Re: [saag] Liking Linkability

Robin Wilton <wilton@isoc.org> Tue, 23 October 2012 09:59 UTC

Return-Path: <wilton@isoc.org>
X-Original-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E82621F8670 for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 02:59:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.443
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.443 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.155, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cZ5V2NQe-wvt for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 02:59:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp110.iad.emailsrvr.com (smtp110.iad.emailsrvr.com [207.97.245.110]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B34C021F8671 for <saag@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 02:59:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp41.relay.iad1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 0A18E290E68; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 05:59:29 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: OK
Received: by smtp41.relay.iad1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: wilton-AT-isoc.org) with ESMTPSA id 08B57291630; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 05:59:27 -0400 (EDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_50B56029-847C-4E9E-BAD4-B7146DDC9C60"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1
From: Robin Wilton <wilton@isoc.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAG5KPzx673VKqg4=26-cvfeXZrBfK-XbURFj8eYx_mXVkko41A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:58:22 +0100
Message-Id: <3EF3A430-A6C5-4ADE-92B5-0744DFFD326B@isoc.org>
References: <CCA5E789.2083A%Josh.Howlett@ja.net> <tslzk3jsjv8.fsf@mit.edu> <201210181904.PAA07773@Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG> <FB9E461D-CA62-4806-9599-054DF24C3FD9@bblfish.net> <CAG5KPzxGz+4MywjP4knfbDr2gyvqUZc1HEBXgtaDfYT+DPg5yg@mail.gmail.com> <8AB0C205-87AE-4F76-AA67-BC328E34AF5E@bblfish.net> <CABrd9SQghpi6_rVQKxYXZDtM5HwvE7Kq7SUw5zi41ZRd3y2h9A@mail.gmail.com> <4324B524-7140-49C0-8165-34830DD0F13B@bblfish.net> <CABrd9SQU1uYVaVPedokHxeYkT=759rkPFfimWK1Z8ATzo3yNFA@mail.gmail.com> <5083CCCF.2060407@webr3.org> <50842789.3080301@openlinksw.com> <50845268.4010509@webr3.org> <5084AC77.8030600@openlinksw.com> <50851512.9090803@webr3.org> <CABrd9SRNVLbWxifQAQ6iuX4qMeFmZVD6rO_q=L348G1UZzr9tg@mail.gmail.com> <50852726.9030102@openlinksw.com> <CABrd9SQ3KTqHq1hOfbLAU5hfgNyqCPK4u+ToEda+VtQ5S0utwA@mail.gmail.com> <5085360E.3080008@openlinksw.com> <50853CD8.8020005@w3.org> <5FB468E4-BDD3-4635-ACD0-A23540C08751@bblfish.net> <508562C2.1060905@w3.org> <F7EA147A-8A49-4627-8AA0-DD811CB9AC49@ bblfish.net> <CAG5KPzx673VKqg4=26-cvfeXZrBfK-XbURFj8eYx_mXVkko41A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ben Laurie <ben@links.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 14:09:57 -0700
Cc: Halpin Harry <H.halplin@ed.ac.uk>, public-identity@w3.org, saag@ietf.org, "public-privacy@w3.org list" <public-privacy@w3.org>, public-webid@w3.org
Subject: Re: [saag] Liking Linkability
X-BeenThere: saag@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Advisory Group <saag.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/saag>
List-Post: <mailto:saag@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 09:59:30 -0000

Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
Internet Society

email: wilton@isoc.org
Phone: +44 705 005 2931
Twitter: @futureidentity




On 23 Oct 2012, at 09:44, Ben Laurie wrote:

<snip>

> 
> Not disagreeing with any of the above, but observing that:
> 
> a) There's no particular reason you could not have an email per site
> as well as a key per site.
> 
> b) Linkability it not, as you say, inherently bad. The problem occurs
> when you have (effectively) no choice about linkability.
> 


But it's very hard to use either of those mechanisms (separation through emails or keys) without giving some third party the ability to achieve total linkability. (In other words, both options remove effective choice).

Yrs.,
Robin