Tracking Protection In Wi-Fi Networks Coming Soon To Linux

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Tracking Protection In Wi-Fi Networks Coming Soon To Linux

Posted by timothy on Tuesday January 19, 2016 @03:05AM from the clear-your-mac-and-your-cookies dept.

prisoninmate writes: Fedora contributor and NetworkManager developer Lubomir Rintel explains how your devices are being identified on a network by a unique number that most of us know by the name of MAC address. Same goes for mobile networking, as your laptop's or mobile phone's MAC address is, in most cases, broadcasted everywhere you go before you even attempt a connection to a wireless network. And that's a problem for your privacy. The solution? Randomization of the MAC address while scanning for Wi-Fi networks. Apple is already using this method on iOS 8 and later mobile operating systems, and so is Microsoft in Windows 10, so Linux users will ["likely"] get it in the upcoming NetworkManager 1.2 release.

112 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

hitler's favorite enemy by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:13 · Score: 0

terrorrists... we're all suspects now?
Coming soon? Already there. by Errol+backfiring · 2016-01-19 03:15 · Score: 0

My ancient pocket dino (a Nokia N900) has had this feature for ages. And yes, it runs Linux.

--
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
Turn it off. by marnues · 2016-01-19 03:21 · Score: 4, Funny

Please don't. My company is building tools that help businesses understand their customers through WiFi. We're having to waste a lot of time building heuristics that determine whose MAC switched when they blip off and a new one randomly appears. We're barely off the ground with this stuff, now we're probably going to have to build new heuristics for Android devices.

I will say that the good part of this is the product managers now understand we can't track real people, which was never our intent, but was possible given the long-lived nature of MACs. I just wish they'd randomize in the middle of the night when charging.
1. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:29 · Score: 0
  
  Please don't. My company is building tools that help businesses understand their customers through WiFi. We're having to waste a lot of time building heuristics that determine whose MAC switched when they blip off and a new one randomly appears. We're barely off the ground with this stuff, now we're probably going to have to build new heuristics for Android devices.
  I will say that the good part of this is the product managers now understand we can't track real people, which was never our intent, but was possible given the long-lived nature of MACs. I just wish they'd randomize in the middle of the night when charging.
  Why does Nixon's "I am not a crook!" pop to mind?
2. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:29 · Score: 0
  
  Hi, thanks for posting!
  You cant track real people, you just help companies better understand their customers by tracking their MAC addresses! I got it! Sounds like a great business plan!
  Your product is useless to us! Please work within the published specs!
  Your company can go fuck itself!
  Thanks for coming out!
3. Re:Turn it off. by ickleberry · 2016-01-19 03:30 · Score: 1
  
  You'll be able to track real people as soon as some hipster startup paid RESTful API company from The Valley starts providing this service. They will gleam this information from Apps, some ISPs will bury a provision in their T&C that allows them sell this information to the said hipster company. Static MAC addresses are bad news in this big brother-infested world. It was grand in the 80's and 90's when a machine sat on a private LAN and never left it and 'big data' was a twinkle in someone's eye but those days are gone unfortunately
4. Re:Turn it off. by PvtVoid · 2016-01-19 03:31 · Score: 0
  
  Please don't. My company is building tools that help businesses understand their customers through WiFi. We're having to waste a lot of time building heuristics that determine whose MAC switched when they blip off and a new one randomly appears. We're barely off the ground with this stuff, now we're probably going to have to build new heuristics for Android devices.
  How about if the businesses "understand" that their customers don't want to be fucking tracked?
  Thank you.
5. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:35 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Hi, I am actually the CEO of the OP's company, let me clarify.
  The difference between a CUSTOMER (which we track) and PEOPLE (which we do not), is that the latter has legal and human rights and is worthy of respect.
  But the former is just a big ole walkin' talkin' sack with a dollar sign painted on it!
  Well I don't know about you, but I'm not interested in tracking a bunch of "people" with rights and dignity! That's boring!
  I'm after that big old fat sack of loot with a dollar sign painted on it!
6. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:43 · Score: 0
  
  MAC is tied to the laptop/phone (yes, you could change the card for some laptops, but no one is going to do it every time they connect to a WiFi hotspot) and a device will be used for a long time (1-5 years depending on type). This makes this UUID not only associated with the machine but the person itself for all intentions and purposes. And you are asking me not to use this feature so yet another company (yours!) can track me? You can take your advice and stick it where the sun don't shine!
7. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:49 · Score: 0
  
  No. It isn't your right to datamine and track me to make money.
8. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:51 · Score: 0
  
  The difference between a CUSTOMER (which we track) and PEOPLE (which we do not), is that the latter has legal and human rights and is worthy of respect.
  
