Re: [Pidloc] PIdLoc Webex

[Tom Herbert <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 10:42 AM Dino Farinacci <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
> >> You are bringing up a different issue now. And we have discussed this at length before. But as long as you have an underlay and plaintext headers, you still lose privacy even when EIDs are obfuscated.
> >>
> > The underlay protocol is not relevant to privacy, it is only the
> > mechanism used in a closed provider's network to deliver packets to
>
> Yes it is for the reasons you have stated before. If I run LISP from my house and obfuscate on EIDs, any eavesdropper can look at the source RLOC to determine I’m a Comcast customer (and can find out the head-end and tail-end connections - my house). That is a violation of my privacy. They can’t tell what transport connections I’m using and who I cam talking to but as long as the outer header is plaintext and “hidden aggreagated", it is a granular privacy invasion. If the LISP xTR was in Comcast, then it looks like some obfuscated EIDs are sending from Comcast. That doesn’t violate my personal privacy.
>
> > their destination. Outside of the network, only plain IP packets are
> > seen. It is the privacy attributes of the packets visible to the world
> > that are interesting.
>
> That is what I’m talking about.
>
Yes, the network should assign ephemeral addresses. Scaling this so
that hosts can use a different address per connection is the problem
that ensues.

> Dino
>