[51484] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Interview Questions and critic
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Peter John Hill)
Wed Aug 28 11:10:50 2002
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 20:54:29 -0400
Cc: Kurtis Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>, <nanog@nanog.org>
To: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
From: Peter John Hill <peterjhill@cmu.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20020827233055.U80168-100000@sequoia.muada.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tuesday, August 27, 2002, at 05:33 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Kurtis Lindqvist wrote:
>
>>> <censored> fears abuse as a hardware ID wired into the ipv6 protocol
>>> can
>>> be used to determine the manufacturer, make and model number, and
>>> value
>>> of the hardware equipment being used by the end user.
>
>> ...uhm, and? What is the real difference with a IPv4 address and
>> privacy?
>
> The difference is that someone using a dynamic IP address is still
> recognizable by the lower 64 bits of their dynamic address because this
> part is always the same. (But cookies do the same thing.)
What is interesting is that people can identify a EUI-64 unicast
address no matter where you are. For example, i use my laptop at work
and at home (assuming I had an ipv6 connection at home). I could be
identified as the same computer, without using cookies, since my base
64 address would be the same, despite the network prefix.
