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

[Chris Lewis <[e-mail]>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12/01/2015 12:58 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:

| These may not feel like important issues to you, but for some
| people they are life-or-death issues, and there really is a
| tradeoff to be made between the freedom of people in that situation
| to speak, and the freedom of the operators of mail servers to
| surveil them, even when that surveillance has a good motive behind
| it.   The problem is that it's not _just_ the people who need the
| information who get it.

We appreciate that, but there already are plenty of special purpose
infrastructures that are perfectly capable of doing what you want when
you want.  People who want it already have it.  No reason to encourage
the breakage of "good purpose surveillance" (such as spam/abuse
filtering or infected machine remediation) all the time, because a
very small number perhaps only occasionally needs it.

It doesn't have to be either/or.  It's both now.  Not sure we need to
rock that boat.  Hence a WG to answer that question.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJWXeSMAAoJENy2YTBCU1mlpPQH/3jIcTLjP7cOpHmWqegot33o
eF76kxEOrO5oTfLjCZS/CfTe2mD7bcTxjaLK79JemNWkUB2U+4/cEXOhh2e+5xz7
jk9PPn4ye559Wt8NMa3SqBkd47JnDy9JROLzLZVrh+btY5+aS/405betYgnMksPN
nx828n36zOXn07bl2viHyCGs1HrNDoWOrujphFYGbx/Foklmso3fBI/354zHKduY
yO9LIiP6bwQeVUu3Tyo2pXTeYojNx3PIyPDTU1edOwgjeBoBpZDZjyRFk2/a3Rjo
smnE4vAqHdN3vif7HzZruxF6AQSp6u4MNSO23kEyDxlHbF2VRF6tJ6aOB77lRt8=
=47Il
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----