Human Rights Considerations for RFC7725
draft-manyfolks-hrcrfc7725-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2017-07-17
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Human Rights Protocol Considerations Research Group           S. Abraham
Internet-Draft                                                 CIS India
Intended status: Informational                               MP. Canales
Expires: January 16, 2018                             Derechos Digitales
                                                          O. Khrustaleva
                                                     American University
                                                             C. Runnegar
                                                                    ISOC
                                                           July 15, 2017

                Human Rights Considerations for RFC7725
                     draft-manyfolks-hrcrfc7725-00

Abstract

   This is draft applies the model for developing human rights protocol
   considerations as defined in draft-irtf-hrpc-research for [RFC7725].

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on January 16, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of

Abraham, et al.         Expires January 16, 2018                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                  hrcRFC775                      July 2017

   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Connectivity  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Visibility in a browser . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   4.  Privacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  Content Agnosticism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   6.  Security  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  Internationalization  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   8.  Censorship Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   9.  Open Standards  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   10. Heterogeneity Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   11. Anonymity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   12. Accessibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   13. Localization  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   14. Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   15. Confidentiality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   16. Integrity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   17. Authenticity  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   18. Adaptability  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   19. Outcome Transparency  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   20. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   21. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   22. Research Group Information  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   23. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     23.1.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     23.2.  URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8

1.  Introduction

   This is draft applies the model for developing human rights protocol
   considerations as defined in draft-irtf-hrpc-research for RFC7725.

2.  Connectivity

   HTTP 451 status code response can be sent by the end nodes as well as
   by intermediary nodes, which makes for a potential anonymity breach
   possible.  However, this anonymity breach needs to be intentional.

3.  Visibility in a browser

   In the web-browsing context, the HTTP status code response might only
   be issued for a sub-resource (e.g. images, videos, extra HTML, CSS,
   or JavaScript, which are each fetched using separate requests),
Show full document text