[ipv6hackers] Dynamic prefixes & privacy (was: IPv6 prefix changing)

[Owen DeLong]

The fixed identifier for [2] is present regardless of the nature of the prefix
assigned to the end user. The upstream connection address is likely at least
persistent if not static over long enough intervals to be a traceable
identifier that the end user cannot influence. 

Rotating the customer prefix can only create an illusion of increased privacy
while not providing any actual increase in privacy. Allowing the user to choose
to provide such an illusion or not is, I suppose, a form of self-determination,
but, I'm not sure I understand the value.

Owen

On Mar 12, 2012, at 12:15 AM, Alex List wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I know that this discussion is not new [3], but to me the problem in
> Germany seems to be more related to the fact that, without dynamic
> prefixes, a residential customer would be obliged to use a sort of ID
> he/she cannot change. Tracking is possible anyway. The problem is to
> what extent one can influence that. In Germany there is (imho rather
> utopic) the "law"/concept of informational self-determination [1]. A
> fixed ID in the Internet can bring back the memories of [2], a very
> sensitive topic, specially for older generations.
> 
> Regards, Alex
> 
> Refs:
> [1] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informationelle_Selbstbestimmung
> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi
> [3] "dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers",
> http://seclists.org/nanog/2011/Jul/440
> 
> 2012/3/8 S.P.Zeidler <spz at serpens.de>
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Thus wrote Markus Reschke (madires at theca-tabellaria.de):
>> 
>> [...]
>>> The only thing I can think of is that the office for data privacy
>>> recommends dynamic addresses. Since static addresses can be tracked
>>> easily, nobody should be forced by the ISP to use them. Therefore
>>> the default should be dynamic addresses with the option to switch to
>>> static ones if requested by the customer.
>> [...]
>> 
>> I think that an (implied) assumption that dynamic addresses protect
>> against tracking is a dangerous fallacy. Starting to get off-topic though.
>> 
>> regards,
>>        spz
>> --
>> spz at serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ipv6hackers mailing list
>> Ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com
>> http://lists.si6networks.com/listinfo/ipv6hackers
> _______________________________________________
> Ipv6hackers mailing list
> Ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com
> http://lists.si6networks.com/listinfo/ipv6hackers