Proposal for research on human rights protocol considerations
draft-doria-hrpc-proposal-00

Abstract

Work has been done on privacy issues that should be considered when creating an Internet protocol. This draft suggests that similar considerations may apply for other human rights such as freedom of expression or freedom of association. A proposal is made for initiating IRTF work researching the possible connections between human rights and Internet standards and protocols. The goal would be to create an informational RFC concerning human rights protocol considerations.

Discussion on this draft at: hrpc@article19.io

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on April 30, 2015.

Copyright Notice

Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.

This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

• 1. Introduction
• 1.1. Requirements Language
• 2. Research topic
• 2.1. Protocol and Standard Examples
• 2.1.1. Architecture
• 2.1.2. Transparency
• 2.1.3. HTML
• 2.1.4. Mailing lists
• 2.1.5. IDNs
• 3. Proposal
• 4. Acknowledgements
• 5. IANA Considerations
• 6. Security Considerations
• 7. References
• 7.1. Normative References
• 7.2. Informative References
• Appendix A. Additional Stuff
• Authors' Addresses

1. Introduction

The recognition that human rights have a role in Internet policies is slowly becoming part of the general discourse. Several reports from former United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, have made such relation explicit, which lead to the approval of the landmark resolution "on the promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet" [HRC2012] at the UN Human Rights Council (HRC). And, more recently, to the resolution "The right to privacy in the digital age" [UNGA2013] at the UN General Assembly. The NETmundial outcome document [NETmundial] affirms that human rights, as reflected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UDHR], should underpin Internet governance principles. Nevertheless, the direct relation between Internet Standards and human rights is still something to be explored and more clearly evidenced.

Concerns for freedom of expression and association were a strong part of the world-view of the community involved in developing the first Internet protocols. Apparently, by intention or by coincidence, the Internet was designed with freedom and openness of communications as core values. But as the scale and the industrialization of the Internet has grown greatly, the influence of such world-views started to compete with other values. The belief of the authors is that as the Internet continues to grow, the linkage of Internet protocols to human rights needs to become both structured and intentional.

Standards and protocols form the basis of the human rights enabling infrastructure of the Internet. It needs to be determined whether there is a causal relationship between Internet protocols and standards, and human rights such as freedom of expression. To study the relationship between the two one would need to carefully consider structural and architectural considerations, as well as specific protocols. The Internet Society paper "Human Rights and Internet Protocols" [HRIP] 'explores human rights and Internet protocols comparing the processes for their making and the principles by which they operate and concludes that there are some shared principles between the two.' Though that paper does not go into possible reasons, dependencies or guidelines, it initiates the discussion. More research is needed to map human rights concerns to protocol elements and to frame possible approaches towards protocols that satisfy the implications of human rights standards.

To move this debate further, a list has been created for discussion of this draft: hrpc@article19.io and related ideas - information or subscriptions at: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/hrpc

1.1. Requirements Language

As this is an informational document recommending a research effort, it will not make use of requirements language as defined in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

2. Research topic

In a manner similar to the work done for RFC 6973 [RFC6973] on Privacy Consideration Guidelines, the premise of this research is that some standards and protocols can solidify, enable or threaten human rights, such as freedom of expression and the right to association and assembly online. To start addressing the issue, a mapping exercise analyzing Internet architecture and protocols features, vis-a-vis possible impact on human rights needs to be undertaken. The list below represents the first examples of this exercise.

2.1. Protocol and Standard Examples

Some initial topics that need exploration are indicated in this section. Most of this work has yet to move beyond speculation and casual conversation. The next release of the draft will develop these discussion further, based on discussion to be held on the hrpc@article19.io email list.

2.1.1. Architecture

RFC 1958 [RFC1958] mentions 'the community believes that the goal [of the Internet] is connectivity, the tool is the Internet Protocol'. It continues a bit further: 'The current exponential growth of the network seems to show that connectivity is its own reward, and is more valuable than any individual application such as mail or the World-Wide Web.' This marks the intrinsic value of connectivity which is facilitated by the Internet, both in its principle, and in practice. This shows that the underlying principles of the Internet aim to preserve connectivity, which is fundamental and similar to the part of article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UDHR], which defines a right to receive and to impart information.

2.1.2. Transparency

Another part of article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights UDHR [UDHR] mentions that one has the right to hold opinions _without interference_ (emphasis added). This same sentiment can be found in IAB RFC4924 [RFC4924] - Reflection on Internet Transparency where it states: 'A network that does not filter or transform the data that it carries may be said to be transparent" or "oblivious" to the content of packets. Networks that provide oblivious transport enable the deployment of new services without requiring changes to the core. It is this flexibility that is perhaps both the Internet's most essential characteristic as well as one of the most important contributors to its success.'

2.1.3. HTML

Websites made it extremely easy for individuals to publish their ideas, opinions and thoughts. Never before has the world seen an infrastructure that made it this easy to share your brainchild with such a large group of other people. The HTTP architecture and standards, including RFC 7230 [RFC7230], RFC 7231 [RFC7231], RFC 7232 [RFC7232], RFC 7234 [RFC7234], RFC 7235 [RFC7235], RFC 7236 [RFC7236], and RFC 7327 [RFC7237], are essential for the publishing of information. The HTTP protocol, therefore, forms an crucial instrument for freedom of expression, but also to the right to freely participate in the culture life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.

2.1.4. Mailing lists

Collaboration and cooperation have been part of the Internet since its early beginning, one of the instruments of facilitating working together in groups are mailing lists (as described in RFC 2369 [RFC2919], RFC 2919 [RFC2919], and RFC 6783 [RFC6783]. Mailing lists are critical instruments and enablers for group communication and organization, and therefore form early artefacts of the (standardized) ability of Internet standards to enable the right to freedom of assembly and association.

2.1.5. IDNs

English has been the lingua franca of the Internet, but for many Internet user English is not their first language. To have a true global Internet, one that serves the whole world, it would need to reflect the languages of these different communities. The Internationalized Domain Names IDNA2008 (RFC 5890 [RFC5890], RFC 5891 [RFC5891], RFC 5892 [RFC5892], and RFC 5893 [RFC5893]), describes standards for the use of a broad range of strings and characters (some also written from right to left). This enables users who use other characters than the standard LDH ascii typeset to have their own URLs. This shows the ambition of the Internet community to reflect the diversity of users and to be in line with Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which clearly stipulates that 'everyone is entitles to all rights and freedoms [..], without distinction of any kind, such as [..] language [..].

3. Proposal

Mapping the relation between human rights and protocols and architectures is a new research challenge, which will require a good amount of cross organizational cooperation to develop a consistent methodology. While the authors of this first draft are involved in both human rights advocacy and research on Internet technologies - we believe that bringing this work into the IRTF would facilitate and improve this work by bringing human rights experts together with the community of researchers and developers of Internet standards and technologies.

At this point we have created a mailing list where we would like to encourage discussion of the issue and capture interest of the IRTF community. A second step would be to create a charter and ask the IRTF for a Research group to further develop methodology and investigate Human rights Protocol considerations.

Assuming that the research produces useful results, the objective would evolve into the creation of a set of recommended considerations for the protection of applicable human rights.

4. Acknowledgements

This builds on work done by RFC 6973 [RFC6973].

Thanks go to those who have discussed and edited the ideas in this draft. Special thanks go to Joy Liddicoat as the co-author of Human Rights and Internet Protocols [HRIP]

5. IANA Considerations

This memo includes no request to IANA.

6. Security Considerations

As this draft concerns a research proposal, there are no security considerations.

7. References

7.1. Normative References

7.2. Informative References

Appendix A. Additional Stuff

This is a place holder for an Appendix if it is needed.

Authors' Addresses