IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [VIPR] VIPR privacy issue

Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug@acm.org> Fri, 03 February 2012 17:16 UTC

Return-Path: <petithug@acm.org>
X-Original-To: vipr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vipr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E318B21F8505 for <vipr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Feb 2012 09:16:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.306
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.306 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.294, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kYgZf-FewOXp for <vipr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Feb 2012 09:16:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from implementers.org (implementers.org [IPv6:2604:3400:dc1:41:216:3eff:fe5b:8240]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43F7D21F84FF for <vipr@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Feb 2012 09:16:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:1f05:616:213:d4ff:fe04:3e08] (shalmaneser.org [IPv6:2001:470:1f05:616:213:d4ff:fe04:3e08]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "petithug", Issuer "implementers.org" (verified OK)) by implementers.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDB6420143; Fri, 3 Feb 2012 17:02:02 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <4F2C1682.40802@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2012 09:16:50 -0800
From: Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug@acm.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20120104 Icedove/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com>
References: <4F1F1A42.1030201@acm.org> <9734F726-C0A8-42D6-87A4-65535D5F3E80@bbn.com> <4F217CC9.4080802@acm.org> <50D0BC87-EC6C-401E-A2F9-A05AC60D5EF0@bbn.com> <4F2183D0.3070809@acm.org> <373FB643-AE7A-473C-A7AB-09F9A9E7093B@bbn.com> <4F21A121.10403@acm.org> <5466D9E6-3859-41A7-9A54-D23DC6D775C6@iii.ca> <E9DCDEA3-5BDC-41E6-B2BE-606E4CCE4F1B@bbn.com> <00A1AC3E-167F-4243-9F1B-345AC99D2409@softarmor.com>
In-Reply-To: <00A1AC3E-167F-4243-9F1B-345AC99D2409@softarmor.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "vipr@ietf.org" <vipr@ietf.org>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
Subject: Re: [VIPR] VIPR privacy issue
X-BeenThere: vipr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Verification Involving PSTN Reachability working group <vipr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/vipr>, <mailto:vipr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vipr>
List-Post: <mailto:vipr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vipr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vipr>, <mailto:vipr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:16:54 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 02/03/2012 09:07 AM, Dean Willis wrote:
> 
> On Jan 27, 2012, at 9:08 AM, Richard L. Barnes wrote:
> 
>> <hat type="geopriv"/>
>> 
>> Could we please distinguish between "location privacy" and "IP address
>> privacy"?  They are related, but distinct concepts.
>> 
> 
> Yep. Mobile IP can give us location privacy without IP address privacy.
> 
> Hmm ...  a separate RELOAD usage for MobileIP, then bootstrap VIPR on top
> of that. Might work.
> 
> What ever happened to HIP, anyhow? We're just dancing around the
> locator-separator problem here.
> 

There is already a draft explaining how to use RELOAD on top of HIP
(draft-ietf-hip-reload-instance).  I do not know which of the privacy leaks
HIP would fix, but that is worth studying.  I would have no problem making HIP
mandatory (and as we are at it, IPv6) for VIPR.

- -- 
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Personal email: marc@petit-huguenin.org
Professional email: petithug@acm.org
Blog: http://blog.marc.petit-huguenin.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
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=aBp/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email