Re: ACTION-372 service providers and debugging


the following text isn't seen as optional AFAICT

As long as there is: 
No Secondary Use
Data Minimization and Transparency
Reasonable Security
No Personalization

May be the chairs could clarify their understanding here. It also has 
unintended consequences if we remove those principles. 
E.g. if we do not have a limit to finality of the permitted use, none of 
the permitted uses make sense. Because data collected for security could 
be used for something else, say profiles. 

E.g. if we do not have data minimization (to the data needed), the 
amount of data that is collected under a permitted use would be unbound. 

On Wednesday 27 March 2013 09:08:28 Jonathan Mayer wrote:
> There's optional text in the current draft.
> On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 at 12:32 AM, Rigo Wenning wrote:
> > Jonathan,
> > 
> > On Friday 22 March 2013 17:54:21 Jonathan Mayer wrote:
> > > The global minimization requirement is unsettled. One textual
> > > option
> > > only covers retention, the other also covers collection. We also
> > > still have to calibrate the rigor of the global minimization
> > > requirement.
> > 
> > I don't see the dispute in the Draft. Can you give me a pointer
> > where
> > the "unsettled" comes from in your opinion?
> > 
> > --Rigo

Received on Wednesday, 27 March 2013 22:11:02 UTC