>         *Date: *20 July 2018 at 18:56:49 GMT+1
>         *To: *[e-mail]
> 
> 
>         On 2018-07-20 00:45, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
>             Hiya,
> 
>             Following up a bit on my comment on the anonymity draft,
>             I did a quick search using "anonymity is hard" and got [1].
>             That's a bit Tor-specific and maybe getting old, but it
>             does seem to touch on a lot of the points that I'd love
>             to see covered (mainly in draft text, not just by reference)
>             in this draft.
> 
>             There are probably lots of other references and materials
>             that could be used as a basis for text. I'd definitely
>             be willing to help edit some text if someone else has a
>             chance to write it, and I might even write a bit, but am
>             not (yet:-) promising that.
> 
> 
> 
>         Anonymity: A Comparison Between the Legal and Computer Science
>         Perspectives by Sergio Mascetti, Anna Monreale, Annarita Ricci,
>         and Andrea Gerino on page 85 in "European Data Protection -
>         Coming of Age" (Gutwirth, et al, ed.), Springer Verlag, 2013 is
>         a /really good essay/ that describes, albeit more verbosely, the
>         ideas I took up at HRPC re: anonymity.
> 
>         In a computer science setting (and by extension also in a
>         protocol setting) we can generalize tools such as
>         pseudonymisation, or data minimization, data obfuscation and
>         other concrete things to many different areas/pieces of
>         information/data. It makes some intuitive sense (in my mind)
>         too, that if many threats to anonymity identified in RFC6379,
>         RFC8280 among other places (fingerprinting, correlation, traffic
>         analysis, etc) are inferential in nature (basically following
>         Law of Large Numbers), then also solutions could aspire towards
>         to addressing the premises of, say, the Law of Large Numbers.
> 
>         And then have a negative definition of "anonymity", namely, that you
>         define what is "identifiability" (what do we mean when we say
>         someone is
>         identifiable wholly, partially or somehow?), and then leave it
>         at the
>         place where "anonymity" is that which in either case is not
>         "identifiable" (this is also pretty much the strategy adopted in
>         HR law
>         internationally and in the CoE).
> 
>         But I'd like to hear Stéphane's (and everyone else's) thoughts
>         on such a
>         direction of the draft.
> 
>         best regards,
> 
>         Amelia
> 
>             Cheers,
>             S.
> 
>             [1]
>             https://www.blackhat.com/presentations/bh-usa-02/bh-us-02-dingledine-anon.pdf
> 
> 
>             _______________________________________________
>             hrpc mailing list
>             [e-mail]
>             https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
> 
> 
> 
>         -- 
>         Amelia Andersdotter
>         Technical Consultant, Digital Programme
> 
>         ARTICLE19
>         www.article19.org
> 
>         PGP: 3D5D B6CA B852 B988 055A 6A6F FEF1 C294 B4E8 0B55
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>         *From: *Amelia Andersdotter <[e-mail]>
>         *Subject: **Re: [hrpc] new title for draft-tenoever-hrpc-political*
>         *Date: *20 July 2018 at 19:00:58 GMT+1
>         *To: *[e-mail]
> 
> 
>         On 2018-07-20 10:33, Corinne Cath wrote:
> 
>             I like a.) Notes on networking standards and politics part
>             of this
>             whole process imho is to get people to read the doc to begin
>             with,
>             which seems most likely with a clear and recognizable title.
>             my 2
>             cents, corinne 
> 
>         yeah, a)
> 
>         +1
> 
> 
>             On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 1:19 AM, Mark Perkins
>             <marknoumea=[e-mail]
>             <mailto:marknoumea=[e-mail]..org>> wrote:
> 
>                'Notes on networking standards and politics'
> 
>                get my vote!
