Hi Dean,
At 20:55 10-12-2012, Dean Willis wrote:
Privacy, absolutely. How can you have privacy when your packets are
being probed to figure out not only what's in them, but who you're
talking to, what applications you are running, and what you're
talking about? It's like the inverse of "do not track" powered by a
nuclear reactor. If you're not having kittens about this, you just
don't understand the implications ;-).
The ITU specification your message refers to does not have any
discussion of privacy considerations. At some level the
specification is not that different from the IETF specifications the
ITU specification references. In my opinion it would be difficult to
get anything done if the problem is framed solely in terms of privacy.
I wouldn't say that people do not understand the implications. I
would describe it a distant threat as there is no immediacy to it,
i.e. for the average person, there isn't any noticeable impact.
Assume DPI is present, even required, at multiple layers in the
network. Do you think we can assure the preservation of privacy by
publishing some nambypamby guidelines on what the DPI operators can
do with the information they've gleaned? Even when there's no
business relationship between the user and the DPI operator and no
informed consent?
I don't think so. However, that does not change the fact that
nothing will be done about the problem. If one wants to ensure
privacy in the protocols being developed in the IETF one would have
to review current work on a regular basis. That is not being
done. If one takes an extreme position the problem will be unsolvable.
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
ietf-privacy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-privacy
