IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-privacy] Is there an official working definition for Privacy Online?

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Tue, 14 June 2016 18:43 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: ietf-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EBB812D8E2 for <ietf-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 11:43:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.816
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.816 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=V7hAQxfz; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com header.b=z3h3PJIY
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 LAAAXNX6U3vd for <ietf-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 11:43:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73D3F12D0A9 for <ietf-privacy@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 11:43:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.226.210.165]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u5EIhDLf000011 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 14 Jun 2016 11:43:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1465929806; x=1466016206; bh=ttDxv2/WaUWRnlZi8fx2BPwNhfbUeiv1mh/9UJGspTk=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=V7hAQxfzy+zBQwkNykSAIWc1jnzRKQzlAP0b6hJSghnMo/vXP9nPPjjDpMxS8g7yY NuYvoT9NGgg1oZwyDimhy29pMp9UZbQZjY0pSKS6X2eEmSJhWdUWa7RyYpr6Ha4kvs Uc7OmZLeY5CpfcyColBwbgdFYdlkOR9BZf7VyqbI=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1465929806; x=1466016206; i=@elandsys.com; bh=ttDxv2/WaUWRnlZi8fx2BPwNhfbUeiv1mh/9UJGspTk=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=z3h3PJIYhPZHpEBUZGIqw0/fhaTfHyjHGQP6XvGiLMA5Y5/py6CBolwLZ04YZXrYi i1l+SuUOMAlMjO65du1bmfKtlH62pY33QIUCNt7fv0NjaBTvcEtJpTH0ybIcqFUN1F em5oepKQnoH2rY4VzrACnX19Jk/M3uYAvOSl0L3w=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20160614111100.0b2a8cc8@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 11:37:01 -0700
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net, David Singer <singer@apple.com>, ietf-privacy@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <572BC47A.7080003@dcrocker.net>
References: <552FCC84.6040305@gmail.com> <CA+9kkMCYuEGRidB1D=SGA0qxk+SuX6+HyqToYDmqQVmpBskWrw@mail.gmail.com> <5530329E.4060608@dcrocker.net> <01F784DA-5FD5-4D1F-8613-C2E668EDA765@isoc.org> <55311CE9.9040003@dcrocker.net> <DB3PR07MB138A042321BB99DF9AB94A4BCE30@DB3PR07MB138.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <55313140.9040400@dcrocker.net> <015a01d0798d$509954c0$f1cbfe40$@huitema.net> <CABtrr-X6CgN3J0dA1YBED0j6K7D5Mt2NAbUwGF5E67BoFX9JUQ@mail.gmail.com> <57268D25.3070708@dcrocker.net> <029801d1a4b9$c3b57850$4b2068f0$@huitema.net> <F285E90F-4E8B-47BE-A0BF-3A24212C39D9@apple.com> <2DDB1AF6-563C-48F3-BF1F-A45038711703@isoc.org> <6DFAD6C9-4EA3-4042-A054-14C82CC48DFA@apple.com> <572BC47A.7080003@dcrocker.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-privacy/CI9k73-RiLTqTDpHA8hycIg9YTQ>
Subject: Re: [ietf-privacy] Is there an official working definition for Privacy Online?
X-BeenThere: ietf-privacy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Privacy Discussion List <ietf-privacy.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-privacy>, <mailto:ietf-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-privacy/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-privacy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-privacy>, <mailto:ietf-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 18:43:35 -0000

Hello,
At 15:08 05-05-2016, Dave Crocker wrote:
>As a social term, perhaps. Social discourse uses and often needs 
>vagueness and even ambiguity.
>
>But again:  How is it possible to use a term as a technical 
>reference, if there is not precision to its use?  This being the 
>IETF, and 'privacy' being a particularly fashionable term, the 
>question is fundamental.

That is a good question.  The regulatory perspective is different 
from the RFC 6973 perspective.  RFC 6973 mentions specific legal 
frameworks.  I would classify privacy under social instead of technical.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email