> 
>                Mark Perkins
> 
>                On Friday, July 20, 2018, 10:10:27 AM GMT+11, Niels ten Oever
>                <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>             wrote:
> 
> 
>                Off-list discussion with Stephen resulted in a new option:
> 
>                'Notes on networking standards and politics'
> 
>                That gives us a few options:
> 
>                a) Notes on networking standards and politics
>                b) On Value Neutrality and the Politics of Standards
>                c) Notes on Value Neutrality and the Politics of Standards
>                d) ?
> 
>                Curious to hear what the RG thinks sounds best, new
>             suggestions
>                ofc also
>                welcome.
> 
>                Best,
> 
>                Niels
> 
>                On 07/20/2018 12:43 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>                 On 07/20/2018 12:38 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
> 
>                     Hiya,
> 
>                     On 19/07/18 23:33, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> 
>                         Hi all,
> 
>                         Thank you all very much for the spirited
>                         discussion at the
> 
>                session. To
> 
>                         resolve the issue with draft political and
>                         remove the last
> 
>                issue mention
> 
>                         blocking adoption I would like to propose to
>                         rename the draft:
> 
>                         On Value Neutrality and the Politics of Standards
> 
> 
>                     Meh:-)
> 
>                     How'd something more like "Some background on
>                     networking standards
>                     and politics" work? That seems to describe the
>                     content of the draft
>                     better to me, (modulo not having carefully read the
>                     latest rev,
> 
>                as I
> 
>                     admitted at the mic, so don't take me too seriously.)
> 
>                     My reason for suggesting that is to try end up with
>                     something that
>                     would be less surprising for an IETF (or IEEE 802 or
>                     W3C...)
> 
>                reader.
> 
> 
> 
>                 Exactly that audience is saying time and again that
>                 'technology is
>                 neutral' / 'protocols are neutral' / 'standards are
>                 neutral'.
> 
>                That is I
> 
>                 would like to address that in the title (and the draft).
> 
>                 Following work can then address how we could come up with
> 
>                approaches to
> 
>                 address that.
> 
> 
>                     Cheers,
>                     S.
> 
> 
> 
>                         Would that work for you all? I also added a few
>                         mentions of value
>                         neutrality (and the lack thereof) for
>                         consistency in the abstract,
>                         introduction, conclusion and the way forward.
> 
>                         Changes can be seen here:
> 
>                https://github.com/nllz/IRTF-HRPC/commit/03826cd73959e692bb1f7aa305f9fbdee325dbd2#diff-fb9d617868a367dd946ef225cc5e6de1
>                <https://github.com/nllz/IRTF-HRPC/commit/03826cd73959e692bb1f7aa305f9fbdee325dbd2#diff-fb9d617868a367dd946ef225cc5e6de1>
> 
> 
>                         Happy to discuss.
> 
>                         Best,
> 
>                         Niels
> 
> 
> 
>                --
>                Niels ten Oever
>                Researcher and PhD Candidate
>                Datactive Research Group
>                University of Amsterdam
> 
>                PGP fingerprint      2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
>                                  643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
>                _______________________________________________
>                hrpc mailing list
>                hrpc@irtf..org <mailto:hrpc@irtf..org>
>                https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>                <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc>
> 
>                _______________________________________________
>                hrpc mailing list
>                [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>                https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>                <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc>
> 
> 
> 
> 
>             -- 
>             Corinne Cath
>             Ph.D. Candidate, Oxford Internet Institute & Alan Turing
>             Institute
> 
>             Web: www.oii..ox.ac.uk/people/corinne-cath
>             <http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/people/corinne-cath>
>             Email: [e-mail] <mailto:ccath@turing..ac.uk> &
>             [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>             Twitter: @C_Cath
> 
> 
>             _______________________________________________
>             hrpc mailing list
>             [e-mail]
>             https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
> 
> 
> 
>         -- 
>         Amelia Andersdotter
>         Technical Consultant, Digital Programme
> 
>         ARTICLE19
>         www.article19.org
> 
>         PGP: 3D5D B6CA B852 B988 055A 6A6F FEF1 C294 B4E8 0B55
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>         *From: *[e-mail]
>         *Subject: **Re: [hrpc] Draft: Rights for restricted content*
>         *Date: *20 July 2018 at 19:23:58 GMT+1
>         *To: *Stephane Bortzmeyer <[e-mail]>
>         *Cc: *Amelia Andersdotter <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> 
> 
> 
>         For some old historical context Ted Nelson's Xanadu proposed and to
>         some extent implemented two-way links with payment or at least
>         statistics in mind.
