Re: [93attendees] Network experiment during the meeting

Jared Mauch <> Wed, 15 July 2015 13:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B04B01A911D for <>; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 06:59:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.912
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Meg4xNllLr_v for <>; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 06:59:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:418:3f4::5]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E8331A9115 for <>; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 06:59:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by (Postfix, from userid 162) id B65655408E5; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 09:59:32 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 09:59:32 -0400
From: Jared Mauch <>
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "Eric Vyncke \(evyncke\)" <>, Rolf Winter <>, "" <>, Jared Mauch <>
Subject: Re: [93attendees] Network experiment during the meeting
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list of IETF 93 attendees that have opted in on this list. " <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 13:59:34 -0000

On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 06:39:42AM -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 7/15/2015 5:15 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:
> > By having a device set to join the IETF network it seems
> > that opting-in to share your data has occured.
> That's a reasonable view.  The problem is that so are other, competing
> views.
> If the world were subject to your preferences, your view would hold
> sway.  However in this world, some of those competing views are likely
> to have professional and/or legal force.

	I'm not saying there may be regulatory regimes where the legal
situation may be different than what I outlined above, but the easiest
way to not be part of this is to opt out by not using the IETF
network.  Seems like a fairly affirmative way.  It's interesting how
IETF went from being engineering based to lawyer based.

	The adage about how many people it takes to build something
vs tear it down seems like it may be applicable here and private
*constructive* input to the parties involved would have a positive

	My experience is the people who gripe the loudest tend to be
ones that didn't investigate the device behaviors earlier.

	I've looked at traffic that my machines receive at these
networks as part of troubleshooting and a fair amount is revealed
in the DHCP request, including company names, usernames, etc..

	On a mac/apple device to help some of this leakge go into:

	1) itunes, set your library name to something generic like "my music"
	2) system preferences -> sharing -> computer name -> my computer
	3) messages -> preferences -> accounts -> bonjour and uncheck all
the boxes, including the share my IM contacts and e-mail addresses.

	for iPhone/iPad change your device name:

	settings -> general -> about -> Name

	If you are worried about your PII you likely would have already
done this, but if not, please consider the above steps.

	I'm sure there is a similar process for other applications, but this
is just what I have at my disposal for a quick write-up/response.

	- jared

Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from
clue++;      |  My statements are only mine.