  Did you really just say that your customers have no legal and human rights and are not worthy of respect?
  Really?
9. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:53 · Score: 0
  
  And why would I want to help "businesses understand their customers through WiFi"? Knowledge can be used in multiple ways, and many see tracking devices as at best neutral, and at worst a net negative.
  What happens when a company is able to identify me personally through a MAC address? That seems quite likely to happen.
10. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:53 · Score: 0
  
  Please don't. My company is building tools that help businesses understand their customers through WiFi. We're having to waste a lot of time building heuristics that determine whose MAC switched when they blip off and a new one randomly appears. We're barely off the ground with this stuff, now we're probably going to have to build new heuristics for Android devices.
  I will say that the good part of this is the product managers now understand we can't track real people, which was never our intent, but was possible given the long-lived nature of MACs. I just wish they'd randomize in the middle of the night when charging.
  Ouch. You are about to get nuked by /. commenters.
11. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:56 · Score: 0
  
  Except, that's not really true is it?
  Customers expect a lot of their data to be tracked in the cloud, they want access to it, they want to retrieve it, they want things to remain in the same state as they were before. All of these kinds of features and services require some context as to who the user is (tracking). They expect companies to track them all over the place. It's just for some reason, the MAC address is the latest hotbutton "security issue" for certain people.
  There are APIs on all of the devices to generate a unique ID that identifies a specific installation of software. This is also useful for tracking purposes.
  Why the device manufacturers would provide one way of tracking while removing another, is an example of silly design. But I guess, hey, apple does it so it must be good.
12. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:58 · Score: 0
  
  Please don't. My company is building tools that help businesses understand their customers through WiFi
  Translation: I'm working for a company which is building exactly the sort of tracking tool that this is trying to defeat.
  
  We're having to waste a lot of time building heuristics that determine whose MAC switched when they blip off and a new one randomly appears.
  Translation: this protection does, in fact, work.
  
  I will say that the good part of this is the product managers now understand we can't track real people
  For now...
  
  which was never our intent,
  I am gullible.
13. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:59 · Score: 0
  
  Did you really think he was the CEO of the company?
  Really?
  Dear God, you are stupid.
14. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:59 · Score: 0
  
  Fuck your requirements. We, the people, couldn't give a shit about what you want to do while you spy on us. Anything that pisses you and your company off, is a welcome move.
  Signed,
  The rest of the planet that doesn't leech off people for a living.
15. Re:Turn it off. by cfalcon · 2016-01-19 04:05 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Don't listen to murnues, above.
  > My company is building tools that help businesses understand their customers through WiFi.
  No, your company is building a tracker program by trying to make use of an oversight in the spec. In fact, shit like that is why this needs to happen, and why the lifespan of announced MACs needs to be short enough to render any information you may gather useless.
  Did you pay for all those phones that the businesses customers are using? Like, do you own them? Or do they belong to people who don't know you and barely know the businesses you serve, and wouldn't help you if given the chance, just as you would not help them? They aren't YOUR customers, after all. They are cattle and you are getting pissed that you won't be able to herd them as easily.
  This is a good thing, and I'm sad it has taken this long. Hope this gets pushed up to Android fast enough so your company can instead do something besides trying to track people who don't owe you shit and who you don't help in any way.
16. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 04:07 · Score: 0
  
  Please don't. My company is building tools that help businesses understand their customers through WiFi.
  Just switch to scanning for bluetooth addresses.
17. Re:Turn it off. by cfalcon · 2016-01-19 04:08 · Score: 2
  
  > > their customers don't want to be fucking tracked?
  > Except, that's not really true is it?
  Apparently it is, because you posted AC, presumably because you don't want to be tracked.
  And yes it is true, and no, the odds that anyone wants to be tracked by accidentally persistent MAC address are slim to none. Just because you put up 20 wifis and try to track me doesn't help me in any way. I'm not a user, I'm walking through an area without telling my phone to not use wifi. This is basic security.
  And again, just like you don't want to be tracked, nobody does.
18. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 04:15 · Score: 0
  
