IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default?

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Wed, 29 January 2020 06:05 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02323120130 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:05:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 YR2W4gUMWxBx for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:05:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 623121200EF for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:05:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.16.42.112] (p548DC4D8.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.196.216]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 486tJS1pgmz16Sv; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 07:05:44 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.40.2.2.4\))
Subject: Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default?
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <853C8880-A6A2-4F67-996D-02F20C3D3039@employees.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 07:05:43 +0100
Cc: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 601970743.206637-67cb5687a011c8f6ccbc31ab7447ead2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DFA6C6B9-5F53-4634-B289-E454354CFD92@tzi.org>
References: <45FE2F3C-EA41-4442-A680-C3875D056A89@fugue.com> <853C8880-A6A2-4F67-996D-02F20C3D3039@employees.org>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.40.2.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/7-ZbaW17fLUWwDmQ4x7VcRiB2lE>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 06:05:49 -0000

On 2020-01-28, at 20:19, Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> wrote:
> 
> We should probably be a bit more careful with terms here. A temporary address does not give the user privileges. It might at best avoid leaking an identifier that can be used to correlate the user’s activity. 

Yes.

But passive sentences are bad.

“Can be used” — by whom?

Both the peer of the connection and a monitor (wiretapper, network operator) may be interested in that stable identifier; in many cases the peer already knows more (ssh example) but the monitor doesn’t, so we should separate these two issues.

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email