Re: [Pearg] Research Group Last Call for "A Survey of Worldwide Censorship Techniques"

"S. Moonesamy" <sm+sdo@afrinic.net> Wed, 01 July 2020 18:51 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@afrinic.net>
X-Original-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 262F73A0BEB for <pearg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 11:51:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 eH1wVwAqm98F for <pearg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 11:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from board.afrinic.net (board.afrinic.net [IPv6:2001:42d0:0:404::83]) (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 8B4A63A0BFF for <pearg@irtf.org>; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 11:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [102.115.171.75] (port=57604 helo=DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.afrinic.net) by board.afrinic.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <sm@afrinic.net>) id 1jqhpk-0004x2-9r; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 22:51:48 +0400
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20200701113215.0bf66010@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2020 11:51:33 -0700
To: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <hall@isoc.org>,pearg@irtf.org
From: "S. Moonesamy" <sm+sdo@afrinic.net>
References: <08f43a37-2b7b-418e-95a8-ed57484c66be@www.fastmail.com> <3eba505f-8e85-472c-b22a-660c6ec697c1@www.fastmail.com> <BY5PR06MB6451CAEC5B1CF4FC2C32432EB1860@BY5PR06MB6451.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <3ed2d30b-9a8d-432f-273e-f2ca183f0f22@andersdotter.cc> <BY5PR06MB6451000D6397DFE09F93BB26B16E0@BY5PR06MB6451.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20200701055337.0d575238@elandnews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pearg/DHC7HK4dVIF2TIRNGd5ov_VvZBU>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 01 Jul 2020 15:17:48 -0700
Subject: Re: [Pearg] Research Group Last Call for "A Survey of Worldwide Censorship Techniques"
X-BeenThere: pearg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Privacy Enhancements and Assessment Proposed RG <pearg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/pearg>, <mailto:pearg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pearg/>
List-Post: <mailto:pearg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pearg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/pearg>, <mailto:pearg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2020 18:52:06 -0000

Dear Joseph,
At 10:51 AM 01-07-2020, Joseph Lorenzo Hall wrote:
>(I'm slowly getting back into this set of conversations, sorry 
>PEARG! The close of the second quarter is a tough time.)

Thank you for the quick response.

>S., are you asking for an example of this happening or for 
>clarification on how such a thing might compromise such guarantees? 
>I'm not sure if we have an example but you'll notice that a whole 
>slew of those thing are hypothetical in that we haven't seen certain 
>kinds of interventions.

I was asking for an example of it happening.  For what it is worth, I 
read RFC 6482 and I didn't find anything about ROAs being a potential issue.

Section 5 of the RFC states that: "There is no assumption of 
confidentiality for the data in a ROA".  I also took a quick look at 
RFC 6480 in case I missed anything.  Where does the "confidentiality 
guarantees" come from?

Regards,
S. Moonesamy