On 03/01/2013 05:48 AM, SM wrote:
At 18:25 28-02-2013, David Singer wrote:
in 'privacy considerations' I think we need to explore the privacy
consequences of using protocols 'appropriately'. And there are, and
it's no longer OK not to worry about them as we design protocols.
Yes.
+1
Hi Claudia,
At 14:42 26-02-2013, Claudia Diaz wrote:
That's an interesting distinction. Translating it to concrete
scenarios would make us however have to change how we usually use
the terms. This can be counterintuitive in some cases:
- If I browse to a website and my IP is exposed, then it
At 18:09 28-02-2013, Eric Burger wrote:
Isn't the problem that when the protocol was written (thinking in
the abstract), no one knew it was going to be used for foo, and foo
did not have the proper security properties? You are right, it is
almost a policy problem, not a technology problem,
On 26 Feb 2013, at 23:19:15, David Singer wrote:
On Feb 26, 2013, at 14:11 , Claudia Diaz claudia.d...@esat.kuleuven.be
wrote:
On 26 Feb 2013, at 09:45:38, SM wrote:
At 13:15 25-02-2013, Claudia Diaz wrote:
If that entity is a gov/commercial organization, then security is the
term
So what if we just said Security Considerations must include what some people
call privacy considerations? If we cannot agree on a concise definition of
security vs. privacy, what is the typical draft author going to do?
--
Sent from a mobile device. Sorry for typos or weird auto-correct. Thank
