[Int-area] request for input/thoughts
Dave O'Reilly <rfc@daveor.com> Wed, 04 July 2018 09:21 UTC
Return-Path: <rfc@daveor.com>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1063B130E42 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 02:21:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=daveor.com
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 atet919_2xkj for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 02:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vps.ftrsolutions.com (vps.ftrsolutions.com [5.77.39.21]) (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 958C4130E73 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 02:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=daveor.com; s=default; h=Mime-Version:To:Date:Message-Id:Subject: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:From:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=FkkeaRRfuH15/5qgy8+qd5isIjGlRXY8g9CBK041TE0=; b=qF/qTP/KZhn3KC4WEtOOHIcgKb cdJGYI/2EF5TyC5GZkYSVjnxhEIzD/4UmFI9sZg9cbATB0tUoOOkxinlt7DtCh0M1SjAM+tkApB/P d90wz9erT/bX53qXZRnhAV5B4Niwqrq5RsMJuprAEW6fn0Bj2X4tC/HkzVVrX3+FG6ag=;
Received: from s147-096.psd.vodafone.ie ([213.233.147.96]:40510 helo=[172.20.10.3]) by vps.ftrsolutions.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <rfc@daveor.com>) id 1fadyy-0009EL-9S for int-area@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Jul 2018 10:21:52 +0100
From: Dave O'Reilly <rfc@daveor.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F5FEF175-C970-4C03-A5BA-86EB1EF1FB31@daveor.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2018 10:21:51 +0100
To: int-area <int-area@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - vps.ftrsolutions.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - daveor.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: vps.ftrsolutions.com: authenticated_id: dave@daveor.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: vps.ftrsolutions.com: dave@daveor.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/lqwE9rafDrorFXzJY6c6iFaDRHs>
Subject: [Int-area] request for input/thoughts
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2018 09:21:57 -0000
Dear all, Further to our recent discussion about adoption of draft-daveor-cgn-logging as an intarea document, I wanted to address one of the issues that I observed during my engagement with this group. It seems to me that there is quite a significant objection within this group to the concept of wiretapping but wiretapping is only one form of law enforcement access to data. True, it is a very intrusive measure and appropriate privacy safeguards must obviously put in place, but there are other measures that are used far more frequently - such as those I was trying to address in draft-daveor-cgn-logging. I wanted to present some research that I have done to attempt to measure the proportion of investigations that involve wiretapping as opposed to other requests for non-content data (e.g. subscriber identity). I therefore submit for your consideration: https://www.ftrsolutions.com/index.php/resources/item/21-how-much-wiretapping-is-really-going-on. I would be very interested to hear any feedback that you might have on this. Best regards, daveor
- [Int-area] request for input/thoughts Dave O'Reilly