ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: <draft-farrell-perpass-attack-02.txt> (Pervasive Monitoring is an Attack) to Best Current Practice

2013-12-16 17:06:55
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 10:45:09PM +0000, Stephen Farrell wrote:

Yes, we could count your corporate mail scanning example as
something that fits the definition but also fits under the
"tension" statement and live with that. I think that's quite
tenable.

Ok.  I wonder whether text along this line in the last paragraph at
of section 1 would make it clear enough:

    …might consider them to be.  For the same reason, a given feature
    of a protocol can often be used both to enable behaviours desired
    by users of the protocol, and to enable pervasive monitoring.
    Moreover, as technology advances …

But even if you think both of the above approaches are wrong,
I don't think consent is the angle to take here for the reasons
stated.

Well, if you just say "this is part of that tension" then you don't
need to give a general-purpose profile of that tension, I guess.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs(_at_)anvilwalrusden(_dot_)com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>