Re: Brian Haberman's Discuss on draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-16: (with DISCUSS)

Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> Thu, 23 January 2014 11:37 UTC

Return-Path: <brian@innovationslab.net>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E432B1A041B; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 03:37:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
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 lYqO-clwtSP7; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 03:37:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uillean.fuaim.com (uillean.fuaim.com [206.197.161.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A5E51A03DF; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 03:37:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clairseach.fuaim.com (clairseach-high.fuaim.com [206.197.161.158]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by uillean.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CC68880F3; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 03:37:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clemson.local (c-76-21-129-88.hsd1.md.comcast.net [76.21.129.88]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clairseach.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C2C6130003; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 03:37:14 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <52E0FEEA.7020105@innovationslab.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 06:37:14 -0500
From: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Brian Haberman's Discuss on draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-16: (with DISCUSS)
References: <20140122202434.30069.4084.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <52E02EAD.1050009@si6networks.com> <52E03BAD.5050306@innovationslab.net> <52E046B0.1000701@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <52E046B0.1000701@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="qGfUADDRJviqHSBIBXBrHTgrXwxh0TUDs"
Cc: 6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org, ipv6@ietf.org, draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses@tools.ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:37:18 -0000


On 1/22/14 5:31 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
> 
> On 01/22/2014 09:44 PM, Brian Haberman wrote:
>>>> 1) Recording the addresses a node has visited during its
>>>> lifetime would somehow be ironic for a document aiming at
>>>> privacy. Just get the document compromised, and you get a list
>>>> of where the node has been since it was first installed.
>> I think I can get a list of where a device has been from any number
>> of places.  So, I don't buy that argument at all.
> 
> 
> I buy the argument. Some vendors have been beaten up for
> it now and then. Making that worse while trying to make
> privacy better would be a shame, no?
> 
> S.
> 
> [1]
> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/apr/20/iphone-tracking-prompts-privacy-fears
> 

Duly noted.  If that is a concern, then it should be noted in the draft
that storing the address is a bad idea.  That way, people won't be
tempted to implement this feature in that way.

Regards,
Brian