Re: [Captive-portals] [homenet] [Int-area] [EXTERNAL] Re: Evaluate impact of MAC address randomization to IP applications

Peter Yee <peter@akayla.com> Tue, 29 September 2020 19:41 UTC

Return-Path: <peter@akayla.com>
X-Original-To: captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 587433A1134 for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 12:41:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dC6FH4aCc210 for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 12:41:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p3plsmtpa11-05.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa11-05.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [68.178.252.106]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44EBE3A112A for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 12:41:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from spectre ([173.8.184.78]) by :SMTPAUTH: with ESMTPSA id NLTIk1xj8kRKwNLTIkwuKj; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 12:39:32 -0700
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=evyhMbhX c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=PF7/PIuz6ZQ4FM3W1XNKAQ==:117 a=PF7/PIuz6ZQ4FM3W1XNKAQ==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=o83nqyVRAAAA:8 a=6Lgoe55huvWZ-8dSPcoA:9 a=EThZy5eMZ9Hr5_Nw:21 a=13DVRkTq51rSF8sD:21 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10
X-SECURESERVER-ACCT: peter@akayla.com
From: Peter Yee <peter@akayla.com>
To: 'Stephen Farrell' <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: int-area@ietf.org, homenet@ietf.org, captive-portals@ietf.org
References: <20200922201317.097C3389D4@tuna.sandelman.ca> <15660.1600807202@localhost> <902400f2-9172-9581-25ab-59ad08e67bee@cs.tcd.ie> <D81695FF-973F-472D-BC0A-9B0F57278B21@comcast.com> <ca575a6b-987e-d998-2713-91e45190f5ea@cs.tcd.ie> <0A436777-D9CE-4A4C-BE45-C8C2CAB9FBF6@comcast.com> <29901277-6da1-46fc-b244-ca289005841d@www.fastmail.com> <af0451b1-8eae-4714-849f-d6e384dda075@huitema.net> <19117.1601400596@localhost> <CAH1iCip7UBe+FR-Cz+sP6SdS11NUQC9gV_s=99yO0tjcvCcX6A@mail.gmail.com> <4215.1601404884@localhost> <3a4b39c8-6b71-5d84-1422-3470c3b01591@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <3a4b39c8-6b71-5d84-1422-3470c3b01591@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 12:39:49 -0700
Message-ID: <037001d69698$4b7a4cf0$e26ee6d0$@akayla.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQMHIWUk3ciIMSy+Ss7YNBHgXXt5/gGSEnqMAflLC+oA6RQusQHYWI0ZAS8ICnUArPZkDgJvHT9eAbl9DyEB4Jvk7wE4jiV8AZ9CTuamlpsyUA==
Content-Language: en-us
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfOh4SnuqvmRHVLvkcVgI3eDPXUtuI5T43gkWftT6cQq8z0yiE/m7Nh2/Jul5rE7XkGQ9livU3R7MNlWfy2gwd+kQaCCViujJQGwsPC8VKWu4mHpvgRH4 uQEciIgxI3suc9NkACTo32csY/C4gP5zJdvNb7svzkHV7Qb7JILT3MooycAwt0e58UzIzd1tS3dBr0qBJTDsbaDvuYC/HW7pNTalro1YMkIUhWuGtIsXPuhL 65yz35vXV2gVEoM9mhiprQ==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/CHm66CWxeSFdCqTusnh9kXD1ZPE>
Subject: Re: [Captive-portals] [homenet] [Int-area] [EXTERNAL] Re: Evaluate impact of MAC address randomization to IP applications
X-BeenThere: captive-portals@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of issues related to captive portals <captive-portals.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/captive-portals>, <mailto:captive-portals-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/captive-portals/>
List-Post: <mailto:captive-portals@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:captive-portals-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals>, <mailto:captive-portals-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 19:41:52 -0000

On 29/09/2020 12:03, Stephen Farrell wrote:

> More on-topic, I do think MAC address randomisation has a role to play for WiFi as it does for BLE, but yes there is a lack of guidance as to how to implement and deploy such techniques well. It's a bit tricky though as it's fairly OS dependent so maybe not really in scope for the IETF?
> (For the last 3 years I've set a possible student project in this space, but each time a student has considered it, it turned out "too hard";-)

As I mentioned previously, IEEE 802.11 is looking into this area, both from an operational perspective and from a privacy perspective. New IEEE 802.11 amendments (IEEE 802.11bh and IEEE 802.11bi, if approved) are being discussed. The (very) high-level documents describing each can be found at [1] and [2]. I would be happy to convey input to IEEE 802.11 regarding either document, particularly in regards to layers 3 and above. Without wishing to open up a can of worms about meeting fees, I will note that IEEE 802.11 is currently not charging for its online meetings, so if anyone wishes to take part in the random MAC address discussions directly, the next meeting will be held in early November. The RCM Study Group met yesterday morning (Americas) and will meet again in two weeks. See [3].

		-Peter

[1] https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-0742-04-0rcm-proposed-par-draft.docx
[2] https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-0854-06-0rcm-par-proposal-for-privacy.pdf
[3] https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-0995-10-0rcm-rcm-sg-agenda.pptx