On 24/11/2016 13:35, Gervase Markham wrote:
On 23/11/16 17:12, Myers, Kenneth (10421) wrote:
What are your pro/cons?
The pro is that we would then be stating explicitly what everyone
presumes to be already the case, and that if it did come to our
attention that there was a violation, we would have grounds for complaint.
The con is that one could argue it's not wise to make a requirement
unless there is some reasonable detection and enforcement mechanism.
Whether that is true in this case is a debatable question. Some issues
are easier to detect than others.
One could argue that it would, in some ways, be one of the easier ones
to both enforce and comply with (given that the entity needing to
comply is actually writing the rules to be enforced).
It would also form a clear cut basis for the existing requirement to
supply the CP and CPS documents in a language understood by the Mozilla
organization.
Enjoy
Jakob
--
Jakob Bohm, CIO, Partner, WiseMo A/S. https://www.wisemo.com
Transformervej 29, 2860 Søborg, Denmark. Direct +45 31 13 16 10
This public discussion message is non-binding and may contain errors.
WiseMo - Remote Service Management for PCs, Phones and Embedded
_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy
