Search results
From RFC-Wiki
- DNS does not make policy decisions about the records it shares with is a cause for some privacy considerations.11 KB (1,650 words) - 12:08, 4 October 2020
- -- the protocol without privacy -- the DES Privacy Protocol [4]69 KB (6,515 words) - 23:18, 16 October 2020
- server in violation of either endpoint's security and privacy policy, === Privacy ===23 KB (3,292 words) - 09:53, 4 October 2020
- 4. Privacy Considerations identifier. This enables the authorization server to apply policy as24 KB (3,456 words) - 10:55, 30 October 2020
- conference and media session setup, conference policy manipulation, policy control protocol (CPCP) [7], or it may be used as an25 KB (3,844 words) - 20:20, 4 October 2020
- Respecting the privacy rights and wishes of users engaged in a call For an active Recording Session, privacy or security reasons may29 KB (4,181 words) - 09:58, 1 October 2020
- must be tuned for privacy. In particular, note that both URL schemes There are two ways to perform privacy tuning on a BEEP session,18 KB (2,589 words) - 03:53, 4 October 2020
- o a single privacy protocol and associated parameters by o Its partyPrivProtocol component is called the privacy87 KB (10,290 words) - 23:18, 16 October 2020
- when identifying which policy to apply for a host are encountered. Best Current Practices on protecting privacy [BCP160] [BCP188].51 KB (6,520 words) - 11:14, 2 October 2020
- server may return it or not, based on its local policy -- as is the == Security and Privacy Considerations ==22 KB (2,934 words) - 05:04, 22 October 2020
- DNS Privacy Considerations This document describes the privacy issues associated with the use of37 KB (5,426 words) - 11:21, 2 October 2020
- Privacy Key Management Version 1 (PKMv1) Protocol Support support for IEEE 802.16 Privacy Key Management Version 1.22 KB (3,240 words) - 14:36, 21 October 2020
- The Domain Name System (DNS) does not make policy decisions about considered open to the public -- which is a cause for some privacy9 KB (1,250 words) - 21:24, 5 October 2020
- as the operation affords no privacy or integrity protect itself. oldPasswd is not present, the server MAY use other policy to10 KB (1,473 words) - 18:50, 3 October 2020
- data - e.g., using digital signatures - and privacy is obtained by establish, in advance, a security policy that decides:25 KB (3,789 words) - 00:26, 20 October 2020
- Report from the Internet Privacy Workshop On December 8-9, 2010, the IAB co-hosted an Internet privacy workshop47 KB (6,885 words) - 12:24, 1 October 2020
- authentication, are policy decisions at the discretion of the below. Application of additional restrictions and policy are at the22 KB (3,039 words) - 09:19, 2 October 2020
- and privacy policies over the Internet. Location information is a GEOPRIV focuses on the privacy and security issues, from both a14 KB (2,062 words) - 14:37, 4 October 2020
- implementations of Distributed Routing Policy System [3]. An initial + Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.010 KB (1,276 words) - 03:31, 20 October 2020
- Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic at the same time protect the privacy of the individuals involved.57 KB (8,127 words) - 07:04, 4 October 2020
- authorization policy.) many of the same privacy consideration and arguments that apply to12 KB (1,335 words) - 23:14, 16 October 2020
- privacy are not required to operate or implement the header field. of lack of support of this HTTP extension or because of a policy29 KB (4,236 words) - 03:46, 2 October 2020
- supported types of client authentication, are policy decisions at the criteria below. Application of additional restrictions and policy28 KB (3,765 words) - 09:17, 2 October 2020
- o Create a mailing list for discussion with a policy of open access. [[RFC1421|RFC 1421]] (Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail: Part I:22 KB (2,981 words) - 21:43, 4 October 2020
- declares a policy, communicated from the server to the client future by the Frame-Options directive in the Content Security Policy22 KB (3,146 words) - 23:42, 1 October 2020
