Re: [Ppm] Batch selection and use cases for DAP

Christopher Patton <cpatton@cloudflare.com> Fri, 15 July 2022 00:37 UTC

Return-Path: <cpatton@cloudflare.com>
X-Original-To: ppm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ppm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A626FC138FA1 for <ppm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Jul 2022 17:37:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cloudflare.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fYOknVYrTLHI for <ppm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Jul 2022 17:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-x632.google.com (mail-ej1-x632.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::632]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECC2FC16ECF8 for <ppm@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Jul 2022 17:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x632.google.com with SMTP id bp15so6322239ejb.6 for <ppm@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Jul 2022 17:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cloudflare.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4riilRb/uzJF0ZwCwQbKEW0ZRTLwx+fdOWlmONo97QA=; b=IF1SlWkNTSUDEQCUfzJ5WePi7jfM5j1TGI2+54OPdMZUPG/m8stiqfO8YsXVMTDvjl HXx1rxlNhywH7FPTBHv31Ki6PXFMmF2f+WRBCZeDlX7yAOpZ3QcRfB/9y/Fwr0yuAvv5 PLWY8/9wav2a+pXQimkT4x9DlrxAXqZkFhyhw=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4riilRb/uzJF0ZwCwQbKEW0ZRTLwx+fdOWlmONo97QA=; b=hXB2SZ57P4P3B1BG+4TdhMQATnnNooBuGrQD5r6yhGEp2rLxDzMgIOpXL8g48z09So 85oBX7cZ31dSa/fClQFizPnsSdzFQXFdNQ35eCCurba7ndTkmmPNpzof6/W0lq+PEKK6 7tRuPgQ/gQVM/hADcIegGxyBnQWhvYnmRf5OVGhqfjuQ6TCjlsktRVKhPj+KZD94PxW8 aJzBCJtd8U1KsXLX10aYUTlt9HHNcjDbBbm2dfZlPfhmQQ3lz3h2JfQOa5zHogpNA/hf zTCIto6vbMeAl+VR6zFtflMAC1heMtvgqJ9q1Vo9Gr0zkOa0qeJ+Yu7hxnimYgp6eUWb lZ9Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora9JhnnMkF945iGTkAMtgQHxfRmN/2a/BRRLzvsyaL+HeKisMlax TFIKfEFDh5y73HJFgEuMKMFqIPKqkl+dpbPAphgW0WOpYfQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1v47E8XTD9MWzYZ8x+uFsXz3iAPvVmFmRlW/ai/kklSm8duBtVCzASrm3ZE1Cau5k1kMJz2/GNP/Jxl0kGh/i4=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:9b14:b0:72b:97ac:c30c with SMTP id eo20-20020a1709069b1400b0072b97acc30cmr11137213ejc.588.1657845422426; Thu, 14 Jul 2022 17:37:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAG2Zi212sWmk3Piuu4Q0YE+wcqhgObx9F7r=SJV5d3Xqy8tFkQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAGkoAS2ZH1s_E=B745-HrvYSkaXuO6xx_t+J57A8sJ23a36w8A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGkoAS2ZH1s_E=B745-HrvYSkaXuO6xx_t+J57A8sJ23a36w8A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christopher Patton <cpatton@cloudflare.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 17:36:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CAG2Zi23xAu+PbogAvuPF8kx5r+GtUbwyTKKDoN1KCkWHO=aoKg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Friedberger <simon@mozilla.com>
Cc: Christopher Patton <cpatton=40cloudflare.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, ppm <ppm@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007f2f2805e3cd37bb"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ppm/wHnNYKjFlZ8fJka5L4O9o3uf1Zw>
Subject: Re: [Ppm] Batch selection and use cases for DAP
X-BeenThere: ppm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Privacy Preserving Measurement technologies <ppm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ppm>, <mailto:ppm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ppm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ppm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ppm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ppm>, <mailto:ppm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 00:37:07 -0000

Hi Simon (please forgive the rate reply!)

Not the answer to your questions (a) or (b) but another question:
>
> We are assuming that correctness of results requires
> all-honest-aggregators but privacy is protected by a
> single-honest-aggregator.
> So, could report selection be simplified by reducing the scope to the
> interaction between Collector and Leader?
> I.e., the leader would select reports based on what the collector wants to
> achieve and the aggregators only have to check the privacy criteria, so
> currently, min_batch_size and max_batch_lifetime.
>

That's a really good idea. The Collector picks the batch selector, and the
Leader uses the batch selector to pick the set of reports to put in the
batch. There's no reason the collector needs to know anything about the
selector beyond that it preserves the intended privacy goal. Perhaps you'd
like to take a shot at sketching how this would work?

Chris P.