  Please don't. My company is building tools that help businesses understand their customers through WiFi. We're having to waste a lot of time building heuristics that determine whose MAC switched when they blip off and a new one randomly appears. We're barely off the ground with this stuff, now we're probably going to have to build new heuristics for Android devices.
  I will say that the good part of this is the product managers now understand we can't track real people, which was never our intent, but was possible given the long-lived nature of MACs. I just wish they'd randomize in the middle of the night when charging.
  Fuck off and die.
19. Re:Turn it off. by maestroX · 2016-01-19 04:17 · Score: 1
  
  You forgot the blue-eyes emoticon, BlueTrace fucker.
  It is your intent to track & analyse people.
20. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 04:20 · Score: 1
  
  Who gives a rat's ass about your company. Unless we own stock or getting kickbacks how is your problem any of our concern other than you are trying to profit by tracking us. GFY
21. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 04:20 · Score: 0
  
  Annon knows.
22. Re:Turn it off. by AmiMoJo · 2016-01-19 04:47 · Score: 1
  
  Doesn't demand for this feature kind of tell you that customers don't want to be understood through tracking their mobile devices? What do they get out of allowing it to happen?
  Have you considered sweetening the deal? Offer them a discount or cash in return for connecting to your wifi hotspot to download a coupon. Or just pivot and become a manufacturer of signs that say "we don't track you" and sell them to ethical businesses (admittedly a small market).
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
23. Re:Turn it off. by Bert64 · 2016-01-19 04:47 · Score: 1
  
  The default MAC is tied to the interface, but there's no reason it can't be changed in software...
  
  --
  http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
24. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 04:59 · Score: 0
  
  Please don't. My company is building tools that help businesses understand their customers through WiFi.
  
  HA HA!
  Now you know you can't track customers through WiFi - at least not through the MAC address alone.
  You may be able to track them by offering something in return. Such as free wifi. Once they actually log on & use the wifi, you can track them using the MAC address (which can't change or they loose the connection) or through the ip address. They can still change all this - but then they'll break their sessions.
  Free wifi with enterprise wpa is also an option - give each customer a unique password on your network. Tracking is now trivial - and you get to keep out those who aren't really customers too.
25. Re:Turn it off. by c · 2016-01-19 05:24 · Score: 1
  
  Please don't.
  While I have no sympathy for your plight, I have to admit genuine curiosity... what, exactly, did you expect as a reaction from Slashdot commenters to that request? " marnues says he needs this, so Linus, buddy, cancel that merge." ?
  
  --
  Log in or piss off.
26. Re:Turn it off. by Cinnamon+Beige · 2016-01-19 05:30 · Score: 1
  
  I think the assumption is that you can offer customers more useful discounts, but honestly I'd prefer the store be explicit and give me some way to provide direct feedback on the 'personalized' discounts. Things like "Oh, I loved seeing this pop up...except I couldn't wedge it into today's budget so it wasn't used" and "Why do you keep trying to sell me bacon did you not notice I only buy kosher/halal/veg* food?" would be useful feedback for the store, and short of somebody finding out what to browse while in the store to give the tracker the hint...
27. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 05:53 · Score: 0
  
  Nice bundling of independent unrelated items together to form what appears to be a cohesive argument.
  First, my posting AC doesn't really have anything to do with my desire for anonymity. It has more to do with the annoyance of logins and passwords in general and my general (admitted) laziness. If you really want me to login, I will, we can compare user ID numbers just for fun, to see who is higher, and all have a good laugh. Though it wouldn't help in any case.. My user ID would be meaningless to you and wouldn't really reveal anything about me anyway! So let's not hoist up the AC flag as proof of your point.
  Have you had a look at what google is tracking based on your location history on your Android device? All this is done WITHOUT the aid of hardware mac address. And people love this feature, they love it because Google tells them what the traffic is going to be like on the way home, which route to take, whether or not they should pick up flowers for their loved one at the grocery store on the way home, etc, etc.
  In any case, a "real" physical MAC address doesn't really identify a person. What it identifies is a specific network interface at the hardware level. It like saying that IP addresses identify people, slashdot has railed against that logic (in lawsuits) for a long time already.
  So I'm afraid that randomizing hardware mac addresses is a) just inconvenient for a lot of system services, but more importantly b) is like closing the barn doors after the horses have left (in fact the horses are already down the road 500 miles).
28. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 05:57 · Score: 0
  
  Regardless whether the AC is or isn't, do you really think CEOs aren't psychopaths and don't operate exactly that way?
29. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 06:01 · Score: 0
  
  Why are we 5 talking to ourselves?
30. Re:Turn it off. by fustakrakich · 2016-01-19 06:03 · Score: 1
  
  Doesn't matter. If you don't defend your self, you're barking up a tree without a paddle..
  
