Subject: [hrpc] New methodology & glossary published -01

From: Niels ten Oever <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:30:45 +0200

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dkg-hrpc-glossary-01
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-varon-hrpc-methodology-01

As always, comments are very welcome.

Best,

Niels

PS Am aware that the document says it's expired (even though the
expiry date is April 18, 2016), I already informed the secretariat
about this.

- -- 
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital

Article 19
www.article19.org

PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
                   678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:54:03 +0200

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 02:30:45PM +0200,
 Niels ten Oever <[email-masked]> wrote 

> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-varon-hrpc-methodology-01

The draft says "The second form occurs through the use of deep packet
inspection, where all DNS protocol messages are inspected by the
network, and objectionable content is distorted, as in [turkey]." But
the article it references never mentions in-network DPI. As far as I
know, in Turkey, it was always through lying resolvers that censorship
was implemented.

Also "The DNS system is organized around a set of independently
operated 'Root Servers' run by organizations around the web" Are we
talking of the Internet or the Web? Also, the DNS is certainly not
organized around the root servers.

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 17:01:35 +0200

> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-varon-hrpc-methodology-01

The XMPP section did not change since the drafts-of-drafts which were
posted here. I regret it (the internationalisation section is
especially confusing).

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 17:19:25 +0200

> Authenticity  The act of confirming the truth of an attribute of a
>      single piece of data or entity.

I'm afraid that no technical protocol can establish the truth, which
is a difficult philosophical concept. Technical protocols can prove,
beyond a reasonable doubt, authenticity (the messages comes from the
source it mentions) and integrity (noone tampered with the message)
but it is not truth.

I can write a message "Dinosaurs never existed" and sign it with PGP,
it would not make it "the truth".

So, I suggest:

Authenticity : The fact that the data does indeed come from the source
it claims to come from. (It is strongly linked with Integrity, see below).

---

From: Will Scott <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 20:44:40 -0700

Sorry for being delinquent on this.
I've opened a pull request removing that section and cleaning up the text
for XMPP
https://github.com/nllz/IRTF-HRPC/pull/14

--Will

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> hrpc mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>

---

From: Niels ten Oever <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 11:54:17 +0200

Thanks Stephane. I updated it on Github [0]. Monday I will push a new
version of the ID, so all comments welcome until then so we can
discuss them in Yokohama.

Best,

Niels

[0] https://github.com/nllz/IRTF-HRPC/blob/master/draft-glossary.md

Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital

Article 19
www.article19.org

On 10/16/2015 05:19 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 02:30:45PM +0200, Niels ten Oever
> <[email-masked]> wrote a message of 41 lines which said:
> 
>> Authenticity  The act of confirming the truth of an attribute of
>> a single piece of data or entity.
> 
> I'm afraid that no technical protocol can establish the truth,
> which is a difficult philosophical concept. Technical protocols can
> prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, authenticity (the messages comes
> from the source it mentions) and integrity (noone tampered with the
> message) but it is not truth.
> 
> I can write a message "Dinosaurs never existed" and sign it with
> PGP, it would not make it "the truth".
> 
> So, I suggest:
> 
> Authenticity : The fact that the data does indeed come from the
> source it claims to come from. (It is strongly linked with
> Integrity, see below).
>