- From: Christine Runnegar <runnegar@isoc.org>
- Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 15:35:15 +0000
- To: "norcie@cdt.org" <norcie@cdt.org>
- CC: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org>, Keiji Takeda <tkeiji@w3.org>, "public-privacy (W3C mailing list)" <public-privacy@w3.org>
Hi all. Thanks so much for moving this forward. Just one note, we don’t have a lot of time after the call to get back to the WG. So, as much as we can do before the call the better. Christine > On 18 Feb 2016, at 4:28 PM, Greg Norcie <gnorcie@cdt.org> wrote: > > It might be useful to discuss at the high level on the call, and then we can divy up more detailed feedback (either on the call or offline). > > > /********************************************/ > Greg Norcie (norcie@cdt.org) > Staff Technologist > Center for Democracy & Technology > District of Columbia office > (p) 202-637-9800 > PGP: http://norcie.com/pgp.txt > > CDT's Annual Dinner (Tech Prom) is > April 6, 2016. Don't miss out! > learn more at https://cdt.org/annual-dinner > /*******************************************/ > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org> wrote: > I agree and we just got started on our review, so not sure discussing > WebRTC is ripe for next week (I'll be out of town so can't join the > call, dang it). best, Joe > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 8:17 AM, Keiji Takeda <tkeiji@w3.org> wrote: > > This message is being sent only to PING mailing list. > > > > Since the spec to review is relatively large and complex and having > > significant impact to user privacy so I think it is better to spend enough > > time to exchange thoughts before the actual meeting since the time is > > limited. > > > > Should we share our review results or questions on this mailing list? > > Or is there any good way for such internal discussion? (GitHub?) > > > > Keiji > > > > > > On 2/17/16 4:43 PM, Joseph Lorenzo Hall wrote: > >> > >> We do provide review comments and will consolidate them and bring them > >> back to you. I have to warn you that some of the stuff we may raise > >> will have been argued to death already at IETF and W3C, so it may be a > >> case of a bunch of responses on your end of the variety: "Yes, we > >> considered that before and the consensus of the group was x." ::) > >> > >> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Stefan Håkansson LK > >> <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Thanks Greg and Keiji for your reviews. Is it correct to interpret > >>> Christine's message as that PING will discuss further and come back with > >>> review comments representing the whole group? > >>> > >>> Br, > >>> Stefan > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On 17/02/16 18:09, Greg Norcie wrote: > >>>> > >>>> I don't think you're misunderstanding, these all seem like valid points > >>>> :) > >>>> > >>>> Looking forward to discussing! > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> /********************************************/* > >>>> *Greg Norcie (norcie@cdt.org <mailto:norcie@cdt.org>) > >>>> Staff Technologist > >>>> Center for Democracy & Technology > >>>> District of Columbia office > >>>> (p) 202-637-9800 > >>>> PGP: http://norcie.com/pgp.txt > >>>> > >>>> *CDT's Annual Dinner (Tech Prom) is > >>>> April 6, 2016. Don't miss out! > >>>> learn more at https://cdt.org/annual-dinner* > >>>> /*******************************************/* > >>>> * > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Keiji Takeda <tkeiji@w3.org > >>>> <mailto:tkeiji@w3.org>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Greg, > >>>> > >>>> Thank you for sharing your thought. > >>>> > >>>> I also have been reviewing the spec and have some points need to be > >>>> discussed. > >>>> > >>>> I feel like WebRTC is defining functions beyond current web > >>>> security > >>>> and privacy practices/principles so we need to examine their > >>>> appropriateness carefully. > >>>> > >>>> For example ... > >>>> > >>>> - It makes holes in same origin policy. > >>>> - It reveals client's IP addresses behind VPN or Tor. > >>>> - It provides more fingerprinting surface to track users. > >>>> - Most functions are all or nothing(as Greg pointed out) and it is > >>>> difficult to be conscious unless users intentionally use WebRTC. > >>>> (Attack can be effective against user