I'm not disagreeing with the idea below, just that by omitting this in the draft, we could leave it open to interpretation that it *always* will be a privacy violation. This could justify decisions by some receivers to decline to send reports.
Otherwise, I'll remove 6.3. -- Alex Brotman Sr. Engineer, Anti-Abuse & Messaging Policy Comcast > -----Original Message----- > From: dmarc <dmarc-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Scott Kitterman > Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2023 1:14 PM > To: dmarc@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc- > aggregate-reporting-09.txt > > 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/dra > >>>> >> ft-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/draf > >>>> >> t-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/d > >>>> marc > >>>> __;! > >>>> >> > >>>> > !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!Fpku > >>>> 2qYC > TuZKAA4K08a9mXXHN3ECaWvI28GCiy40HeEi8kyMh5bKjQWeT7UFbqsfeN5N > >>>> v88e0Nj1WqU$">https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://jl.ly__;!!CQl3mcH > >>>> > X2A!Cto4yMwda7b3nRK8gpGY7nKgl02tjSkT__FGFJ10Z6Tz6ib1muDEKkCAuWufI- > y > >>>> 7H7WVv7bkc3rHyFM3vJ9QPB69uRg$ </a> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> dmarc mailing list > >>> dmarc@ietf.org > >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dm > >>> > arc__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!Cto4yMwda7b3nRK8gpGY7nKgl02tjSkT__FGFJ10Z6Tz6ib1 > m > >>> uDEKkCAuWufI-y7H7WVv7bkc3rHyFM3vJ9QTLYW37U$ > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> dmarc mailing list > >> dmarc@ietf.org > >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dma > >> > rc__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!Cto4yMwda7b3nRK8gpGY7nKgl02tjSkT__FGFJ10Z6Tz6ib1m > uD > >> EKkCAuWufI-y7H7WVv7bkc3rHyFM3vJ9QTLYW37U$ > > > >_______________________________________________ > >dmarc mailing list > >dmarc@ietf.org > >https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc > >__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!Cto4yMwda7b3nRK8gpGY7nKgl02tjSkT__FGFJ10Z6Tz6ib1mu > DEKkC > >AuWufI-y7H7WVv7bkc3rHyFM3vJ9QTLYW37U$ > > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list > dmarc@ietf.org > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc__;! > !CQl3mcHX2A!Cto4yMwda7b3nRK8gpGY7nKgl02tjSkT__FGFJ10Z6Tz6ib1muDEKk > CAuWufI-y7H7WVv7bkc3rHyFM3vJ9QTLYW37U$ _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
