Re: [Shutup] Proposed Charter for something

"John Levine" <> Mon, 07 December 2015 02:34 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A97D41ACCE3 for <>; Sun, 6 Dec 2015 18:34:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.862
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.862 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LcS2MaLCPCdS for <>; Sun, 6 Dec 2015 18:34:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 723831ACCDC for <>; Sun, 6 Dec 2015 18:34:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 29616 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2015 02:34:48 -0000
Received: from unknown ( by with QMQP; 7 Dec 2015 02:34:48 -0000
Date: 7 Dec 2015 02:34:26 -0000
Message-ID: <20151207023426.54934.qmail@ary.lan>
From: "John Levine" <>
In-Reply-To: <>
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Shutup] Proposed Charter for something
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: SMTP Headers Unhealthy To User Privacy <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 02:34:51 -0000

>Perhaps one of the most important things in the WG is to decide whether 
>the output is a document, and whether the document is an informational, 
>a BCP or standard or STD.  My current thinking is that we're going to 
>hit BCP at best.

This is increasingly looking like a RG, not a WG.  There's a lot of
speculation about what aspects of mail messages and SMTP sessions have
what privacy implications, with an extremely premature focus on IP
address logging.  I'd much rather back up a step or two and see if we
can catalog the aspects of mail messages with estimates of the privacy
benefits and risks of each, keeping in mind the context.  

For example, how much new information is there in the date stamp in a
Received header in the usual case that it's a few seconds after the
timestamp in the Date: header?  On the other hand, most Received
headers have a unique ID that's really handy to identify the message
and the path it took (That's how you tell who's sending spam reports
from AOL and Yahoo, even though they redact all the addresses.)

That would be a useful catalog, and we can think about models that
look at the net personal information, and diagnostic and anti-abuse
information provided by various combinations of features or the lack
thereof.  That would be interesting on its own, and would give us a
much better foundation from which to consider changes that could
produce an actual overall privacy improvement.