- Mobile IPv6 Location Privacy Solutions IPv6 location privacy problem described in [[RFC4882|RFC 4882]], and propose97 KB (14,578 words) - 19:09, 13 October 2020
- - Policy constraints may dictate that the location provided remains | Policy * |27 KB (3,914 words) - 16:07, 14 October 2020
- Security and Privacy Considerations for This document discusses privacy and security considerations for37 KB (4,930 words) - 13:14, 2 October 2020
- An Architecture for Location and Location Privacy time protect the privacy of the individuals involved. This document85 KB (12,866 words) - 08:49, 1 October 2020
- [P3P] Marchiori, M., Ed., "The Platform for Privacy Preferences Another browser-based issue comes about when the Platform for Privacy14 KB (2,002 words) - 14:46, 1 October 2020
- Considerations section but the security and privacy aspects are best Common Policy [[RFC4745]], Geolocation Policy [GEO-POLICY], or more30 KB (3,930 words) - 12:02, 1 October 2020
- Common Open Policy Service (COPS) secure Common Open Policy Service (COPS) connections over the23 KB (3,482 words) - 18:04, 4 October 2020
- authentication, authorization, access control, and privacy policies. === Authentication and Privacy ===38 KB (5,856 words) - 11:51, 19 October 2020
- administrators to provide policy that can override the default These addresses may also be "preferred" or "deprecated" [2]. Privacy46 KB (6,748 words) - 03:02, 4 October 2020
- === History-Info with Privacy Header Field === This is an example of the use of the Privacy header field with a77 KB (9,664 words) - 01:35, 2 October 2020
- 5) Acts as a technical policy liaison and representative for the set technical development priorities, to discuss policy matters which23 KB (3,230 words) - 15:45, 15 October 2020
- data consumer or provider consent. If content privacy is a concern, operator and its privacy policy. Those documents may be31 KB (4,351 words) - 11:20, 4 October 2020
- liaison to the Office of Science and Technology Policy (headed by the and technology policy affecting the Internet. It endorses and25 KB (3,510 words) - 13:49, 16 October 2020
- message to carry Device identifiers. Privacy and security The usage of identifiers in HELD introduces a new set of privacy49 KB (6,992 words) - 04:19, 22 October 2020
- does not specify a standard, or a policy of the IAB. Distribution of issues like violation of privacy, break-in attempts or10 KB (1,559 words) - 13:51, 16 October 2020
- This registry uses the "Specification Required" policy described in Note that the "Specification Required" policy implies review by a16 KB (2,279 words) - 07:53, 2 October 2020
- specification defines a value for the Privacy header field that 14.2. Registration of "history" for SIP Privacy Header Field . 2772 KB (10,588 words) - 23:53, 1 October 2020
- Policy-Based Routing Database 1479 Steenstrup Jul 93 Inter-Domain Policy Routing Protocol36 KB (4,738 words) - 08:52, 18 October 2020
- information under several privacy and integrity modes. several privacy and integrity modes. The most secure of the privacy49 KB (6,879 words) - 04:50, 2 October 2020
- The distribution of location information is a privacy-sensitive task. Dealing with mechanisms to preserve the user's privacy is important102 KB (12,369 words) - 21:21, 11 October 2020
- Common Policy: A Document Format for Expressing Privacy Preferences aspects. An XML schema specifies the language in which common policy52 KB (7,283 words) - 15:55, 5 October 2020
- Category: Informational Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic and navigation capabilities gives rise to significant privacy and36 KB (5,612 words) - 07:06, 4 October 2020
- known as policy based management. ask their Policy Server for an admit/reject decision for a particular20 KB (2,572 words) - 20:20, 3 October 2020
- o An OPES System MUST include information about its privacy policy, enforcing the policy.28 KB (4,353 words) - 11:01, 4 October 2020
- == Encryption Policy == === Encryption Policy Specification ===17 KB (2,458 words) - 18:41, 1 October 2020