Re: ENUM Privacy (was RE: [Enum] User ENUM vs Operator ENUM)

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com>]

Kim and all,

  Again good point, and exactly right in your conclusion.  The two tier
approach is IMHO being used to be unclear purposefully as a method
to soothe concerns of privacy while at the same time effecting a policy
that would be so confusing to the unsuspecting public at getting
access to private information as well as perhaps selling said
information
to potential marketing firms in order to bolster the providers bottom
line.

Fullbrook Kim (UK) wrote:

>    It's not clear to me exactly what you're suggesting here.
>
> - If the DNS you're referring to is private then no concerns.
> - If the DNS is publicly accessible then are you saying that in the
> DNS the
> E.164 number only has a domain name corresponding to it without a
> username
> e.g. 12345678909 -> sip:bigtelco.com   ?  This would be an incomplete
> URI
> and would need some other mechanism to provide call routing to a
> specific
> user, perhaps a full ENUM DNS which is only accessible by Operators.
> This
> "two tier" system would get rid of most of the privacy concerns but
> with the
> downside of some duplication of material.  Could be a solution worthy
> of
> further study.
> - If the DNS is publicly accessible with the URI in usual format e.g.
> 12345678909 -> sip:jdoe at bigtelco.com  then we are back to the same
> situation
> already described: anyone can "war dial" the DNS and build up a list
> of SIP
> URIs of subscribers which is effectively a publicly accessible phone
> book
> without "opt out".
>
> Kim.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Hammer [mailto:mhammer at cisco.com]
> Sent: 22 June 2004 20:38
> To: Jeff Williams
> Cc: enum at ietf.org; Stastny Richard
> Subject: Re: AW: ENUM Privacy (was RE: [Enum] User ENUM vs Operator
> ENUM)
>
> <Original note edited>
>
> I would argue that for any E.164 number in the form of a domain name
> that
> is found within the DNS, if the resulting records point simply to
> information of a service or a service provider address that does not
> provide more information specific to an individual subscriber, then no
>
> privacy violation has occurred.  Any messages sent to that address, be
> they
> http, email, im, sip, h323, or whatever can then be handled on their
> own
> terms.  Routing happens.
>
>
>
> -
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>    Part 1.2       Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
>               Encoding: 7bit

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827



_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
enum at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum