[Top] [All Lists]

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

2015-12-01 18:00:18
Tuesday, Dec 1, 2015 6:52 PM John C Klensin wrote:
Suppose that,
instead, the question was closer to: "if a user had a serious
desire to protect her location, especially against pervasive
surveillance by state actors and too-curious message recipients,
how would she do that with existing systems?"

John, I think that I already explained why this isn't a good question to ask.   
We don't want privacy just for people who think in advance, "hm, email in 
general isn't private, and I know that I am going to need privacy, so I will 
use this other service in order to gain privacy."   We want the email to 
already have been private when the need for it to be private arises, without 
the user who needs this privacy having a mental model that would allow the 
aforementioned questions to be asked, to say nothing of being answered.

Regarding my personal mail server, one instance is in Dallas and the other in 
Frankfurt.   Regardless of where I happen to be on any given day, any 
geolocation done on the headers will reveal that I am in a data center in one 
of those two cities.   Since I am not in either of those data centers, I am 
protected from any revelations about my actual location through header fields 
in my email.   Of course, you can tell that the mail came from me, but that's 
what I want, so it's okay.

Sent from Whiteout Mail -

My PGP key:

Attachment: pgpSsmdmslf_N.pgp
Description: PGP signature

ietf-smtp mailing list
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>