[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Google
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: Future Handling of Blue Sheets



On 4/22/12 22:12 , Tobias Gondrom wrote:
> Hi Russ,
> 
> thank you for the information.
> In this case, my preference would be not to publish the blue sheets with
> the proceedings.
> 
> Reasoning:
> The blue sheet data can at some point be used to determine movement
> profiles of individual attendees at the meeting to a finer granularity
> than today and therefore can be an issue for privacy (even though I
> recognize that this is a public meeting). The fact that we "may reduce"
> the amount of subpoenas is a viable reason, still personal data should
> be handled as conservative as possible.

What property of the blue sheet makes it personal data.

> Without a significant and
> measurable economic advantage by the publication, we should rather not
> publish this data with the proceedings.
> (My underlying assumption is of course that currently our cost of
> subpoenas is not forbiddingly high compared to overall conference costs.
> If that assumption proves to be false, I would have to rethink my
> statement above.)
> 
> Besides that:
> - am agnostic on whether we ask for email address or not (in the end I
> gave up on hiding my email address as a way to reduce spam...)
> - even without publication, we could still scan the blue sheets and
> maintain them in an electronic archive without keeping the hard copies
> (please note there may be legal requirements on procedures of handling
> non-paper copies that are later to be used in a court of law).
> - And if we would go to a Hiroshima/RFID model, the discovery in
> subpoenas could be much easier compared to scanned paper documents with
> handwritten names.
> 
> Just my 5cents.
> 
> Tobias
> 
> 
> 
> On 23/04/12 12:41, Russ Housley wrote:
>> Hi Tobias.
>>
>> I would like to make them available as part of the proceedings so that
>> anyone can find them and view them.  This _may_ reduce subpoenas for
>> the blue sheets in the future.
>>
>> Many people have expressed similar thoughts about the RFID
>> experiment.  Last time we investigated a system for IETF meetings, it
>> was quite expensive.  I'll ask again to see if this has changed.
>>
>> Russ
>>
>>
>> On Apr 22, 2012, at 11:44 PM, Tobias Gondrom wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Russ,
>>>
>>> from a privacy perspective: may I ask for what purpose you propose to
>>> publish the blue sheets (with the names of all WG session attendees)
>>> with the proceedings?
>>> AFAIK, at the moment the blue sheets are basically available on
>>> request especially in case of IP questions. What would lead to the
>>> proposal to publish the list of names of attendees always with the
>>> proceedings?
>>>
>>> Best regards, Tobias
>>>
>>>
>>> Ps.: btw. though I might be the only one, but I liked the blue sheet
>>> replacement experiment (RFID) in Hiroshima...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 22/04/12 22:31, IETF Chair wrote:
>>>> At IETF 83, we had a discussion about the future of blue sheets,
>>>> many spoke at the mic in support of the proposal.  There has been
>>>> very little discussion on the mail list.  However, all of the
>>>> discussion that I have see has been very supportive.
>>>>
>>>> The suggestion is three blue sheet changes:
>>>> 1.  No longer ask for email address;
>>>> 2.  Scan the blue sheet and include the image in the proceedings for
>>>> the WG session; and
>>>> 3.  Discard paper blue sheets after scanning.
>>>>
>>>> Please speak up if you think this is the wrong thing to do.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>    Russ
> 



[IETF Annoucements]     [IETF Obscurity Interest]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux]     [Pilates]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]

Add to Google