Anonymity, Human Rights and Internet Protocols
draft-tenoever-hrpc-anonymity-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2017-02-06
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         N. ten Oever
Internet-Draft                                                 Article19
Intended status: Informational                         February 06, 2017
Expires: August 10, 2017

             Anonymity, Human Rights and Internet Protocols
                    draft-tenoever-hrpc-anonymity-00

Abstract

   Anonymity is less discussed topic in the IETF than for instance
   security [RFC3552] or privacy [RFC6973].  This can be attributed to
   the fact anonymity is a hard technical problem or that anonymizing
   user data is not of specific market interest.  It remains a fact that
   'most internet users would like to be anonymous online at least
   occasionally' [Pew].

   This document aims to break down the different meanings and
   implications of anonymity on a mediated computer network.

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 August 10, 2017.

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

ten Oever                Expires August 10, 2017                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                    anon                     February 2017

   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Vocabulary Used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Research Questions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  Research Group Information  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     8.1.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     8.2.  URIs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   There seems to be a clear need for anonymity when harassment on the
   Internet on the increase [Pew2] and the UN Special Rapporteur for
   Freedom of Expression call anonymity 'necessary for the exercise of
   the right to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age'
   [UNHRC2015].

   Nonetheless anonymity is not getting much discussion at the IETF,
   providing anonymity does not seem a (semi-)objective for many
   protocols, even though several documents contribute to improving
   anonymity such as [RFC7258], [RFC7626], [RFC7858].

   There are initiatives on the Internet to improve end users anonymity,
   most notably [torproject], but this all relies on adding encryption
   in the application layer.

   This document aims to break down the different meanings and
   implications of anonymity on a mediated computer network and to see
   whether (some parts of) anonymity should be taken into consideration
   in protocol development.

2.  Vocabulary Used

   Concepts in this draft currently strongly hinges on [AnonTerm]

   Anonymity  A state of an individual in which an observer or attacker
      cannot identify the individual within a set of other individuals
      (the anonymity set).  [RFC6973]

ten Oever                Expires August 10, 2017                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft                    anon                     February 2017

   Linkability  Linkability of two or more items of interest (IOIs,
Show full document text