  --
  “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
31. Re:Turn it off. by orlanz · 2016-01-19 06:13 · Score: 1
  
  I think what you are trying to do is still do able. Just that the old game of getting identifiable information without giving anything is going away. And rightfully so, there have been too many businesses that have abused what is the equivalent of dumpster diving. Asking people not to shred their trash isn't going to go anywhere.
  However, why not setup an intranet at each location. Provide people the ability to scan bar codes and get pricing information on the spot on their phone (Macys). Provide a layout of the store and where they can find things (HomeDepot). Provide weekly, in store, or cart based electronic coupons. Provide the weekly ad. In return for this convenience, you get identifiable information on the user. This is a far better trade off to determine what folks are interested in, identify dead zones in your store, or how sales effect foot traffic.
32. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 08:53 · Score: 0
  
  You don't, truly.
33. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 09:16 · Score: 0
  
  mine randomizes every time I turn wifi on, have fun dude.
34. Re:Turn it off. by Holi · 2016-01-19 09:39 · Score: 1
  
  ". My user ID would be meaningless to you and wouldn't really reveal anything about me anyway"
  I beg to differ. It would allow me to look at your posting history which would most likely tell me a lot about you.
  
  --
  Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
35. Re:Turn it off. by cfalcon · 2016-01-19 10:15 · Score: 1
  
  > Nice bundling of independent unrelated items together to form what appears to be a cohesive argument.
  My argument is as follows: You obviously understand the virtue of not being tracked, because you chose to post- TWICE- in a way to deny everyone your post history. This means that your argument is such swill that you don't even believe it for a fucking second, as evidenced by your OWN actions.
  > Have you had a look at what google is tracking based on your location history on your Android device?
  I can selectively choose which apps can access that in Ios, and I'm pretty sure Android is close to that capability. I can also turn it off trivially in Android or Ios. MOST importantly, if I CHOOSE to leave this on, for any app, at any time, it's because I have a REASON- I perceive convenience and functionality for ME out of allowing the phone or an app to keep that.
  What we are discussing in this article is QUITE different: wifi nodes you go past being able to track who is going where. This is a much bigger concern, because my phone shouldn't be ratting me out to whichever corporate interests have a shitty router somewhere. In addition to using it NOW to spy on people, it has a big future proofing issue- the moment someone decides that they can get a lot of benefit from tracking MAC addresses it becomes incentivized, and suddenly the world becomes full of dummy wifi nodes just sitting there shitting up your list, each harvesting bullshit. Hell, I already suspect some places of advertising with network IDs.
  > In any case, a "real" physical MAC address doesn't really identify a person.
  Irrelevant and not as true as it should be. If MAC addresses weren't randomized, you could guess with a high degree of certainty that the same one represented the same person. Stick a few wifi hotspots around and suddenly you are tracking people over a large enough area. If any of them are actually logged into and used, now you CAN make that correlation.
  Randomizing it takes away the advertising incentive, takes away the snooping incentive, takes away the tracking incentive.
  > It like saying that IP addresses identify people
  If anywhere you walked got a copy of your home PC's current IP address, we'd live in a more privacy-unfriendly world. This isn't much difference. Both are bad ideas for the same reasons.
  > just inconvenient for a lot of system services
  Again, this isn't full randomization. NO FUCKING SERVICES ARE MESSED UP. Only tracker assholes!
  It would be nice if you could optionally set the MAC to be randomized even on networks you connect to, but we probably won't see that because it actually WOULD break a lot of things.
  But if someone runs a wifi spot that I don't need to connect to, they don't need my MAC address. And there's no fucking "system service" that's getting dicked up. I don't even know what the fuck you are talking about there anyway. Are Windows users complaining? Iphone users? This will work just as seamlessly for Linux and Android.
36. Re:Turn it off. by arglebargle_xiv · 2016-01-19 11:03 · Score: 1
  
  The difference between a CUSTOMER (which we track) and PEOPLE (which we do not), is that the latter has legal and human rights and is worthy of respect.
  Did you really just say that your customers have no legal and human rights and are not worthy of respect?
  Ever read an EULA?
37. Re: Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 11:05 · Score: 0
  