who do not use WebRTC.) > >>>> > >>>> I may be missing some point but please let me know if I am > >>>> misunderstanding. > >>>> > >>>> Keiji Takeda > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 2/16/16 3:35 PM, Greg Norcie wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi all, > >>>> > >>>> I read through the WebRTC 1.0 spec, and I had a few things that > >>>> jumped out, > >>>> would love to hear if the rest of the group agrees/disagrees. > >>>> > >>>> First, I noticed that the getStats[1] API seems to get a ton of > >>>> granular > >>>> data, some of which could be used to fingerprint users. Do we > >>>> feel that > >>>> this level of granularity is in keeping with previous guidance > >>>> on > >>>> Fingerprinting? [2] > >>>> > >>>> Along similar lines, I noticed that consent for WebRTC seems to > >>>> be quite > >>>> all or nothing - once granted it seems to be difficult to > >>>> revoke. > >>>> Considering WebRTC can expose a user's local IP, maybe we > >>>> should > >>>> recommend > >>>> that this consent be easily revocable and visible when in > >>>> place? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> This has come up in two different reviews now[3], so we may > >>>> want > >>>> to give > >>>> some guidance in the privacy questionnaire. (I will be looking > >>>> at our > >>>> current language and drafting some changes later this week) > >>>> > >>>> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc-stats/ > >>>> [2] https://w3c.github.io/fingerprinting-guidance/ > >>>> [3] The previous being the Permissions UI: > >>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/permissions/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> /********************************************/ > >>>> Greg Norcie (norcie@cdt.org <mailto:norcie@cdt.org>) > >>>> Staff Technologist > >>>> Center for Democracy & Technology > >>>> District of Columbia office > >>>> (p) 202-637-9800 <tel:202-637-9800> > >>>> PGP: http://norcie.com/pgp.txt > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> *CDT's Annual Dinner (Tech Prom) is April 6, 2016. Don't miss > >>>> out!learn > >>>> more at https://cdt.org/annual-dinner > >>>> <https://cdt.org/annual-dinner>* > >>>> > >>>> /*******************************************/ > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 5:08 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK < > >>>> stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com > >>>> <mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Dear Privacy Interest Group, > >>>> > >>>> The WebRTC Working Group is working toward publishing the > >>>> WebRTC 1.0 > >>>> specification to Candidate Recommendation and is thus > >>>> seeking wide > >>>> review on the document: > >>>> > >>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-webrtc-20160128/ > >>>> > >>>> We are particularly interested on feedback on the following > >>>> aspects from > >>>> PING: > >>>> - the privacy considerations, > >>>> - more specifically, the risks associated with exposing IP > >>>> addresses as > >>>> part of the establishment of the P2P connection, > >>>> - the privacy properties of the identity verification > >>>> mechanism, > >>>> - the guarantees provided by isolated mediastreams. > >>>> > >>>> We of course also welcome feedback on any other aspect of > >>>> the > >>>> specification.. > >>>> > >>>> We would appreciate if that feedback could be provided > >>>> before the week > >>>> of February 22 where our next meeting in scheduled, and no > >>>> later than > >>>> March 1st. > >>>> > >>>> If you have any comments, we prefer you submit them as > >>>> Github issues: > >>>> https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues > >>>> Alternatively, you can send your comments by email to > >>>> public-webrtc@w3.org <mailto:public-webrtc@w3.org> > >>>> . > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> > >>>> For the WebRTC co-chairs, > >>>> Stefan Håkansson > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > Joseph Lorenzo Hall > Chief Technologist, Center for Democracy & Technology [https://www.cdt.org] > e: joe@cdt.org, p: 202.407.8825, pgp: https://josephhall.org/gpg-key > Fingerprint: 3CA2 8D7B 9F6D DBD3 4B10 1607 5F86 6987 40A9 A871 > > CDT's annual dinner, Tech Prom, is April 6, 2016! https://cdt.org/annual-dinner > >
Received on Thursday, 18 February 2016 15:35:50 UTC