Privacy re: ibm editor, p3p, epic.org

(interchange from CMU internal mail):

yup
 Privacy is an extremely loaded thing.  The paper you found from epic is
a great example of horrible half truths.  For example, their reference
to alternatives sounds good on the surface, but actually go out and
review *that* landscape!  It can be best characterized as patchy,
opportunistic use of engineering intended for other things, serving the
protection of information, not the use of information! 
 P3P is absolutely the best I've seen because it addresses the
desease directly. Vague references like "highest known standards" --
what are these?  I find NO literature as compelling as the P3P
working draft although I have emphasized that these are not bilateral
agreements and they must be for P3P to work.  These
people want FEDERAL control over privacy and they are willing to dump
on any effort, no matter how much ancillary support it can give, that
disrupts their mission.  This internecine fighting itself may doom
privacy and that would be another case of something very unfortunate
happening.   
 
A much more positive approach is a R&D approach that seeks to broadly
distribute a deep (non-politicized) understanding and experimental
investigation of how to deal with this very important problem.

regards, Bob


linda bytnar wrote:
> 
> ....after several hours of installing an editor that keeps crashing