  Sometimes. If the hardware and software support it, not always the case in iot devices
38. Re:Turn it off. by KGIII · 2016-01-19 11:59 · Score: 1
  
  You're right out of your fucking mind. I was setting up tracking systems back when you were playing Nintendo - maybe PS. Probably not PS 2. You have enough unique identifiers to use those nifty cameras. It has about a 3% failure rate in 2008. I assume it has improved since I sold. Why do we track? Well, we want to put the best bargains in front of you. If enough people do not follow the "proper flow" then we redesign the layout.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
39. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 12:01 · Score: 0
  
  Have you had a look at what google is tracking based on your location history on your Android device?
  I tried to look this up and found nothing.The only settings under "Location" on my phone are "Use wireless networks", which has always been turned off, and "Use GPS satellites", which is on. There's nothing about a history anywhere.
40. Re:Turn it off. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-20 08:53 · Score: 0
  
  Please don't. My company is building tools that help businesses understand their customers through WiFi.
  Just because I do business with a company does not give them the right to follow me around to "understand" me. The reason for changing your MAC is to defeat exactly what you are attempting to do. Maybe if you quit trying to develop tracking software we wouldn't need to change the MAC. How about having your product managers send me their email logins so I can read their mail so I can better understand them?
  Really what your company is attempting to do is what is screwing up the Internet and life in general. Tracking is just plain stalking. How does it feel to be a stalker?
Re:Turn it off. Why, what do we gain? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:25 · Score: 1

What do we gain, what makes it worth our while to let others track us?
whats? by dansgovindo · 2016-01-19 03:28 · Score: 2

what is happend here?
1. Re:whats? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 04:16 · Score: 1
  
  Someone set up us the bomb.
This will mess with DHCP reservation by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:33 · Score: 0

This will mess with DHCP reservation
Also, how can I randomise on Windows?
I think the best way to randomise is to use randomisation on a separate USB dongle if you are conerned, on your private subnets you want a MAC stable for DHCP reservation.
1. Re:This will mess with DHCP reservation by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:40 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  This is automatically done when scanning for WiFi access points, which your phone or laptop or whatever is probably doing constantly. When you connect you use whatever MAC rules you normally have.
  This is about not advertising your real MAC address to APs you have no intention of connecting to, so third parties (NSA and friends) cant scatter a bunch of APs around town to track your movements.
2. Re:This will mess with DHCP reservation by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:41 · Score: 1
  
  The solution? Randomization of the MAC address while scanning for Wi-Fi networks
  Scanning only. It uses the real MAC address when connecting to a network.
3. Re:This will mess with DHCP reservation by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 09:22 · Score: 0
  
  btw, it also advertises the last few SSIDs you've connect to in the past. did everyone in this thread forget?
4. Re:This will mess with DHCP reservation by sunderland56 · 2016-01-19 13:00 · Score: 1
  
  Scanning only. It uses the real MAC address when connecting to a network.
  No need for that on a public network, is there?
  If this is a known network, connect using a 'real' MAC address. (Which doesn't need to be the hardware one, it just needs to be constant, so static IP assignment works). If this is an unknown network, just use a random MAC address - or else they'll track you.
  When adding a network to your known list, it could give you the option to use the 'real' address, or continue to use a fake one.
5. Re:This will mess with DHCP reservation by cthulhu11 · 2016-01-20 10:54 · Score: 1
  
  It's all moot, really. This would require a Linux laptop to have a working wifi driver.
Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by alanxyzzy · 2016-01-19 03:35 · Score: -1

Microsoft have introduced a "feature" that sends WiFi passwords to their servers and then shares them with the friends of people you have trusted, I've locked down my WiFi by turning on MAC address based authentication in hostapd. Random MAC addresses with break this. And no - I'm not going to bow to MS and add " _optout" to my SSID. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
1. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:37 · Score: 0
  
  I want random MAC for public use, but stable mac for my own private subnet.
  We need the best of both worlds.
  I use DHCP reservation on my private subnet. I wish to use public wifi but random mac's, to solve this, I would like to use a USB nano dongle, and then randomise that mac, and for my private use I can use the built in PCIE MAC thats stable.
2. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by amorsen · 2016-01-19 03:49 · Score: 2
  
  That is not how random MAC scanning works. The scanning is done with a random MAC, but actual traffic uses the real hardware MAC. Your MAC address based authentication is unaffected.
  Real random MAC on public networks has not been implemented by any OS yet, AFAIK.
  
