[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ipng
Subject:    RE: Solutions to the problem with RFC 4941
From:       "Hosnieh Rafiee" <ietf () rozanak ! com>
Date:       2013-05-04 7:18:35
Message-ID: 000001ce4897$9b9cd010$d2d67030$ () rozanak ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

> In other emails 
> "you said X", when I never said such a thing.

First, I did not talk on behalf of you. Probably there is misunderstanding in the \
meaning of the following sentence in my last email (not emails).

> Since Fernando's proposal is not going to solve the current problem with RFC 4941, \
> I have suggested to him, on several occasions, that he resolve this problem so that \
> the node's privacy will be better >protected but he ignored this suggestion and \
> claiming that his purpose is different.

The meaning of this sentence, if there was misunderstanding: (Based on your responses \
in the list to me) You are not planning to update this document for whatever reason \
that you have or explained AND you want to have your draft as one of " several \
optional standards" as others mentioned. 

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/current/msg16862.html 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/current/msg16859.html
 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/current/msg17710.html

Privacy as I defined it before :
" The information in my bank account is my private information and as such should be \
known to no one. This is privacy., i.e., the information that I do not want to be \
shared with anyone without my permission: it is so private for me. But by having the \
same IP address for a long period of time can lead to the leakage of private \
information. This is why I said that changing the IID from the same network would \
help. I did not say that the RFC Privacy Extension is perfect. (Nothing in life is \
perfect. We just strive for perfection but never really attain it.)"

"Why I think that privacy is more an application layer (and in other posts I said, \
upper layer than IP) issue than an issue with the other layers an why the IP layer \
might  cause problem in this vain. As an example suppose a criminal follows someone \
with the name A, Using his IP address to follow A he can then find his location and \
decide on a location for committing his misdeed, like killing him. Then the IP \
address proved harmful to his privacy because it exposed information about him to the \
this criminal. In another example A travels a lot. If a robber follows his IP and \
knows that he is not at home, he can easily ransack his house. This is again the IP \
layer causing harm to privacy."

-My concern that I repeated in my posts: If I stay in an x network for more than \
certain period of time I might be a victim of privacy attacks. The risk of attack \
                depends on the X time. 
-Having stable address helps: Depends on X. if it is short, Yes, but if I am \
                permanently in that network and router prefix does not change, NO. 
-Possible solution: Change my IP address within the same network too.
-How: set a lifetime to my IP address.  

My second concern: moving from and to network a to x. Question: Do I have the same IP \
in each of these networks? If yes, I might be a victim.  
- Having stable address helps: If I have the same IP every time I enter to these \
networks and/or I stay in each networks more than x time, It might not help as the \
attacker have a chance to still correlate my information to my IP. 

Is RFC 4941 can be of any help?
It might be but needs some improvements. 

@ list: If you think RFC 4941 not really helps for privacy, why do you concern about \
implementations that use this RFC and talking about backward compatibility?  In my \
opinion, If I am a vendor and I see there is no update on a RFC, I assume that it is \
not a serious concern so when the new optional RFCs do not address my concerns, I \
still try to implement it for any new OS (using the same old code from my old OS).

@Fernando: If you are so frustrated (for misunderstanding or whatever reasons) Why \
don't you bring your boxing gloves to Frankfurt main? :-)  as I noticed you are \
speaker there as well as I. We can enjoy fighting there :-)


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]