[Captive-portals] Any other existing detection methods?

Thomas Peterson <hidinginthebbc@gmail.com> Mon, 01 April 2019 15:52 UTC

Return-Path: <hidinginthebbc@gmail.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 662731201A7 for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 08:52:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 zDoUPIyH5PaX for <captive-portals@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 08:52:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x42d.google.com (mail-wr1-x42d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECE611202AA for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 08:52:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x42d.google.com with SMTP id h4so12701945wre.7 for <captive-portals@ietf.org>; Mon, 01 Apr 2019 08:52:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=v7bet1o34ikMo6BLWzf064mMhHVfq3bCwWiWOxOqIxY=; b=bjbeNuvLdDDxSrwF1mrtqyt3pitKxmL9rE9aQBEryUpDfThSz+SpspSzoeXPqZlIXz DWTJ6c3BSpcXUAFI8K0WAQyWqppNA19DPSwOahv0gmDKjuTOmkzZxVluOyPipPGxVoud v4Vt/gYPiy5sjGODEYUJIxHpi5meuzT4hVGR1alB8VHUHDGd0qU+xwfSssrr6WtiUdsU otQg1SujLBOEMkDCJedMzRTh1o/2/TSTRJPmU0lKS5V9ygfBtkHnPrQtq8rUKLAlAdwt dehGzKWbK7gdU3w0WkIFtNGut1+geQ6iqajH+aKh03E8GHo0qwAq0aTNtL3TT9JjONxd 7g3g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=v7bet1o34ikMo6BLWzf064mMhHVfq3bCwWiWOxOqIxY=; b=iI95DW8PW915eq1lX74tW/nVsBnPB2TMj276TnNq9W5tazbXXLJ/ckmLjhuw2Y3Wvk Kcl1ita5EBbow7Deaa0JTHiGQE9JSBhRs233gCF7sndUm476g/F1s3bijGodwESv0ZTr POBSOpwZSlezL3mjpyfDtxI2oepZR32Ck3YFxDwDNNyefKkdWo+FVvPxoIA8PVMZ91+l IlLft/nzzqJ1s+rrgpH1tmPuD0aESXU+yo/gtybAZQG7PSoHMzbsdIAD87URHqXw4son VST4lObNpg7DPlhp7rPgC1Bc6L7iyGMNB3fgUiwjoz3wsdL9Oyr3q+NbV6CDCr5Fv63p BesA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXv8NRV4Xk8fmM5azod6jPZqiUPkbr6OMRNf8lZ8tGZO1RpIpnK DmqL/DHwbfYN1iiC/XahQxIROtrx
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyrA/xfXjcQ0x3w91E3b0kXakCXiJeaQQ6lKGnMcmwptmq+HfMDl4C/vxLCMxHqghwveMz1OA==
X-Received: by 2002:adf:fecb:: with SMTP id q11mr39602746wrs.252.1554133960255; Mon, 01 Apr 2019 08:52:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ROADKILL.local ([132.185.158.37]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 7sm39596392wrc.81.2019.04.01.08.52.39 for <captive-portals@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 01 Apr 2019 08:52:39 -0700 (PDT)
To: captive-portals@ietf.org
From: Thomas Peterson <hidinginthebbc@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <fc21fb49-1408-9169-6c71-dc57c273b824@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2019 16:52:38 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/captive-portals/NecAWiKm9MQhZQPhrN5r5NglI_o>
Subject: [Captive-portals] Any other existing detection methods?
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: Mon, 01 Apr 2019 15:52:53 -0000

A recent pull request[0] for the architecture document contains a new 
appendix describing known methods devices may use to detect a captive 
portal. Two of the ways I have found are DNS and HTTP based.

Are the any other means that clients use to detect captive portal 
presence besides what I have described? Wikipedia lists ICMP redirect[1] 
as a means, but I have been unable to find documentation from a vendor 
to support this.


Regards


0: https://github.com/capport-wg/architecture/pull/26

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captive_portal#ICMP_redirect