Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Do we need a privacy section (#55)

Hi,

When an enterprise network is breached by an outside attacker (using "if"
no longer seems appropriate) or is compromised by an inside attacker, the
SACM components that have datastores of devices and associated identity
info as well as (often) associated user identities are high-value targets of
attacks for bulk theft of PII.

By its fundamental nature, SACM increases the threat of exposure of PII
and therefore should address anonymization of individual device identity
info and strong controls on the dissemination of that info to subscribers.

Cheers,
- Ira

Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic
http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com
Winter  579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176  734-944-0094
Summer  PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Ron Colvin <Ron.Colvin@nasa.gov> wrote:

> My understanding on PII is that as soon as I associate a person with an
> email address, phone number or physical address I have PII that I need to
> protect. If we associate a user id, account or user provisioned PKI with a
> device including possibly a MAC address we probably have the same concerns.
>
> I think in many cases user certificates are used for device authentication
> and I thought that was an attribute that was highly desirable.
>
>
> On 8/7/15 7:38 AM, adammontville wrote:
>
> I agree that privacy needs to be covered.
>
> Still, when we talk about *identity* or *identification* in this working
> group, we're talking about something different than PII data. As such,
> there's this other issue for the information model
> sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model#21
> <https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model/issues/21>,
> which is seeking to get feedback on what a useful term other than identity
> might be. The present candidate seems to be *designate*. So, instead of
> "identify an endpoint" we would "designate an endpoint" or "collect AVPs
> from the designated set of endpoints".
>
> I also wouldn't go so far as to say that we're performing pervasive
> monitoring in the sense that mainstream media understands the term. Our
> scope has always been single-enterprise, and it remains that way.
>
> Again, privacy is important, but I don't think we're talking about PII as
> much as might be implied by our choice of terms.
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/55#issuecomment-128680469>
> .
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sacm mailing listsacm@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm
>
>
> --
>
>
> ********************************************************
> Ron Colvin CISSP, CAP, CEH
> Certified Security Analyst
> NASA - Goddard Space Flight Center<ron.colvin@nasa.gov> <ron.colvin@nasa.gov>
> Direct phone 301-286-2451
> NASA Jabber (rdcolvin@im.nasa.gov) AIM rcolvin13
> NASA LCS (ronald.d.colvin@nasa.gov)
> ********************************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sacm mailing list
> sacm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm
>
>