W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > January 2012

RE: Defining Collection/Retention/Use/Sharing (ACTION-64, ISSUE-16)

From: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 03:03:35 -0800
To: Jonathan Mayer <jmayer@stanford.edu>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>
CC: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Message-ID: <63294A1959410048A33AEE161379C8023D0C425223@SP2-EX07VS02.ds.corp.yahoo.com>
Is it fair state that if "Collection" is defined in such a stringent manner that there is no technically feasible manner for a web server to NOT collect data (any request/response would at a minimum be "collected" in memory - even if immediately purged) and therefore the conversation shifts to "Retention" for the group at that point?

- Shane

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Mayer [mailto:jmayer@stanford.edu] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 7:28 PM
To: David Singer
Cc: public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)
Subject: Re: Defining Collection/Retention/Use/Sharing (ACTION-64, ISSUE-16)

On Jan 25, 2012, at 6:28 PM, David Singer wrote:

> I'm not sure I get it.  
> For example, do I 'collect' the IP address of the user, while the transaction is in process?  Does 'collect' apply to any information that is the server is exposed to?


> I would have thought that some extra action is needed before it becomes 'collection'.

Not by this definition.

> I think we need to say that the data concerned are 'per-transaction records that contain data that is indexed against a specific user, or an identifier that could be used to identify a specific user'.  That way, transaction logs that are not indexed by IP address (you'd have to troll the log to extract the entries for a given IP) are not in scope, nor are any aggregate counts.

We'll talk about protocol data and unidentifiable data in the context of exceptions.  I don't see any reason to make our treatment of them implicit.

> I wonder if retention is 'keeping information from or about the transaction, after sending the response', i.e. the persistence after the immediate requested transaction.
> On Jan 25, 2012, at 10:54 , Jonathan Mayer wrote:
>> Operative text:
>> A party "collects" data if the data comes within its control.
>> A party "retains" data if data remains within a party's control.
>> A party "uses" data if the party processes the data for any purpose other than storage.
> ...storage?  any other purpose than responding to the inbound request?
>> A party "shares" data if the party enables another party to collect the data.
>> Non-normative text:
>> The definitions of collection, retention, use, and sharing are drafted expansively so as to comprehensively cover a party's user information practices.  These definitions do not require a party's intent; a party may inadvertently collect, retain, use, or share data.  The definition of collection includes information that a party did not cause to be transmitted, such as protocol headers.
> David Singer
> Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Thursday, 26 January 2012 11:04:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:38:30 UTC