Re: [perpass] draft-josefsson-email-received-privacy

Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> Fri, 23 October 2015 12:39 UTC

Return-Path: <simon@josefsson.org>
X-Original-To: perpass@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: perpass@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 329C91B303B for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 05:39:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 NbsauWyRg5VF for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 05:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from duva.sjd.se (duva.sjd.se [IPv6:2001:9b0:1:1702::100]) (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 E59451B35B0 for <perpass@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 05:39:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from latte.josefsson.org ([155.4.17.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by duva.sjd.se (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4) with ESMTP id t9NCdG3E030905 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 23 Oct 2015 14:39:17 +0200
From: Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
References: <87r3kpmm25.fsf@nordberg.se> <011301d10b75$e1f19480$a5d4bd80$@huitema.net>
OpenPGP: id=54265E8C; url=http://josefsson.org/54265e8c.txt
X-Hashcash: 1:22:151023:perpass@ietf.org::9vq6Abev83K2V5Gx:101
X-Hashcash: 1:22:151023:huitema@huitema.net::F2Ra9y4FFd8YkxxG:6yXh
X-Hashcash: 1:22:151023:linus@nordberg.se::6LpI7imz5yc/cIAO:k/gY
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 14:39:15 +0200
In-Reply-To: <011301d10b75$e1f19480$a5d4bd80$@huitema.net> (Christian Huitema's message of "Tue, 20 Oct 2015 13:28:28 -0700")
Message-ID: <878u6t3gjw.fsf@latte.josefsson.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.130014 (Ma Gnus v0.14) Emacs/24.4 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.7 at duva.sjd.se
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/perpass/0iqPmZab_TTJGYDG36v6oFDATzE>
Cc: 'Linus Nordberg' <linus@nordberg.se>, perpass@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [perpass] draft-josefsson-email-received-privacy
X-BeenThere: perpass@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The perpass list is for IETF discussion of pervasive monitoring. " <perpass.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/perpass>, <mailto:perpass-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/perpass/>
List-Post: <mailto:perpass@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:perpass-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass>, <mailto:perpass-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 12:39:38 -0000

"Christian Huitema" <huitema@huitema.net> writes:

> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 11:29 AM, Linus Nordberg wrote:
>> ...
>> draft-josefsson-email-received-privacy-00 has been submitted, see
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-josefsson-email-received-privacy/
>> 
>> I'd be interested in hearing what people on the perpass list think of
>> this.
>
> Happy to see this! The text about email's Received field metadata has been
> in drafts leading to RFC 7624 for more than a year, and it is very good that
> someone active in the email working groups actually proposes a solution.

Thank you.

> Now for a suggestion. Maybe that's a difference in personal writing styles,
> but I found the draft a bit dry. I would have appreciated a discussion of
> the scenarios, and a bit of emphasis on the "submission" part, which is the
> most concerning for privacy.

Agreed -- the draft was written hastily before the IETF -00 cut-off date
and could surely benefit from a better introduction of the problem.  If
you have concrete suggestions on what to (or not) focus on in more
detail, that would be appreciated.  We will make a stab at improving
this section shortly.

/Simon