22:45:31 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #privacy
22:45:31 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-privacy-irc
22:45:35 <npdoty> scribenick: npdoty
22:45:36 <alex> alex has joined #privacy
22:45:51 <npdoty> hhalpin: recap what's happened
22:45:56 <alex> Q?
22:46:01 <npdoty> ... interest in identity
22:46:04 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #privacy
22:46:06 <vgalindo> vgalindo has joined #privacy
22:46:26 <npdoty> ... from a workshop, saw most interest in common JS cryptography api
22:46:30 <Josh_Soref> s|Q?||
22:46:46 <npdoty> ... shocking amount of consensus that a minimal API would be useful
22:46:58 <aleecia> aleecia has joined #privacy
22:47:07 <Josh_Soref> i|recap|Topic: Crypto|
22:47:09 <npdoty> ... less consensus on covering identity topics as well
22:47:14 <Josh_Soref> RRSAgent, draft minutes
22:47:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-privacy-minutes.html Josh_Soref
22:47:21 <SteveH_> SteveH_ has joined #privacy
22:47:37 <npdoty> ... wouldn't this work be better in webappsec? they said no thanks
22:47:38 <Josh_Soref> RRSAgent, make minutes public
22:47:38 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', Josh_Soref.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
22:48:08 <npdoty> rrsagent, make logs public
22:48:15 <npdoty> rrsagent, draft minutes
22:48:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-privacy-minutes.html npdoty
22:49:01 <npdoty> ... one charter with separate groups for identity and cryptography
22:49:02 <ddahl> Web Cryptography charter http://www.w3.org/wiki/IdentityCharter
22:49:15 <tlr> tlr has joined #privacy
22:49:17 <npdoty> fjh: is the scope appropriate?
22:49:20 <Josh_Soref> Chair: hhalpin
22:49:32 <ddahl> http://www.w3.org/wiki/IdentityCharter#Web_Cryptography_Working_Group_Charter
22:49:32 <Josh_Soref> RRSAgent, draft minutes
22:49:32 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-privacy-minutes.html Josh_Soref
22:49:42 <npdoty> @@: do you have enough people to do both? if the interest is mostly in cryptography, why not just do that?
22:49:44 <rvaneijk> rvaneijk has joined #privacy
22:49:56 <Josh_Soref> s/@@/hhalpin/
22:50:05 <ddahl> http://www.w3.org/2011/identity-ws/report.html
22:50:47 <schunter> schunter has joined #privacy
22:50:50 <Josh_Soref> s/hhalpin/@@/
22:51:03 <npdoty> @@@: the problem space for cryptography is much more defined than the identity space; identity feels like there are a number of different proposals
22:51:18 <npdoty> ... split off the cryptography API now as something to get done now
22:51:31 <fjh> q?
22:52:03 <npdoty> ... suggest a separate cryptography working group
22:52:27 <npdoty> %%: are these the same people anyway?
22:52:57 <fjh> s/%%/SteveH_/
22:53:35 <npdoty> Virginie_Gemalto: crypto is much larger than identity, and so should be separate
22:53:48 <npdoty> q?
22:53:59 <Suresh> Suresh has joined #privacy
22:54:14 <npdoty> tlr: does the room know the exact content of the identity work?
22:54:16 <fjh> +1 to tlr, please clarify identity portion of charter
22:54:30 <npdoty> s/@@@/MarkWatson_Netflix/
22:55:02 <npdoty> ... agreement to starting work on cryptography and key issues, a tractable set of problems
22:55:17 <npdoty> <identity jokes>
22:55:48 <npdoty> hhalpin: we had a workshop on identity where half the people were also involved in cryptography
22:55:48 <Josh_Soref> s/<identity jokes>/[ Identity Jokes ]/
22:56:37 <npdoty> hhalpin: if the client had some ability to sign things, then the client could sign things which would benefit the existing identity frameworks
22:56:58 <ddahl> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Identity/Verified_Email_Protocol/Latest
22:57:00 <npdoty> ... Mozilla would like it for BrowserID, for example
22:57:45 <npdoty> ... feeling like the identity API might be a thin layer on top of the cryptography primitives
22:58:30 <npdoty> ... concern expressed that some problems were quite hard (like key storage), having use cases is important
22:58:33 <adrianba> q+
22:58:35 <ddahl> DOMCrypt API draft: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Privacy/Features/DOMCryptAPISpec/Latest
22:58:39 <Josh_Soref> q+ stpeter to say: interest also for deploying JSON-based signing and encryption, see http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/jose/charter/
22:58:39 <shunan__> shunan__ has joined #privacy
22:59:30 <Josh_Soref> q+ Josh_Soref to mention http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-identity-minutes.html which was an earlier breakout
22:59:37 <npdoty> hhalpin: identity systems work by transmitting claims, and proving that the claims came from an IDP, proof done through some kind of signatures
23:00:09 <shepazu> shepazu has joined #privacy
23:00:11 <npdoty> stpeter: the identity piece is a customer of the crypto api, but not the only customer
23:00:25 <adrianba> q?
