[anti-abuse-wg] Privacy requirements
Alessandro Vesely vesely at tana.it
Tue Dec 20 17:24:30 CET 2011
On 20/Dec/11 15:44, Frank Gadegast wrote: > > Raising the restrictions on personal objects isnt a bad idea at all, > but it should wait until personal data and abuse contacts are > seperated, like outlined by Tobias' last proposal and after > most objects in the database confirm to this new model. Agreed. What synchronization is exactly needed depends on the software details, so I'd leave that in RIPE NCC's hands. However, proposal 2011-06 doesn't mention relaxing access restrictions. Do we need to add such goal explicitly? > I would love to hide all personal email addresses behind > a randomly changing address <randomcode>@abuse.ripe.net Uh, that sounds like programming the "search" button to step aside from the cursor whenever users try to click on it :-) Abuse directed to an abuse-mailbox is like bugs caught during regression testing: still annoying, but much better than uncontrolled occurrences. > And names, postal, fon and fax address of personal objects > could be hidden behind a webpage with captcha code or thelike, > maybe the abuse finder tool could be enhanced here. Yes, personal data has to be protected. Perhaps not names. Perhaps login is easier than captcha for some users.