> On 24 Apr 2018, at 16:41, Tom Herbert <t...@herbertland.com> wrote: >> >> Although not explicitly stated, your message is certainly implying that the >> conclusion of your argument is … and therefore we should do nothing. >> >> I agree with you that the world is not perfect - when I’m in an optimistic >> state of mind (which is most of the time!) I like to think of it as a work >> in progress. However, the position that as long as there are repressive >> regimes out there where freedom of speech is not respected we should do >> nothing, is one that I think needs to be challenged. What about the rights >> of the rest of us in the meantime? >> >> This is the point I’m trying to make: the situation is more nuanced than a >> simplistic privacy is good, more privacy is better, total privacy is best >> position - this being, at least as it appears to me, the prevailing opinion >> within the IETF. All I’m trying to do here is find an appropriate forum >> within which to stimulate this discussion. >> >> Part of the problem that I have noticed is that the discussions of privacy >> vs. law enforcement access to data are very ideologically motivated - on >> both sides - with neither side apparently willing to accept that the other >> side has any validity to their position. Not the first time in the history >> of humanity that we’ve had that problem. As with all of the most interesting >> problems, there isn’t a right or wrong answer, when considering the conflict >> between individual right to privacy and law enforcement access to data - the >> solution is not one or the other, but much more likely to be somewhere in >> the middle. >> > Dave, > > Sure, then propose a solution for that. As others have pointed out > this current draft is one sided and although acknowledges the fact > that a balanced approach is warranted, it does nothing to try to find > a balance. I'd also ask that you be a little more careful in framing > this as a "privacy" versus "law enforcement" issue. They are not > mutually exclusive. Many of us believe that privacy is a necessity for > liberty, security, and crime prevention. >
Tom, Challenge excepted! I have just finished the document I was working on and it was my intention to begin working on a document that might help consideration of this issue next. It will take me some time but I will be back to the group when that is finished. daveor _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
