May 2011 - cooperation-wg - mailman.ripe.net

IPv6 at EuroDIG
by chrisb＠ripe.net 31 May '11

31 May '11

Dear colleagues, The EuroDIG conference (European Dialogue on Internet Governance) is taking place today and tomorrow (30-31 May) in Belgrade, Serbia. While the Critical Internet Resources section of the conference is being devoted to new gTLD issues, the RIPE NCC is working with a number of other groups to hold a side event on IPv6 adoption and the issues it raises for Internet governance. If you are attending the event, the discussion will take place at 11:30 (CET) on Tuesday morning. More information is available here: http://www.eurodig.org/eurodig-2011/programme/plenary/side-events Unfortunately, as a side event, remote participation will not be provided. However, other plenary and workshop sessions at the conference feature remote participation, inlcluding webcast, live stenography and Webex participation. Ypou can access these services from: http://www.eurodig.org/webcast Best regards, Chris Buckridge External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

2 2

SMTP forwarding in the face of Data Protection Directive
by Alessandro Vesely 23 May '11

23 May '11

Hi all, can a tool for lawfully acquiring a user's consent via the Internet motivate SMTP operators to modify their procedures in such a way that spam can be countered more effectively? Let me please expand slightly on this question, I'll try and be concise. It is well known that the Simple Mail Transfer Protocol provides for replacing the envelope recipient with one or more other email addresses. This server forwarding is not to be confused with manually forwarding a message from a client. Mailing lists and newsletters are operated that way, as well as redirection configured by means of "dot forward" static files. Since email addresses are personal data, their processing is covered by Directive 95/46/EC. How is the data subject's consent acquired? In response to the Data Protection Directive, operators should have defined a protocol for obtaining and keeping proof of the consent. It never happened. In facts, it is very difficult to introduce new protocols for email --new protocols for web operations come about much more frequently. Evidence that consent has been granted can be provided by the data subject's mail exchanger (MX, a.k.a. the user's incoming mail server). It can digitally sign a notification from the data processor. That way, the user's server becomes aware of a new wanted stream of messages, and can whitelist it. That is, it can skip anti-spam checking for those messages. As bulk messages account for a significant part of legitimate mail, anti-spam measures could then be significantly strengthened. The users' advantage is to have an automatically maintained list of subscriptions, and a uniform interface to manage them. Currently, users have to interact with what can be called a "time-distributed database", in the sense that monthly or yearly they may receive subscription reminders... The obvious shortcoming of this idea is that mail server operators simply won't install any new software if their systems can work acceptably well without it. However, acquiring written consent is such a pain to many businesses that, perhaps, they will install that software if it helps complying with privacy issues. What do you think? TIA for any comment

5 11

Participate Now: RIPE NCC Membership and Stakeholder Survey
by Axel Pawlik 19 May '11

19 May '11

[Apologies for duplicate emails] Dear colleagues, You still have time to take part in the RIPE NCC Membership and Stakeholder Survey 2011. The survey can be taken at: https://www.ripe.net/survey2011 ================== Important Feedback ================== This survey comes at a critical point as it will influence the strategy of the RIPE NCC following the depletion of the IPv4 address pool. The analysis of the survey results will be conducted by the Oxford Internet Institute, and all identifying information will be removed before the data is given to the RIPE NCC. For the first time, the survey is open to all stakeholders in the RIPE community in addition to RIPE NCC members. So far, over 300 people have responded to the survey. We aim to receive 1,000 responses by the survey closing date of 10 June. The survey should take only 10-15 minutes to complete. =========== Win an iPad =========== To encourage participation in the survey, the RIPE NCC is giving away five iPads to respondents chosen at random by the OII. Next week, we will announce the "early bird" winner of the first iPad, who will be drawn from those who responded to the survey by 16 May. The other four iPads will be drawn at random from all respondents. We look forward to receiving your input. Best regards, Axel Pawlik Managing Director RIPE NCC

1 0

What governments don't get (feedback on data retention)
by Alessandro Vesely 05 May '11

05 May '11

Hi all! After applauding Malcom yesterday, I've recognized a parallel between VAT and wiretapping: They both don't work well with layers. Traditionally, telephony is conceived as the service of a single operator. Suppose that the telecom splits among various intermediaries. Actually, several large industries define such kind of split internally, for administrative purposes. However, if the split is real each provider of a service layer has to pay VAT, while departments don't. By a similar logic, if cryptography is deployed at some layers, then wiretapping has to be coordinated with those layers as well --possibly not the network provider or cable operator roles that the directive targets. Can someone suggest a solution that would solve both issues :-)

1 0

Re: cooperation-wg digest, Vol 1 #28 - 1 msg
by Malcolm Hutty 03 May '11

03 May '11

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/05/2011 11:00, Malcolm Hutty wrote: > This has now moved on, with the publication of the Evaluation Report on > the Data Retention Directive. > > A copy of the report, and a little commentary I wrote are at the URLs > that follow No sooner do I report that relatively happy news, than I receive news of the response from the Council of Ministers. The Presidency has circulated to Member States a questionnaire that reads rather like a rebuttal. In particular the questionnaire invites Member States to say * that even though Data Retention is said to be justified for the purpose of dealing with "serious crime", once data has been retained it can be used for other purposes; and * that when assess the Directive Member States can ignore the evidence and proceed simply on the basis of the expressed wishes of law enforcement. Statewatch obtained a leaked copy, which you can find here: http://www.statewatch.org/news/2011/apr/eu-council-mand-ret-discussion-pape… - -- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/ London Internet Exchange Ltd Maya House, 134-138 Borough High Street, London SE1 1LB Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk2/6W8ACgkQJiK3ugcyKhQc5QCghbm+/oeBKFCwXz/l1KJXITyh PYkAn1HJorlUln930dpb7Z5aucS0kyMx =gBV2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: cooperation-wg digest, Vol 1 #25 - 1 msg
by Malcolm Hutty 02 May '11

02 May '11

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 24/02/2011 11:00, cooperation-wg-request(a)ripe.net wrote: >> EU Directive 2006/24/EC on Data Retention was a very poor document . >> I hear that the EU is working on such things again. > > Yes, and no. There is a review going on, and a meeting was held in late > November in Brussels. > > Rumours say that COM will not open up the directive, but instead clarify > what is intended. Which to me is another reason for the coop wg to bring > this up. [...] > Patrik This has now moved on, with the publication of the Evaluation Report on the Data Retention Directive. A copy of the report, and a little commentary I wrote are at the URLs that follow http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/malmstrom/archive/20110418_data_re… https://publicaffairs.linx.net/news/?p=3930 - -- Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523 Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/ London Internet Exchange Ltd Maya House, 134-138 Borough High Street, London SE1 1LB Company Registered in England No. 3137929 Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk2+hrcACgkQJiK3ugcyKhRSxACgzlsD09TA/44qnCQVptWSXwD3 G2UAn1aShHUEhp54D2lQaOEXluNXy7QZ =4+Cs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0