> 
>         "Who points to me" is a generally difficult problem without either
>         brute force (google, web spiders in general) or some sort of
>         architected method (Xanadu) and even in those cases can be difficult
>         particularly if one wants some high degree of accuracy for payments
>         for example.
> 
>         I believe the basic idea in Xanadu was to use a transfinite* link
>         scheme (think: Dewey decimal system, a.b.c, a.x.b.c, etc) where
>         links
>         incorporated metadata. The person who probably understands this best
>         is Roger Gregory, a mathematician who worked with Nelson on the idea
>         and I still hear from.
> 
>           http://xanadu.com/tech/
> 
>         * The term "transfinite" is also used in reference to
>         classifications
>         of infinities in mathematics, no relationship, or only a passing
>         one.
> 
>         -- 
>                -Barry Shein
> 
>         Software Tool & Die    | [e-mail]             |
>         http://www.TheWorld.com
>         Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD       | 800-THE-WRLD
>         The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>         *From: *Seth Johnson <[e-mail]>
>         *Subject: **Re: [hrpc] Human Rights relating to racism and
>         xenophobia*
>         *Date: *20 July 2018 at 19:28:22 GMT+1
>         *To: *Corinne Cath <[e-mail]>
>         *Cc: *Mark Perkins <marknoumea=[e-mail]>, Hrpc
>         <[e-mail]>, Tony Rutkowski <[e-mail]>,
>         Amelia Andersdotter <[e-mail]>
> 
> 
>         Good points from Corinne -- except: state and private roles can be
>         distinguished.  That's in fact exactly what's needed to get clarity.
> 
>         On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 8:36 AM, Corinne Cath
>         <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>             Hi Mark,
> 
>             Some comments in-line:
> 
>             On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 1:15 AM, Mark Perkins
>             <marknoumea=[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
>                 Tony
> 
>                 For my Library and Information Studies Masters I studied
>                 the New World
>                 Information and Communication Order and all the
>                 controversy surrounding it,
>                 so I am particularly jealous of your collaboration with
>                 Sean MacBride.
> 
> 
> 
>             +1
> 
> 
> 
> 
>                 However, I do not draw the same conclusions as you from
>                 this.
> 
>                 One of the main issues of NWICO and the MacBride report
>                 was the unequal
>                 diffusion / flow of information and its centralisation
>                 in a few hands &
>                 colonial countries. The counter arguement was of one
>                 against censorship.
> 
>                 The Internet, and especially the Web changed this
>                 balance and the
>                 argument. For a while the new free flow of information
>                 was seen as by some
>                 as the New Revolution, though as always - social
>                 problems do not have
>                 technical solutions.
> 
>                 States have since gained in capacity & willingness to
>                 censor, in mass
>                 surveillance and to use the tools to repress opposition.
> 
>                 Corporations have moved from centres of information flow
>                 (the old
>                 paradigm) to centres of 'attention'.
> 
>                 There are also moves towards recentering the Internet,
>                 from intelligence
>                 at the edges to intelligence at the centre.
> 
>                 Your anecdote regarding MacBride and his deception
>                 regarding the Iran
>                 Revolution is revealing. The US/CIA backed Iranian
>                 surveillance apparatus
>                 (SAVAK) had repressed any secular opposition, leaving
>                 the mosque and bazaar
>                 the only places to organize. A similar process had
>                 occured prior (& post) to
>                 the Arab Spring, with similar backers but this time with
>                 much more
>                 sophisticated surveillance tools.
> 
>                 The main threats of xenophobia, racism, homophobia &
>                 misogny are in
>                 practice from states. This is not to minimize the
>                 effects of non-state
>                 actors on individuals - but it is states that have the
>                 surveillance tools
>                 and can compel the facebooks, googles, etc to hand over
>                 their data. And it
>                 is states that carry out the worst acts of xenophobia,
>                 racism, homophobia &
>                 misogny.
> 
> 
> 
>             I am not sure it is helpful to argue that states are 'more
>             evil' than
>             companies. I know its an American proclivity to worry mostly
>             about states
>             but from my perspective it is simply not possible to cleanly
>             separate what
>             nefarious things states do from what nefarious things
>             companies do. States
>             buy their surveillance tools from company, as well as
>             developing them in
>             house. They, as you indicate, get data from companies who
>             provide this
>             sensitive information because they are compelled to for
>             legal or economic
>             reasons.
> 
> 
> 
>                 Increasing tracability, or diminishing the options for
>                 pseudonymity /
>                 anonymity on the grounds of enhancing accountability
>                 will have the perverse
>                 effect of increasing the surveillance power of states
>                 and thus their powers
>                 of xenophobia, racism, homophobia & misogny. This has
>                 even been recognised
>                 as the case by UN Special Rapporteurs...
> 
> 
> 
>             Those same special rapporteurs have also carefully
>             considered the roll of
>             private actors in facilitating government surveillance. Imo,
>             any discussion
>             of the problem that actually gets to the root must be
>             include a careful
>             picture of the interplay between these two actors.
> 
>             Best,
> 
> 
> 
>                 My (more than) two pacific francs
> 
>                 Mark Perkins
> 
>                 On Thursday, July 12, 2018, 11:59:16 AM GMT+11, Tony
>                 Rutkowski
>                 <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
>                 Hi Amelia,
> 
>                 Perhaps one of the "lost in translation" problems here
>                 involves the way
>                 lawyers conceptualize and treat these matters.  In
>                 short, human rights
>                 law is principally manifested through international law
>                 in diverse
>                 forms.  My law school alma mater - Washington College of
>                 Law - has for
>                 many decades been a center for human rights law, and
>                 indeed created a
>                 Center for Human Rights and Humanitarian Law..  See
>                 https://www.wcl.american.edu/impact/initiatives-programs/center/
>                 Indeed, at the time, the dean was one of the world's
>                 prominent human
>                 rights jurists and several of my professors played
>                 leading roles in
>                 shaping the that body of law for some decades.  Other
>                 prominent law
>                 schools also have Human Rights Law programs.  See
>                 https://law.yale.edu/study-law-yale/areas-study/human-rights-law
>                  And,
>                 when I taught the graduate program course on international
>                 telecommunications law at NY Law School in the 1980s, I
>                 included human
>                 rights law material.
> 
>                 You might want to be aware also that the first major
>                 initiative to deal
>                 with human rights and new technologies including
>                 internets, was the
>                 Commission chaired by Sean MacBride in 1979 generally
>                 named after him.
>                 Sean at the time had just won the Nobel Peace Prize for
>                 his formation of
>                 Amnesty International, the International Commission of
>                 Jurists, and in
>                 general instantiating much of what constitutes human
>                 rights law in
>                 international instruments and bodies.  Although
>                 controversial at the
>                 time, the report which the Commission produced perhaps
>                 remains today the
>                 most comprehensive study done on the subject.  See
>                 http://www.un-documents.net/macbride-report.pdf
> 
>                 Because of my engineering-legal roles at the FCC and in
>                 inter-agency and
>                 international bodies at the time, I had the good fortune
>                 of being
>                 seconded to be Sean's technical advisor not only at the
>                 seminal New
>                 Delhi meeting of the Commission  (see attached), but
>                 also over the many
>                 months of followup meetings with him in Paris, Geneva,
>                 and New York.  We
>                 became friends.  Now about 40 years later, the input
>                 provided seems
>                 still largely accurate in envisioning subsequent decades.
