Re: [dssa] Information classification proposal

[Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Rick, Carlos, and Bill,

You may wish to refer to Annex B of the DSSA-WG Charter which includes 
information about the handling of proprietary information.  See: 
https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/7930080/DSSA-WG+Final+Draft+Charter+v1.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1296034298000.
 Annex B is on page 9.

Thanks,

Julie

Julie Hedlund
ICANN Staff


On 5/24/11 3:53 PM, "Rick Wesson" <rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

First, I prefer that we only leverage publicly available information and be as 
open and transparent as possable. While this is my preference I understand some 
of you MAY wish to share sensitive information. I propose that the Traffic 
Light Protocol [1] may be optimal and that those desireing to share sensitive 
information. I've participated in groups that this worked out well, and is 
fairly intuitive.

[FROM WIKIPEDIA...]

There are four colors (or traffic lights):

RED - personal for named recipients only
   In the context of a meeting, for example, RED information is limited to 
those present at the meeting. In most circumstances, RED information will be
  passed verbally or in person.

AMBER - limited distribution
The recipient may share AMBER information with others within their 
organization, but only on a ‘need-to-know’ basis. The originator may be 
expected to specify the intended limits of that sharing.

GREEN - community wide
Information in this category can be circulated widely within a particular 
community. However, the information may not be published or posted publicly on 
the Internet, nor released outside of the community.

 WHITE  - unlimited
Subject to standard copyright rules, WHITE information may be distributed 
freely, without restriction.

-rick

[1] see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_Light_Protocol

2011/5/24 Carlos M. Martinez <carlos@xxxxxxxxxx>
Hello everyone,

<disclaimer>
This is the first ICANN-related WG I'm involved with, so perhaps this is
already covered somewhere. If so, please disregard :-)
</disclaimer>

As a possible idea geared towards facilitating and enabling information
disclosure and exchange within the DSSA and its sub-WGs I would like to
propose we consider using a lightweight information classification scheme.

Under this proposal, a disclosing or contributing party SHOULD tag
documents with the keywords {public, reserved, confidential}.

Possible definitions for these terms would be:

- public: self-explanatory, information and data contained within a
contribution can be made publicly accesible
- reserved: information and data contained within a contribution is NOT
to be made publicly available but each member could share it with the
constituency each represents
- confidential: information and data within a contribution is to be
shared among DSSA members ONLY

We could work a little more on the definitions so they are most
applicable to our environment, these definitions are only "off the top
of my head".

Given the amount of participants within the WG I think this could help
all of us make sound decisions regarding information sharing and could
offer disclosing parties a form to express sharing policy.

regards

Carlos
--

Carlos M. Martinez
LACNIC I+D
PGP KeyID 0xD51507A2
Phone: +598-2604-2222 ext. 4419 <tel:%2B598-2604-2222%20ext.%204419>