Re: [Pearg] Proposed virtual interim on IP address privacy

Stephen Farrell <> Mon, 16 November 2020 20:16 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 085113A13A2 for <>; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:16:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MOBMda9NU_Ud for <>; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:16:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA1633A13A1 for <>; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:16:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF24BBE7B; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 20:16:26 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NJdgaJfgSCYh; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 20:16:25 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [] ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E7334BE2E; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 20:16:24 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=mail; t=1605557785; bh=9CxMCND7SXrOiNUkbmDP+IbZ37E7l6QojRtVs/mfB1Q=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=C4MhPAp36rP0ACOXc88fy9rMBON+8b6uP0KJD7f/RKrc/UxkpEl/gWdqruuvC4kNk NklgCO4WkgvR8fCTGFkHnZpRg1L0cq0cD7IFeicZ+/TOki9wgJ3GHYg1HlLGtZuvno 20jtKIqbpd3R68VB3MfGyeHV6m/P9Y6p7tdzMkAY=
To: Christopher Wood <>,
References: <>
From: Stephen Farrell <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 20:16:24 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.3.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9Scppqq86I6E6IC1PnxcMHpaI92fHJwQQ"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Pearg] Proposed virtual interim on IP address privacy
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Privacy Enhancements and Assessment Proposed RG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 20:16:31 -0000


On 13/11/2020 17:23, Christopher Wood wrote:
> We are aiming for some time in early December or January. We'd like
> to hear from folks here if they'd be interested in attending such an
> interim, and if so, whether they'd like to contribute to the agenda.
> Of course, suggestions to alter the agenda are also welcome!
I'd attend if possible.

One topic I'd like to see covered is: when is one person's
use-case another person's abuse-case? ISTM the exact same
behaviour can be judged as fine or abusive depending on the
circumstances and actors involved. I think it'd be good to
try be more explicitly aware of that and to maybe consider
if there's a preponderance of evidence for one view or the
other in some cases.

I don't really have presentation material or work-done on
that but am willing to ask awkward questions of others if
that's of any use;-)