23:00:29 <npdoty> rigo: have you taken into account that identity is one of the privileges of the king?
23:01:02 <npdoty> [no one understands at all]
23:01:29 <aleecia> Um. What?
23:01:30 <npdoty> rigo: goes to the fundamentals of a nation state
23:01:44 <npdoty> q?
23:01:48 <nwidell> nwidell has joined #privacy
23:01:56 <npdoty> ack adrianba 
23:02:43 <SteveH__> SteveH__ has joined #privacy
23:03:05 <npdoty> adrianba: not an expert, but the charter is very browser centric, a JavaScript API could work very well beyond just the browser -- widget, nodejs, other environments
23:03:10 <Josh_Soref> [ Josh_Soref: The charter visibly is heavily scoped to a Browser ]
23:04:03 <npdoty> ... regarding specificity, not clear to me which use cases we're addressing or how we would know we were done
23:04:22 <Josh_Soref> [ Josh_Soref: The charter is visibly vague on use cases: "Use cases include identity on the web and advanced protocols between web applications. " ]
23:04:29 <Josh_Soref> q?
23:04:33 <stpeter> q-
23:04:50 <ddahl> use cases page for DOMCrypt (needs updating): https://wiki.mozilla.org/Privacy/Features/DOMCryptAPI/UseCases
23:04:59 <stpeter> Jan Lindquist
23:05:20 <npdoty> Jan: content protection would be one important use case
23:05:31 <dsinger> q+\
23:05:37 <dsinger> q-\
23:05:38 <tlr> q?
23:05:40 <dsinger> q+
23:06:04 <michaelhanson> JOSE WG charter is http://www.ietf.org/dyn/wg/charter/jose-charter
23:06:12 <npdoty> hhalpin: because there was less representation of content providers at the workshop we didn't go into as much on that, but those would be good additional use cases
23:06:12 <SteveH__> 05process issue: did we want to timebox the charter discussion to 30 mins?
23:06:19 <dsinger> q?
23:06:31 <npdoty> ... use cases would be a deliverable of the group itself
23:07:22 <mark> mark has joined #privacy
23:07:30 <npdoty> adrianba: my general concern about W3C charters is that the work isn't specific enough, which makes it hard to know if it's valuable enough to participate
23:07:33 <mark> q+
23:07:53 <Josh_Soref> q?
23:07:54 <SteveH__> 05very cool
23:08:07 <fjh> s/very cool//
23:08:30 <Josh_Soref> ack me
23:08:30 <Zakim> Josh_Soref, you wanted to mention http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-identity-minutes.html which was an earlier breakout
23:08:47 <SteveH_> SteveH_ has left #privacy
23:09:11 <Josh_Soref> There was a previous breakout http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-identity-minutes.html on identity
23:09:39 <npdoty> we'll go through the q and then tlr will ask a straw poll and potentially split out of the room
23:09:41 <npdoty> q?
23:09:45 <npdoty> ack dsinger
23:10:12 <npdoty> dsinger: too much about browsers and users and needs to be written in more abstract terms (echo adrianba)
23:10:15 <npdoty> ack mark
23:10:38 <npdoty> mark: device identity is an important part, which is also important for content protection
23:10:58 <npdoty> ... out-of-band distributed keys as a core use case
23:11:17 <Josh_Soref> i|go through the q|tlr: that was an unfortunate scheduling item, a number of us here could not be there and we asked them not to do it|
23:11:29 <npdoty> tlr: summary, crypto API inspired by domcrypt which has significant interest but needs a crisp, clear and bounded scope
23:12:11 <npdoty> ... does anyone have a specific identity-related API with support from beyond themselves?
23:12:25 <Josh_Soref> +1
23:12:43 <npdoty> ... have another identity workshop in half a year
23:12:57 <npdoty> hhalpin: one month to iterate the crypto api, then ship it to AC review
23:12:57 <fjh> +1 to scoping carefully and tlr
23:13:07 <npdoty> ... please help clarify these use cases
23:13:14 <npdoty> stpeter: and encourage more people to get involved here
23:13:41 <Josh_Soref> i|one month|[ there was no one who stepped forward to claim a spec with support from another party ]|
23:13:57 <npdoty> tlr: who is interested in finding time today to write more on the charter? (outside right now)
23:15:10 <npdoty> dsinger: need an activity area for privacy/security/identity as a cohesive set of problems
23:15:21 <npdoty> Topic: HTTP Auth
23:15:51 <npdoty> Yukata: many people agree that the auth is broken
23:16:30 <npdoty> ... hard for users to check when entering their password that they weren't redirected that they aren't being phished
23:16:43 <npdoty> ... limited usage beyond Basic HTTP Auth
23:16:55 <npdoty> ... TLS has client authentication, but also only limited auth
23:17:03 <npdoty> ... form authentication is widely used but has lots of problems
23:17:17 <npdoty> ... a better HTTP authentication is required
23:17:43 <michaelhanson> michaelhanson has joined #privacy
23:18:09 <npdoty> ... passwords the simplest to understand
23:18:24 <npdoty> ... but other authentication means are necessary (need expert help)
23:18:40 <npdoty> ... What should we solve? What is the scope?
