Re: [Ideas] [lisp] WG Review: IDentity Enabled Networks (ideas)

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:39 PM, Dino Farinacci <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Let me ask for your opinion Christian (or anyone else for that matter). If
> a device is assigned a private/public key-pair and the identifier for the
> device is a hash of the public-key, is the identifier private?
>
>
I can't answer this in isolation. Does the identifier show up on the wire?
If so, then totally.

-Ekr


Is the identifier trackable even when its network location is not generally
> known, not advertised publicly, and possibly changing frequently?
>
> Dino
>
> > On Oct 11, 2017, at 12:34 PM, Christian Huitema <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/11/2017 10:32 AM, Padma Pillay-Esnault wrote:
> >> but you do not need a reference to a permanent identity for that --
> systems similar to CGA would work just fine.
> >>
> >>
> >> The identity of the device is just adding a lever of identifier which
> effectively allows authentication to modify the identifiers used by that
> device but also what the users of these identifiers can look up. If we had
> used "user of identifier" it would have been misconstrued for humans. So
> damn if you do and damn if you don't ...
> >>
> >> We are open for discussions anytime.
> >>
> >
> > Some thing you should be hearing is that "long term identity of device"
> has almost the same privacy properties as "long term identity of the
> device's owner". You may think that identifying a random piece of hardware
> is no big deal, but it turns out that the network activity and network
> locations of that piece of hardware can be associated to those of its human
> owner. So you need the same kind of protection for these device identifiers
> as for human identifiers.
> > --
> > Christian Huitema
> >
>
>