  --
  Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
3. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:53 · Score: 0
  
  So, basically a useless feature.
  I want periodic (every connection) to be a new RANDOM MAC on a specific adapter and SSID network.
  I want it on Windows 7 and Linux.
4. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by DarkOx · 2016-01-19 04:09 · Score: 1
  
  I can't imagine it would be either. The consequense for DCHP on IPv4 would be not great to say the least.
  I would see address pool exhaustion, the concept reservations breaking entirely, any hardware based options variability failing (IE send the right pixie boot server for the device class) all becoming a total mess.
  
  --
  Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
5. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by DarkOx · 2016-01-19 04:11 · Score: 2
  
  Damn slashdot and its lack of edit, that should be DHCP
  
  --
  Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
6. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by cfalcon · 2016-01-19 04:13 · Score: 2
  
  No, it's not at all useless. It may not be exactly as useful as YOU want, but it's absolutely useful.
  Pretend your MAC address is some number, that I'll call Larry. Without this, just walking through an area can result in your machine saying "Larry here, what networks are around?" With this, every time he asks, he'll say "$RANDOM_NAME here, what networks are around?" This is good design, because you shouldn't have to leak information like a MAC just to see what's going on.
  Now pretend you want to connect, and you connect as Larry. That's fine for most people, but you want more- you want your address to connect differently each time. This is much more niche, but you CAN do it- there are hardware MAC address changers, after all, and you could automate one in Linux. Not quite sure in Windows how to do it automatically, but I'm sure you could.
  I think your idea is good too, btw- but it's nowhere near as important as the one that gives your info away to networks you aren't even trying to connect to.
7. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 04:16 · Score: 0
  
  Depends, some access points will not send the probe reply to an unauthorized MAC, then it will indeed not work.
8. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by amorsen · 2016-01-19 04:21 · Score: 1
  
  Most of those problems would be non-issues on public Wifi, as long as the MAC address doesn't change more often than say once an hour.
  If you are TFTP-booting on Starbucks Wifi you deserve what you get.
  
  --
  Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
9. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 04:26 · Score: 0
  
  Real random MAC on public networks has not been implemented by any OS yet, AFAIK.
  Works on Linux. man ifconfig, or tl;dr: 'ifconfig wlan0 hw ether $(generate_random_MAC.sh) && dhclient '
10. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by Bert64 · 2016-01-19 04:49 · Score: 1
  
  You can already do it on Linux
  ifconfig wlan0 hw ether 00:11:22:33:44:55
  
  --
  http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
11. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by laurencetux · 2016-01-19 05:09 · Score: 1
  
  my problem with this is
  1 what happens when multiple orgs want to be LAST in the chain
  2 an SSID only has 32 characters to begin with so if you need to use a few tags you land up with
  mine_eatfresh_fred_optout_nomap as your ssid
12. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 06:49 · Score: 0
  
  Per connection randomised MAC per physical/SSID/adapter is what we need to have true control.
  Can somebody hack up a Windows 7 and Linux tool for this? I think we need that even more than scanning. I currently use a "disposable" USB nano adapter for places I don't want my machine MAC addresses used, sometimes I sit behind a pocket router to mask all my interfaces.
13. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by serviscope_minor · 2016-01-19 07:03 · Score: 1
  
  Just Don't use de:ad:be:ef:00 because that's my random address.
  Er wait...
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
14. Re:Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by amorsen · 2016-01-19 09:27 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, you can implement it yourself quite easily on Linux for a 90% solution. Once you want notifications to the DHCP client, periodic changes of MAC address, selection of which networks to keep the factory MAC address on, and so forth, it is not so simple.
  
