On 13 nov 2013, at 16:04, Suzanne Woolf <suzworldw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm nervous of any assumption that any jurisdiction won't compromise its Data > Protection regime under some conditions. I'd simply assume such contracts > can't be reliably kept inside the US or outside, unless I'm sure that the > data doesn't exist to be turned over. > > IOW-- I know as a USan I can be expected to say this, but other agencies > besides the USG spy, and yes, even in places with stronger Data Protection if > only because other jurisdictions tend to have "national security" carve-outs > in them too. The only thing we can do is to require frameworks around these measures. See for example this list of rules that Foreign Minister of Sweden published in NY Times early November 2013: <http://www.regeringen.se/sb/d/7416/a/227782> I am not saying that is a perfect list (I have my own -- <http://stupid.domain.name/node/1684>), but that is what I claim is a goal that is "reachable". Patrik
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