23:18:52 <npdoty> ... finding people who are interested in helping
23:19:15 <npdoty> IETF draft available, would appreciate input
23:19:22 <npdoty> http-auth@ietf.org
23:19:44 <npdoty> Yukata: proposal for HTTP Mutual Auth
23:19:50 <npdoty> ... a much more secure password authentication
23:20:59 <npdoty> ... server sends a challenge message to the client, so that the client can validate the server as well
23:21:14 <npdoty> ... server uses a stored secret to authenticate itself to the client
23:21:53 <npdoty> ... input names for username and password in the browser chrome itself
23:22:29 <npdoty> [demo of the protocol in use on a browser]
23:23:18 <npdoty> draft-oiwa-http-*
23:23:55 <npdoty> fjh: SHTTP may have tried to do something similar
23:24:22 <dsinger> https://www.rcis.aist.go.jp/special/MutualAuth/
23:24:44 <npdoty> yukata: easier to implement because compliant with existing HTTP auth [paraphrasing]
23:25:02 <npdoty> Jan: at what stage do you store the shared secret token?
23:25:09 <rvaneijk> Thank you David
23:25:38 <npdoty> dsinger: one of the reasons against using HTTP auth is that sites want to integrate it into their page rather than the user chrome
23:26:02 <npdoty> ... discussion at the identity workshop about form labeling technologies in the user agent
23:26:16 <npdoty> dsr: but users can't generate good passwords
23:26:44 <npdoty> ... fan of Mozilla to get the browser to generate the password
23:27:32 <npdoty> alex: vulnerability to man-in-the-middle during initial registration
23:28:00 <npdoty> yukata: issues with phishing on the first site
23:28:10 <npdoty> http://www.w3.org/2011/07/privacy-ig-charter
23:28:14 <npdoty> Topic: Privacy IG
23:28:17 <npdoty> scribenick: aleecia
23:28:20 <rigo> rigo has joined #privacy
23:28:27 <alex> alex has joined #privacy
23:28:44 <aleecia> npdoty: not much time, send me feedback. AC review & approval for privacy interest group.
23:29:05 <fjh> see also http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-app-privacy-bp-20110804/
23:29:21 <yoiwa> yoiwa has joined #privacy
23:29:22 <aleecia> … Additional topics and cross-WG privacy issues. Ex: P3P, Tracking protection WG. Others like fingerprinting, local storage, cross multiple WGs
23:29:42 <aleecia> …Would like an interest group to think about how W3C can do better across specs. 
23:30:08 <aleecia> …could do guidelines, or locus of expertise. Often privacy takes legal and technical together.
23:30:11 <fjh> q+ 
23:30:29 <aleecia> …send out formal participant call as we work out chairs, ideally later this month
23:30:54 <aleecia> %%: Lot to be gained by a privacy layer across social media. 
23:31:00 <npdoty> s/%%/alex/
23:31:46 <aleecia> … Ex: bucket gender or age group for release, could have spec that's open and W3C controlled, makes more sense than each social media has their own untrusted
23:31:51 <rigo> ack fjh
23:32:31 <aleecia> Frederick: privacy doesn't work modularly in a system. Those who create JS or content, date retention, reuse: privacy is a little out of scope. Informed consent means what's being done with data and by whom
23:32:48 <aleecia> …don't think any single group could deal with it. This would be helpful, but not sure it's possible.
23:33:06 <aleecia> …supportive of increased awareness. Not sure how it would address technical
23:33:14 <aleecia> %%: is privacy a horizontal group?
23:33:19 <aleecia> Frederick: would have to
23:33:57 <npdoty> s/%%/dsr/
23:34:31 <aleecia> Rigo: past AC meeting, security guys said "you don't get a free ride in security consulting." If the IG path, could lack the support needed. Only makes sense if we have commitment that several actors come together -- if you're a privacy advocate you are deeply annoying everyone else.
23:34:35 <npdoty> q?