  --
  Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
15. Re: Can't lock down with random MAC addresses by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 15:08 · Score: 0
  
  TAILS
Unless you don't use NetworkManager by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 03:37 · Score: 1

Because systemd sucks.
1. Re:Unless you don't use NetworkManager by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 05:07 · Score: 0
  
  But how would you change your networking without a pretty(useless) gui?
2. Re:Unless you don't use NetworkManager by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 06:14 · Score: 0
  
  Because systemd sucks.
  Complete non-sequitur - NetworkManager isn't part of systemd, the equivalent is systemd-networkd.
  The latter is _much_ simpler, sanely configurable without a GUI, and is intended to be used with other tools (e.g. wpa_supplicant) in the traditional Unix way.
  Systemd isn't just a handy word for "everything I don't like", however much Slashdotters treat it that way.
3. Re:Unless you don't use NetworkManager by caseih · 2016-01-19 06:50 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  You are confused. I'm not sure why you were modded up here. NetworkManager is not part of systemd, and doesn't require systemd either. Your linux machines have been using it for years, several years longer than systemd has ever existed. Please get your facts straight before posting.
  Sounds like your knee jerked and you mistook NetworkManager for networkd, which is a part of systemd. But networkd is intended only to provide simple network functionality for containers like Docker or virtual machines. networkd is not required, and I've never ever used it on my boxes and I've run systemd for years. I don't even think I have it installed (yes systemd really is modular and you can remove parts of it).
  Possibly networkd could become a backend for NetworkManager, but so far I don't think that's the case. And NewtorkManager seems to handle hotplugging of devices with ease (like Wifi dongles or ethernet dongles).
  NetworkManager is great for managing things like WiFi, VPNs, and multiple TCP/IP configurations. For example, I keep a special NetworkManager profile for connecting to my Ubuiquiti Wifi devices for the first time. The profile uses a static IP address like 192.168.1.10. For my normal connections, DHCP is used. NetworkManager is very powerful, and there's a nice command-line utility to interface with it as well. It used to be quite embarrassing for many years on Linux that even something as simple as plugging in a ethernet wire would not automatically bring up the interface like Windows and Mac had done for years. NetworkManager was a welcome piece of the puzzle.
4. Re:Unless you don't use NetworkManager by allo · 2016-01-23 22:48 · Score: 1
  
  both are poetteringware
You can already change your MAC on linux by Viol8 · 2016-01-19 04:14 · Score: 1

Use ifconfig:
ifconfig eth0 hw ether
Its had this option for years. I presume it'll work for the wlan0 device though I've never tried it.
1. Re:You can already change your MAC on linux by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 04:28 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  The MAC randomization used here is only while scanning, not while connecting, in order to not break MAC whitelisting where it may be used.
  "What seems like a viable option is randomizing the MAC address while scanning, chainging it every now and then, but still use the hard-wired MAC address for association and actual connectivity. Apple pioneered this approach with its mobile operating system, iOS version 8. Since the worst thing that can happen in an unlikely event of MAC address clash is that your AP list is incomplete for a while it seems like a fairly safe choice."
2. Re:You can already change your MAC on linux by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 04:54 · Score: 0
  
  No no no, you must not do it like that, it's not worthy of a modern operating system. We will provide you completely new tools to do so in some time.
  -- systemd
3. Re:You can already change your MAC on linux by Aleph-G · 2016-01-19 05:12 · Score: 1
  
  Its better to use ip: ip link set wlan0 address 66:66:66:66:66:66 (ifconfig is deprecated)
4. Re:You can already change your MAC on linux by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 06:44 · Score: 0
  
  Why is ifconfig deprecated? Seems to work just fine for me? I remember Arch saying the same thing 5 years ago, but still depending on it.
5. Re:You can already change your MAC on linux by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 23:05 · Score: 0
  
  Why is ifconfig deprecated? Seems to work just fine for me?
  
  Perhaps ifconfig doesn't depend on systemd?
Bill Hicks on Marketing by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 04:23 · Score: 0

You know what to do.
Been randomizing my WiFi MAC for years by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 04:37 · Score: 0

1 - Don't connect automatically.
2 - Have a button that generates a random MAC. Don't use it at home.
With this in the news though, they will just move to fingerprinting, which is harder for me to fake. I guess I will start by setting my user strings to say I am Windows XP with Internet Explorer 8 (I am actually Linux and Firefox). By the time they figure out that is not true, I will be gone.
Hope my ramblings not trackable anyway. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 04:43 · Score: 0

I have always turned off my wifi when not at home (Android and Win Phone/Mobile - plenty of data allowance for my usage patterns on the plans I've had).
Systemd users will get... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 05:04 · Score: 0

Linux users already have this. Systemd users will have it soon. Rehashing previous functionality, selling it as a compelling advantage over what came before.
boo systemd, boo
Did everyone forget about fingerprinting? by xtronics · 2016-01-19 05:08 · Score: 1

