IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IETF privacy policy - still a bad idea

todd glassey <tglassey@earthlink.net> Sat, 24 July 2010 17:06 UTC

Return-Path: <tglassey@earthlink.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 426213A69CB for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 10:06:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.188
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.188 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.411, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O9mHFJfZE8Hf for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 10:06:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.63]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F34A43A6827 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 10:06:48 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=frdi8sBr62chSvZkpjEb34u0mF7jCNXsCegqfgf0gbSqWBb2WbliVIdUHQbNYjzt; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [67.180.133.66] (helo=[192.168.1.100]) by elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <tglassey@earthlink.net>) id 1OciBo-0005hl-5x for ietf@ietf.org; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 13:07:08 -0400
Message-ID: <4C4B1DB9.6000503@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2010 10:07:05 -0700
From: todd glassey <tglassey@earthlink.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.7) Gecko/20100713 Thunderbird/3.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: IETF privacy policy - still a bad idea
References: <20100721223355.1728.qmail@joyce.lan> <CF9D8943-5A46-4BCA-9A2A-27CBFFA04038@cisco.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1007241831100.1584@joyce.lan>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1007241831100.1584@joyce.lan>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ELNK-Trace: 01b7a7e171bdf5911aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec79e17ff9745df60b2b720a01c84f5842f2350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 67.180.133.66
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sat, 24 Jul 2010 17:06:53 -0000

 On 7/24/2010 3:36 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
>> The IETF has a legal home, named ISOC. Let me rephrase: "Do you think
>> ISOC is not subject to the laws of Europe?"
>
> Of course they are.  But that's OK, since ISOC has had a privacy
> policy in place since 2006, which makes specific reference to the
> "safe harbor" policy kludge worked out between the US and EU:
>
> http://www.isoc.org/help/privacy/
>
>> Good grief.
>
> Indeed.  Do we agree that this means we're done?

No, we are NOT done with this, not unless that is the IETF is formally
acknowledging that its practices meet that existing privacy mandate and
in a manner which provides a demonstration of how that process is
implemented in the IETF.

Todd Glassey

>
> R's,
> John
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email