Hi Nikos,
I think that's a very interesting idea. Like you, I also think we probably
underestimate the extent to which data minimisation and anonymisation
techniques genuinely obscure personal data. And yet very often, they are the
only answers to the question "What is 'Privacy By Design?'"...
y identifier.
Bottom line: I'm not sure if the required action here is further research work
or changes to the draft, but I do think the problem would benefit from being
explored and defined more fully…
HTH,
Robin
Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
Internet So
That works for me… it's compatible with further discussion that doesn't result
in changes to the draft's scope of contents.
R
Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
Internet Society
email: wil...@isoc.org
Phone: +44 705 005 2931
Twitter: @futureidentit
'm using TOR (The Onion Router) and my traffic
passes through one or more intermediary nodes
A more specific case: when I use privacy-enhanced search tools like IXQuick or
DuckDuckGo
Yrs.,
Robin
Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
Internet Society
email: wil.
an average person. In
>> fact it is probably a good thing that they do not read them...
>
> :-)
>
>> Well. You can hide your IP address to a certain text. What gets hidden with
>> the IP address depends whether you use systems like Tor, VPNs, NATs, IPv4 /
>> IPv
this came from…).
What I think is useful about this approach is that it assumes that neither
better information (food labelling/privacy icons) nor consent mechanisms (diet
is, for these purposes, an entirely discretionary self-motivated activity) are
enough to change user behaviour; the vital
e, and so on. still, they don't know who you are…
- the day comes when you make a purchase. This time, your visit also becomes
associated with a name, a credit card number and a delivery address.
All the data associated with your previous visits is now personally
identifiable...
R
Robin Wilt
Absolutely
Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
Internet Society
email: wil...@isoc.org
Phone: +44 705 005 2931
Twitter: @futureidentity
On 10 Sep 2012, at 11:58, Bryan McLaughlin (brmclaug) wrote:
> HI Robin,
>
> I agree it is ’blurry’
>
> My
It depends slightly on what you mean by "determine"…
The IETF isn't the body that legislates on what the consent requirements are,
or what is or isn't personal data… but if those have been decided by the
relevant authorities, IETF can ascertain what the decisions speci
t that doesn't
mean it should be ignored… nor does it mean that user perception of the problem
is a reliable guide to what should be done about it.
Best wishes,
Robin
Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
Internet Society
email: wil...@isoc.org
Phone:
eeds a bit more investigation before I'd trust it...
Yrs.,
Robin
Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
Internet Society
email: wil...@isoc.org
Phone: +44 705 005 2931
Twitter: @futureidentity
On 11 Dec 2012, at 16:38, Allison Mankin wrote:
>
> Another non-onero
Oops. Sorry, Dean, I've just seen your response and realised that I have added
myself, by default, to the "glib dismissal" fraternity :^(
R
Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
Internet Society
email: wil...@isoc.org
Phone: +44 705 005 2931
Twitter:
nd do listen in, then that's a privacy problem.
In other words, the same scenario can be both a security and a privacy problem,
depending on the perspective from which you look at it.
R
Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
On 1 Mar 2013, at 00:34, SM wrote:
>
by classification into 'physical harm, financial
harm and reputational harm'. A far as I'm aware, though, that kind of model has
yet to be turned into a clear methodology...
HTH,
Robin
Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
On 1 Mar 2013, at 09:37, St
that only takes one unprotected link in the chain
to associate with an identity."
;^)
Robin
Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
On 23 Sep 2013, at 08:40, Brian Trammell wrote:
> hi Stephen, all,
>
> (copying ietf-privacy as requested in the draft)
Hi all -
On 24 Sep 2013, at 12:00, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>
> Hi Eliot,
>
> On 09/24/2013 11:41 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
>
>> It is worth noting that by
>> the use of the term, one could reasonably argue that TLS is
>> opportunistic encryption because the encryption is not prearranged in
>> advan
Thanks, Eliot…
I suspected we were probably all pretty well aligned - I just wanted to draw
out that point about explicit vs implicit requirements, rather than disagree
with you. Especially about the contents of related RFCs, where your expertise
far outstrips mine. ;^)
R
Robin Wilton
meta-issue we face, here, IMO, is that none of the questions raised by this
definition of privacy has a single simple answer, let alone a binary one. I
think that's why we have such a hard time translating social concepts that we
all understand implicitly, into technical solutions that adequately ref
Excellent - thanks Jeff. Just leaving for SFO to present a paper on Ethical
Data Handling.
R
Sent from my iPod
On 14 May 2014, at 15:59, "=JeffH" wrote:
> And, building upon Solove's work, there's this...
>
>
> Big Data Ethics
> http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2384174
>
I don't know of an official IETF finite on, but this is the one the Internet
Society has been using for a while, and I think it's still good:
http://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2013/12/language-privacy
Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
On 16 Apr 2015
at
conclusion through a relatively systematic analysis.
Hope this helps a bit,
Robin
Robin Wilton
Technical Outreach Director - Identity and Privacy
On 5 May 2016, at 00:53, "David Singer" wrote:
> I agree, at the moment ‘privacy’ is defined roughly as the things you miss
&
2 comments inline…
> On 5 May 2016, at 14:30, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>
>
>
> On 05/05/16 14:20, Dave Crocker wrote:
>> On 5/5/2016 1:30 AM, Robin Wilton wrote:
>>> Privacy can also be a subjective thing (for instance, some people
>>> think it's imp
Apologies for top-posting, but this is a general reply rather than
point-by-point responses…
It feels like a possible goal, then, is a short piece of text which contains
sufficient “hooks” to link to other material (which in turn can define specific
aspects of the problem in appropriately techn
Thanks Peter,
very useful.
I think the underlying “meta”-issue here is emerging…
If we assume that you can start with a “high-level” definition that needs to be
applied and interpreted by “lower-level” descriptions and guidance, and that it
is theoretically possible to acheve the desired level
24 matches
Mail list logo
