Re: [gnso-thickwhoispdp-wg] new pictures

[Rick Wesson <rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Don,

> 1) data loss through hack or inadvertent disclosure

Could you define "inadvertent disclosure" when the data is *always*
available globally via :43 and :80 not to mention in bulk?

I have a difficultly understanding how this data is "hackable" when its
freely available. Finally, how could "data loss" be a factor as the data
effectively is published. How could it possibly become lost or hacked. I
can't seem to think of an example of either, could you provide one of each?

thanks,

-rick


On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 6:22 PM, Don Blumenthal <dblumenthal@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Rick,
>
> I don't agree that we can ignore a discussion of the possibility of data
> losses, although we don't need to go into depth on analyzing security
> measures.
>
> The legal details are TBD as the data protection group gets to work.
>
> Don
>
> On 2/10/13 9:10 PM, "Rick Wesson" <rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >Don,
> >
> >
> >> The question for me basically is:
> >>
> >> Does requiring a move from a thin to a thick registry raise issues
> >>concerning 1) data loss through hack or inadvertent disclosure or 2)
> >>clashes with data protection laws? Both questions need to be considered
> >>during transfer and when the data is in the registry's Whois.
> >
> >In the hopes of keeping this all on track could you enumerate how
> >these relate to the charter? data -loss though hacking does not appear
> >to be within our remit. Data protection lwas is as broad as there are
> >geo-political regions. could you tighten up your constraints and
> >provide concrete examples of both the laws, country of origin,
> >implications, and matrix that into a graphic our chair might grok.
> >
> >starting timer....
> >
> >thanks,
> >
> >-rick
>
>