Subject: RFC 6590 on Redaction of Potentially Sensitive Data from Mail Abuse Reports

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 14:13:33 -0700 (PDT)

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        RFC 6590

        Title:      Redaction of Potentially Sensitive Data 
                    from Mail Abuse Reports 
        Author:     J. Falk, Ed.,
                    M. Kucherawy, Ed.
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       April 2012
        Mailbox:    [email-masked], 
                    [email-masked]
        Pages:      8
        Characters: 15927
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-marf-redaction-08.txt

        URL:        http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6590.txt

Email messages often contain information that might be considered
private or sensitive, per either regulation or social norms.  When
such a message becomes the subject of a report intended to be shared
with other entities, the report generator may wish to redact or elide
the sensitive portions of the message.  This memo suggests one method
for doing so effectively.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]

This document is a product of the Messaging Abuse Reporting Format Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track
protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Internet
Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and
status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html.
For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to [email-masked].  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.

The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC