IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: COVID-19 contacts tracker (Re: a brief pondering)

John Wroclawski <jtw@csail.mit.edu> Wed, 15 April 2020 19:35 UTC

Return-Path: <jtw@csail.mit.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 698523A086F for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 12:35:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.919
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 OlPrLVSleSZo for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 12:35:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ana-server.csail.mit.edu (ana-server.csail.mit.edu [18.26.1.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD6EC3A086B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 12:35:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ana-server.csail.mit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84619D384266; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:35:47 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mydomain = ana-server.csail.mit.edu
Received: from ana-server.csail.mit.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ana-server.csail.mit.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 1rtcRWyRQSEp; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:35:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from callisto-vii.cambridge.schlepp.org (c-66-30-11-134.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [66.30.11.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ana-server.csail.mit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7B017D384258; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:35:46 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.14\))
Subject: Re: COVID-19 contacts tracker (Re: a brief pondering)
From: John Wroclawski <jtw@csail.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <922752c9-7ac6-ff32-35c5-7035e49e22ff@network-heretics.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:35:44 -0400
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E1AE702B-A44D-4C11-A4D2-176794C1836B@csail.mit.edu>
References: <fd6b7ee2-cdbe-14a1-0087-ce61282b22f6@lear.ch> <29D0DCA7-1D72-428F-A6DD-05511D90C039@cable.comcast.com> <2fa6a8c8-7639-a378-2ff1-3f8697556b66@cisco.com> <24cd67ab-df5a-cc2f-745f-ace19d5325ea@network-heretics.com> <FD9C31D9-7113-40D7-8AB1-E581458DB02F@webweaving.org> <922752c9-7ac6-ff32-35c5-7035e49e22ff@network-heretics.com>
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.14)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/-f52AQY8cP7qpdjeN6LJ7cRqRi4>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 19:35:51 -0000

> On Apr 15, 2020, at 2:58 PM, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> wrote:
> 
> To be clear, I don't think this is a problem that can be solved by protocol design.   Unless/until we can actually audit both the hardware and software in our mobile devices, we're vulnerable to whatever the big companies put in those devices, and to whatever governments demand of them.

But these are two distinct issues.

It’s entirely possible to design a protocol that has specific, effective privacy preserving properties, and possibly even some interesting "subversion resistance” properties, and then subvert it. 

It’s also possible to design a protocol that doesn’t have those properties in the first place - at which point I don’t need to subvert it.

It seems to me that one of these approaches should still seem more attractive than the other one to the privacy-concerned, even if neither is perfect.

cheers, -john

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email