Subject: Re: [Ltru] Security and nationality

From: Nicolas Krebs <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 23:16:55 +0100

>Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 13:46:52 +0200 (EET)
>From: "Jukka K. Korpela" <[email-masked]>
>To: [email-masked]

A little off topic, on Accept-Language header: 

>In the so-called real world, we also have poorly written software that 
>does very nasty things at times. In particular, the Thunderbird email 
>program, following an old Netscape/Mozilla tradition, automatically 
>inserts an X-Accept-Language header, with values taken from the settings 
>in the Mozilla/Firefox web browser. It even includes that header into 
>Usenet postings. Thus, information intended for selecting between 
>different language versions of web pages is thereby sent, without 
>informing the user, in all outgoing email and Usenet messages. This is of 
>course all wrong, but it's probably not formally wrong by any 
>specification.

- http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/headers.html#X-Accept-Language 
- RFC 4021 section 2.1.27 http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4021.txt 
   http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4021#section-2.1.27
- news:[email-masked]
  http://groups.google.com/group/fr.comp.mail/msg/aee199862e8e1a56
- http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=234033#c47
- http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-lang-priorities

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: Addison Phillips <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 16:26:36 -0800

It might not have occurred to you, but mailers might use this 
information to send bounce, error, and other messages in the language 
that the user prefers.

Interestingly, it can also help mail servers determine the mail encoding 
for those messages that arrive unlabeled (any hint is better than none 
at all).

Addison

-- 
Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc.

Internationalization is an architecture.
It is not a feature.

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 21:49:34 +0100

On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 04:26:36PM -0800,
 Addison Phillips <[email-masked]> wrote 
 a message of 54 lines which said:

> information to send bounce, error, and other messages in the
> language that the user prefers.

Sure, there are a lot of interesting use to such an header (although I
wonder how many MTA read the non-standard X-Accept-Language header
before generating the bounce...). But the point of Jukka K. Korpela's
story was, I believe, that the ordinary user who configures his
software to be in Swahili might not understand that, from now on, his
software will tell everyone about his preferences...

The proposal "It might be contrary to the privacy expectations of the
user to send an Accept-Language header with the complete linguistic
preferences of the user in every request." seems reasonable to me. The
default behavior of Thunderbird is a concern to me, too. IMHO, we
should warn implementors about privacy issues. 

(I do not suggest to make specific requirments such as "MUST NOT send
the language preference by default" but I suggest to warn "There may
be a problem here".)

---

From: "Randy Presuhn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 08:50:48 -0800

Hi -

As a technical contributor...

> From: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <[email-masked]>
> To: "Addison Phillips" <[email-masked]>
> Cc: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 12:49 PM
> Subject: [Ltru] Re: Security and nationality
....
> the language preference by default" but I suggest to warn "There may
...

This thread seems to center on potential problems in other specifications,
rather than intrinsic problems of language tags.  Instead of talking about
specific headers in other protocols, I think we should stay generic.
If folks believe it is necessary to change the current text (I don't), how
about something like:

   Language tags used in, for example, content negotiation, like any
   other information exchanged on the Internet, might be a source
   of concern because they might be used to make inferences
   about sender.

Randy

---

From: Martin Duerst <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 10:43:26 +0900

>the language preference by default" but I suggest to warn "There may

This is what a security section is about anyway.

Regards,     Martin.

#-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-#-#  http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp       mailto:[email-masked]

---

From: Martin Duerst <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 10:43:26 +0900

Regards,     Martin.

---

From: Addison Phillips <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2007 19:50:43 -0800

Randy noted:
> If folks believe it is necessary to change the current text (I don't), 

+1 to the "I don't"

 > how

I can agree with this. In fact, I think it might be better to eliminate 
the example (it would make the text stronger):

   Language tags, like any other information exchanged on the Internet, 
might be a source of concern because the might be used to make 
inferences about the user.

We might also wish to repeat the warning from 4647 (only s/range/tag/):

--
In addition, unique or highly unusual language ranges or combinations of 
language ranges might be used to track a specific individual's activities.
--

Addison

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 05:58:45 +0100

> inferences about the user.

The "any" doesn't help, you can reduce that further to:

  Language tags might be a source of privacy concerns because they might
  be used to make inferences about the user.

> We might also wish to repeat the warning from 4647 (only s/range/tag/)

+1

Frank

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 11:14:41 +0100

On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 05:58:45AM +0100,
 Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]> wrote 

> The "any" doesn't help, you can reduce that further to:

-1

The text is so general and vague ("life can be risky") that it will
probably be ignored. We really need to be more specific.

---

From: Marion Gunn <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 10:30:09 +0000

I suggest "can" and "could" rather than "might" x 2 below - that is,  
if the majority feel such a vague statement is worth including at all  
(which I doubt, because all it does is point to an obvious misuse  
while adding nothing of substance).
mg

> probably be ignored. We really need to be more specific.

- -
Marion Gunn * EGTeo (Estab.1991)
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn, Baile an
Bhóthair, Co. Átha Cliath, Éire.
* [email-masked] * [email-masked] *

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 19:04:59 +0100

> while adding nothing of substance).

If searches for "privacy" find something in this direction I'm happy
with it.  We don't need specific recipes how to abuse language tags.

Frank

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 12:25:15 -0800

+1

Karen Broome

Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]> 
01/08/2007 10:04 AM

To
[email-masked]
cc

Subject
[Ltru] Re: Security and nationality

Frank

---

From: "Mark Davis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 12:40:13 -0800

I agree

-- 
Mark