>                 http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0004/000491/049100eb.pdf
> 
>                 There is a cautionary note here that is worth telling.
>                  Sean in his
>                 public speeches would hold up audio tapes as an example
>                 of an "internet
>                 packet technology" that was at that time being used by
>                 activists
>                 attempting to bring about regime change in Iran.  Sean
>                 was passionate
>                 about human rights and viewed his role leading the
>                 Commission as a kind
>                 of culmination of his long activist life - which also
>                 included major
>                 roles in the formation of the Irish Republic and Sinn
>                 Féin.  (Sean's
>                 mother was Maud Gonne, and his father was hanged in the
>                 Easter Uprising
>                 when he was 14).   However, when the outcome of the
>                 Iranian Revolution
>                 wasn't quite the human rights friendly regime he
>                 anticipated, he became
>                 somewhat despondent and largely disappeared from public
>                 view - passing
>                 away a few years later in his mother's famous Roebuck
>                 House in Dublin.
> 
>                 The reason that this note of caution is worth telling,
>                 is that after the
>                 1988 Melbourne Treaty enabling international public
>                 internets
>                 (notwithstanding the KGB's vocal expression of concern),
>                 the DARPA
>                 internet began to be advanced in the 1990s as an
>                 instrument of group
>                 activism and regime change.  However, it became quickly
>                 apparent that
>                 there were attributes of the platform that could have
>                 potentially
>                 catastrophic societal consequences via both state and
>                 non-state actors.
>                 The past several years have significantly amplified the
>                 concern and the
>                 trends are not good.
> 
>                 --tony
> 
>                 On 11-Jul-18 6:02 PM, Amelia Andersdotter wrote:
> 
>                     On 2018-07-10 22:51, Tony Rutkowski wrote:
> 
>                         Hi Niels,
> 
>                         Clearly the additional protocol is regarded as
>                         human rights law.
> 
>                     It's "international law".
> 
>                     I think a useful way to think about it (for myself),
>                     is that human
>                     rights imply obligations on states (or companies)
>                     with respect to
>                     individuals/private persons or groups of
>                     individuals/private persons
>                     acting in a private/individual capacity.
> 
>                     While "international law" in a more generic sense
>                     may also entail
>                     agreements between governments on competencies they
>                     should grant
>                     institutional actors (such as public authorities,
>                     international bodies)
>                     or legal persons (companies, NGOs, what have you).
> 
>                     I have never come across the use of the word "human
>                     rights law" for
>                     international agreements that aim to steer
>                     governments in the direction
>                     of providing rights, duties or competencies to
>                     public authorities (I may
>                     not even, in general, have come across the word
>                     "human rights law", but
>                     it's a separate issue, I guess).
> 
>                     best regards,
> 
>                 _______________________________________________
>                 hrpc mailing list
>                 [e-mail]
>                 https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
> 
>                 _______________________________________________
>                 hrpc mailing list
>                 [e-mail]
>                 https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
> 
> 
> 
> 
>             --
>             Corinne Cath
>             Ph.D. Candidate, Oxford Internet Institute & Alan Turing
>             Institute
> 
>             Web: www.oii..ox.ac.uk/people/corinne-cath
>             Email: [e-mail] & [e-mail]
>             Twitter: @C_Cath
> 
>             _______________________________________________
>             hrpc mailing list
>             [e-mail]
>             https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>         _______________________________________________
>         hrpc mailing list
>         [e-mail]
>         https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
> 
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     hrpc mailing list
>     [e-mail]
>     https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> hrpc mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
> 

-- 
Niels ten Oever
Researcher and PhD Candidate
Datactive Research Group
University of Amsterdam

PGP fingerprint	   2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
                   643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3