Re: [Shutup] [ietf-smtp] Proposed Charter for the "SMTP Headers Unhealthy To User Privacy" WG (fwd)

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Sun, 29 November 2015 21:58 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: shutup@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: shutup@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 852411B35A0; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 13:58:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.886
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.886 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.585, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 4aVLDrOXK2qE; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 13:58:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A8221B359E; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 13:58:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C828BE2C; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 21:58:46 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tJf3U_IEyhfu; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 21:58:45 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [10.87.48.91] (unknown [86.46.20.32]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73532BE5D; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 21:58:44 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1448834325; bh=B5/SyN/nfAOS7kdDhdAC/NoJyeMTFs3kSOGIdLadPnY=; h=From:Subject:To:References:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=MvU8jHUnhNhyGewjX3dmAdmJYgE6bvY0Z13mPSvSWb6nfVoh5FL2NBsbxrJ/MtOzP bjYCM3jdKQcAHs4Sw3U++WDm4zMTQQvnd/0XGtAbb1nurZCOmgw31S+8Lzup/Qi6te spWKkgch1n7KhwVMlVMO7FHT2F6j64QIu+bhd92c=
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, ietf-smtp@ietf.org
References: <20151129181346.9221.qmail@ary.lan>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <565B7514.70102@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 21:58:44 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20151129181346.9221.qmail@ary.lan>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/shutup/0SevZIVmFGzIcMPjlgwFvAtWeaw>
Cc: shutup@ietf.org, dcrocker@bbiw.net
Subject: Re: [Shutup] [ietf-smtp] Proposed Charter for the "SMTP Headers Unhealthy To User Privacy" WG (fwd)
X-BeenThere: shutup@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: SMTP Headers Unhealthy To User Privacy <shutup.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/shutup>, <mailto:shutup-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/shutup/>
List-Post: <mailto:shutup@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:shutup-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/shutup>, <mailto:shutup-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 21:58:55 -0000

(Re-tx - there was an address typo in the earlier message)

On 29/11/15 18:13, John Levine wrote:
>  the largest mail provider in the world already redacts
> most senders' location info.

As I understood it, one of the possible outcomes of this
effort might be to document the kinds of redactions that
have been done so that others could do similarly.

I've no clue as to whether that'd result in a menu of "things
one can do," or if there are parts of that that may end up
as standards, but a good first step might be to document
what's been done already, esp if it's different in different
mail providers and if those variations have different impacts
elsewhere in the overall mail infrastructure.

Seems like the above would be a useful start anyway. (If
it's not been done already - there's no reason such stuff
absolutely has to be in an RFC.)

S.