23:34:41 <dsinger> q+
23:35:07 <aleecia> Peter: not enthusiastic about a group to review output of other groups. In favor of IG that develops best practices and processes that groups are advised to follow
23:35:40 <aleecia> …avoid CSS issue with privacy called out, "don't have to follow spec if you want to fix the privacy problem," instead let's fix the spec. 
23:35:46 <aleecia> …MSFT would be involved
23:36:09 <aleecia> David: Group can come to IG for help, not the other way around, or it's an unbounded work load
23:36:13 <rigo> q+ Rob
23:36:17 <rigo> ack dsinger
23:36:22 <aleecia> …start with "this is how you write a privacy considerations section"
23:36:30 <aleecia> …make it better each year
23:37:08 <aleecia> Robert: two success criteria. Establish systematic process could be general for such a group. Within data protection world, privacy impact assessment gets to "select before you collect" and PbD.
23:37:23 <fjh> s/doesn't work modularly in a system/is a systemic issue, so hard for a single WG to deal with in isolation./
23:37:29 <dsinger> q+
23:37:47 <rigo> ack Rob
23:37:49 <aleecia> …part of risk management approach in security, can apply here. Side effect: raise awareness. Main goal: systematic approach where privacy is quality criteria.
23:37:54 <aleecia> %%: agree in general.
23:38:09 <aleecia> …anything that makes it better is worth doing, low bar <laughter>
23:38:11 <fjh> s/Those who create JS or content/For web applications for example, issue include web applications control/
23:38:17 <npdoty> s/%%/adrianba/
23:38:32 <aleecia> %%: identify new problems? Other solutions in other standards? If no solution, look for a way to find one.
23:38:38 <fjh> s/ privacy is a little out of scope/that is out of most wg scope/
23:38:39 <aleecia> …scope for the interest group
23:38:46 <fjh> rrsagent, generate minutes
23:38:46 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-privacy-minutes.html fjh
23:39:11 <aleecia> Adrianba: look for issues that we've seen in the past. Or apply security processes and adapt them. Several ways to approach. Work of the group to identify.
23:39:15 <dsinger> ?
23:39:18 <dsinger> q?
23:39:57 <aleecia> npdoty: not starting from scratch. IETF world, Alyssia Cooper is working on a similar document. Best practices for privacy in Internet protocol design, plus glossary draft.
23:40:07 <aleecia> …hopeful work we can share, but different problems
23:40:11 <fjh> s/web applications control/web applications /
23:40:36 <aleecia> DavidSinger: fingerprinting can mean my house, not me (via appliance) 
23:40:54 <aleecia> …retention of personally derived information, there are external standards we can point to
23:41:18 <aleecia> npdoty: W3C has some of this via mobile web best practices for developers
23:41:28 <aleecia> …TAG working on minimization for API design
23:41:31 <dsinger> q-
23:41:38 <aleecia> …some W3C pieces already we can put into that
23:41:59 <aleecia> …this feels like our first IG meeting <laughter>
23:42:06 <aleecia> …who else should be here?
23:42:14 <aleecia> %%: Hans mumble
23:42:31 <aleecia> hannes tschofinig
23:42:47 <aleecia> David: already valuable as a place to share information
23:42:58 <aleecia> npdoty: in scope of charter
23:43:13 <adrianba> adrianba has left #privacy
23:43:14 <bkihara> bkihara has left #privacy
23:43:54 <aleecia> Rob: privacy impact assessment shows privacy as process is nothing but risk identification in security 
23:45:03 <aleecia> Rob: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policies/privacy/docs/wpdocs/2011/wp180_en.pdf -- first detailed summary of RFID PIA
23:46:11 <nwidell> nwidell has joined #privacy
23:53:17 <dsinger> dsinger has joined #privacy
00:00:59 <dsinger> dsinger has joined #privacy
00:15:46 <fjh> fjh has joined #privacy
00:42:22 <aleecia> aleecia has joined #privacy
00:56:35 <schunter> schunter has joined #privacy
01:02:42 <Frankie> Frankie has joined #privacy
01:05:35 <shepazu> shepazu has joined #privacy
01:23:53 <ddahl> ddahl has joined #privacy
02:03:30 <aleecia> aleecia has joined #privacy
02:11:56 <dsinger> dsinger has joined #privacy
02:12:03 <aleecia> aleecia has joined #privacy
02:17:05 <Zakim> Zakim has left #privacy
02:27:51 <dsinger> dsinger has left #privacy
02:28:36 <aleecia> aleecia has joined #privacy
03:12:38 <fjh> fjh has joined #privacy
03:23:24 <michaelhanson> michaelhanson has joined #privacy
04:46:35 <schunter> schunter has left #privacy
04:54:17 <aleecia> aleecia has joined #privacy
05:06:50 <aleecia> aleecia has joined #privacy
06:42:18 <aleecia> aleecia has joined #privacy