Re: [Pearg] descriptive censorship work: draft-hall-censorship-tech

[Shivan Sahib <[e-mail]>]

Hi Joe!


>>> -1 to extending the scope. That could be done in other
>>> documents, each of which would likely take some time. FWIW,
>>> personally, I'd recommend just getting this one to the
>>> RFC editor queue, pocketing the progress, and then the RG
>>> can move on to new documents documenting other mechanisms
>>> for and countering censorship.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> S.
>>>
>>
>> The suggestion to include censorship-countering techniques came up
>> because of the concern that as the draft stands, it would not fall under
>> PEARG's charter. Happy to hear disagreements about that though.
>>
>
> Heya Shivan,
>
> I'd love to hear more elaboration here tomorrow about this (or on the list
> if you have time before then).
>
> I looked at the Charter and like Stephen I'm not necessarily seeing where
> it would require a descriptive draft about techniques also talk about
> mitigations. I suspect that RFC 6973's structure of "privacy threats" and
> "threat mitigations" is where the linking between threats and mitigations
> might come from in your mind? (So it's an implicit part of the Charter by
> reference to 6973?) Or maybe I'm missing a more direct link in the Charter
> text?
>

I mentioned the concerns mainly because it was brought up by someone to me
- it seems though that the group is in agreement that the document is worth
pursuing as-is (and I think so too), plus I agree that we want to avoid
scope-creep.

Thanks,
Shivan