Assuming for a moment that single user domains can't have a privacy violation (I'm not sure I agree), how about a two person domain? Three? Unless it's impossible to have a report that contains personal information, mail receivers (report senders) absolutely can't rely on the assertion in question since they have no way of knowing.
This is a pointless rabbit hole. Let's not go down it. Scott K On April 25, 2023 4:58:26 PM UTC, Alessandro Vesely <ves...@tana.it> wrote: >John is not alone, I too can recognize single posts. However, I'd argue that >in such cases there is no privacy violation. You violate privacy when you >collect personal data of (several) people *different from yourself*. > >Best >Ale > > >On Tue 25/Apr/2023 18:36:34 +0200 Scott Kitterman wrote: >> My suggestion is delete all of it. It's accurate for some cases, not for >> others. If you want to keep any of it, I think it needs to be properly >> caveated. I expect that would be a Sisyphean task that's not worth the >> effort. >> >> Scott K >> >> On April 25, 2023 2:54:46 PM UTC, "Brotman, Alex" >> <Alex_Brotman=40comcast....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: >>>> As explained in 6.1, that's not actually true if the domains are small >>>> enuogh. >>>> In some of my tiny domains I can often recognize individual messages I've >>>> sent. I'd just delete these sentences. >>> >>> I'd argue that you're in a (mostly) unique situation where you're the >>> sender and the report reviewer. That being said, would you prefer I remove >>> all of 6.3? Does the remaining sentence have enough value to keep? Or >>> sweep it up to 6.1? >>> >>> -- >>> Alex Brotman >>> Sr. Engineer, Anti-Abuse & Messaging Policy >>> Comcast >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: John R. Levine <jo...@iecc.com> >>>> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2023 10:18 PM >>>> To: Brotman, Alex <alex_brot...@comcast.com>; dmarc@ietf.org >>>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: >>>> draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate- >>>> reporting-09.txt >>>> >>>> > I removed the small section that faced objections. >>>> > >>>> > I updated the ridtxt definition and discovered that mmark was making a >>>> mess of those asterisks. When there are more than one/some on a single >>>> line, it believes you would like some subset to be defined as "<em>" >>>> things. >>>> >>>> Looks pretty good. Minor points: >>>> >>>> The first paragraph in 2.6 says: >>>> >>>> Where the URI specified in a "rua" tag does not specify otherwise, a >>>> Mail Receiver generating a feedback report SHOULD employ a secure >>>> transport mechanism. >>>> >>>> Since the only mechanism is mail and nobody's going to S/MIME encrypt their >>>> reports, I suggest just deleting it. >>>> >>>> 6.3: >>>> >>>> Mail Receivers should have no concerns in sending reports as they do >>>> not contain personal information. ... >>>> >>>> Domain Owners should have no concerns in receiving reports as they do >>>> not contain personal information. >>>> >>>> As explained in 6.1, that's not actually true if the domains are small >>>> enuogh. >>>> In some of my tiny domains I can often recognize individual messages I've >>>> sent. I'd just delete these sentences. >>>> >>>> R's, >>>> John >>>> >>>> >>>> >> -----Original Message----- >>>> >> From: dmarc <dmarc-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of >>>> >> internet-dra...@ietf.org >>>> >> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2023 7:39 PM >>>> >> To: i-d-annou...@ietf.org >>>> >> Cc: dmarc@ietf.org >>>> >> Subject: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: >>>> >> draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>>> directories. >>>> >> This Internet-Draft is a work item of the Domain-based Message >>>> >> Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (DMARC) WG of the IETF. >>>> >> >>>> >> Title : DMARC Aggregate Reporting >>>> >> Author : Alex Brotman >>>> >> Filename : draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt >>>> >> Pages : 28 >>>> >> Date : 2023-04-24 >>>> >> >>>> >> Abstract: >>>> >> DMARC allows for domain holders to request aggregate reports from >>>> >> receivers. This report is an XML document, and contains extensible >>>> >> elements that allow for other types of data to be specified later. >>>> >> The aggregate reports can be submitted to the domain holder's >>>> >> specified destination as supported by the receiver. >>>> >> >>>> >> This document (along with others) obsoletes RFC7489. >>>> >> >>>> >> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: >>>> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ie >>>> >> tf-dmarc- >>>> >> aggregate- >>>> >> >>>> reporting/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!HBzOZHijNkg7AyDQnUKsIyEGZaJcT2dIFMGNVy >>>> qsr7 >>>> >> nLWuCbVwCDo_mqKdBpLG2eSmAWmSaOYcZxRLwpzMl1GqF46TKSvg$ >>>> >> >>>> >> There is also an HTML version available at: >>>> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-iet >>>> >> f-dmarc- >>>> >> aggregate-reporting- >>>> >> >>>> 09.html__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!HBzOZHijNkg7AyDQnUKsIyEGZaJcT2dIFMGNVyqsr >>>> 7nL >>>> >> WuCbVwCDo_mqKdBpLG2eSmAWmSaOYcZxRLwpzMl1GqEqNRr1SA$ >>>> >> >>>> >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >>>> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2 >>>> >> =draft- >>>> >> ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting- >>>> >> >>>> 09__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!HBzOZHijNkg7AyDQnUKsIyEGZaJcT2dIFMGNVyqsr7nLW >>>> uC >>>> >> bVwCDo_mqKdBpLG2eSmAWmSaOYcZxRLwpzMl1GqFdWqTU2g$ >>>> >> >>>> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at >>>> >> rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> _______________________________________________ >>>> >> dmarc mailing list >>>> >> dmarc@ietf.org >>>> >> >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc >>>> __;! >>>> >> >>>> !CQl3mcHX2A!HBzOZHijNkg7AyDQnUKsIyEGZaJcT2dIFMGNVyqsr7nLWuCbV >>>> wCD >>>> >> o_mqKdBpLG2eSmAWmSaOYcZxRLwpzMl1GqEDBiM7_A$ >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for >>>> Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. <a >>>> href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://jl.ly__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!Fpku2qYC >>>> TuZKAA4K08a9mXXHN3ECaWvI28GCiy40HeEi8kyMh5bKjQWeT7UFbqsfeN5N >>>> v88e0Nj1WqU$">https://jl.ly</a> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> dmarc mailing list >>> dmarc@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dmarc mailing list >> dmarc@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc > >_______________________________________________ >dmarc mailing list >dmarc@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