Just won't work.
Mostly due to java creep in browsers - https://panopticlick.eff.org/
If you want to get unwarranted attention - randomly flip your MACs - makes you look like a spook.
What we really need is a browser that looks very common via finger-print - the page is not shown - only an OCR document created from the page with links that have tracking information removed. Once the OCR doc is created the instance of the browser is removed.
I really miss web sites that don't use java..
1. Re:Did everyone forget about fingerprinting? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 05:29 · Score: 0
  
  This isn't about traffic when the client is associated, which will continue to use a static (although changeable) MAC address. By the time you've got an IP address back from an access point, your phone has blasted so many unique pieces of information towards the access point that it might as well have presented your birth certificate. That's not what this is about. The key issue is with the probe requests that clients use to scan for access points. These are sent all the time, even when no access point known to the client is in range. This way every phone and laptop with Wifi enabled is an active radio beacon that permanently broadcasts a unique identifier. On many devices this is even the case when Wifi is turned off, but the service for Wifi assisted positioning is enabled. The craziest thing is that none of the active scanning is technically necessary, because the clients could just passively listen for the beacon frames that the access points broadcast (by default 10 times per second).
2. Re:Did everyone forget about fingerprinting? by Etcetera · 2016-01-19 05:42 · Score: 1
  
  This way every phone and laptop with Wifi enabled is an active radio beacon that permanently broadcasts a unique identifier. On many devices this is even the case when Wifi is turned off, but the service for Wifi assisted positioning is enabled. The craziest thing is that none of the active scanning is technically necessary, because the clients could just passively listen for the beacon frames that the access points broadcast (by default 10 times per second).
  THIS. I wish I had mod points, because this deserves two. I'd love for more devices to do this passively. Be active when I hit the "Scan for Wifi Networks" button (maybe), but otherwise just listen to what's going on. For OS's that seem to think that not responding to an ICMP ping is a valuable end-user feature, you'd think more of them would offer this already.
  
  --
  Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
3. Re:Did everyone forget about fingerprinting? by jonesy16 · 2016-01-19 06:34 · Score: 1
  
  Problem is, with mobile carriers abusing us on data limits, most people are thankful that their phones will find an open network and use it to update their Facebook feeds in the background. So it's not just about maintaining a list of AP's, but also checking if you have permission to get on them.
4. Re:Did everyone forget about fingerprinting? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 07:33 · Score: 0
  
  Again, that is not what this is about. Associating with an access point, even just to see if there is internet connectivity, will keep using your real MAC address (or the one you've configured). The tracking protection only affects the probe requests, and these are technically unnecessary, as their function could be implemented by passive listening for beacon frames from the access points, which is completely stealthy and provides maximal privacy. The only situation where you need probe requests is if some clueless admin has disabled "SSID broadcasts" on the access point. In that case the access point keeps broadcasting beacon frames, but doesn't include its SSID in them, so instead the phone has to constantly broadcast probe requests with the SSID in them to see if it's in range of that stupid admin's access point.
  The alleged reason for sending probe requests is that, allegedly, waiting a tenth of a second on each channel with the receiver on to listen for beacon frames consumes more energy than sending probe requests and waiting a shorter time for the replies. Personally I don't buy it, but whatever, now you know.
  Also, as this has come up in a few discussions lately, I'd like to point out something related but off-topic: The typical public hot spot configuration in small scale environments like bars, restaurants and cafes is to use WPA-PSK with a key that is printed in the menu or on some sign inside the venue. This configuration does not protect against passive snooping. An attacker can read everything on such a Wifi network that isn't separately encrypted.
Please make this disableable by AntronArgaiv · 2016-01-19 05:29 · Score: 1

I support the idea, but please make it optional for those of us who have reasons not to want to do it. One example of why you might not want to do this: if you restrict MAC addresses on your home wifi, this will break it.
1. Re:Please make this disableable by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 05:51 · Score: 0
  
  The feature is only for scanning, not for the actual association. So it's safe to enable random MAC for scanning by defualt. When NetworkManager actually connects to your access point, it will use the normal permanent MAC address of your card.
Passive scanning by enriquevagu · 2016-01-19 05:37 · Score: 2

If you want to keep your privacy, you'd better employ passive scanning. Avoids any MAC transmission at all and saves some power while disconnected.
Link in Wi-fi.org
1. Re:Passive scanning by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 05:52 · Score: 0
  
  Passive scanning also takes 10 times as long, which has real consequences for any network with more than one access point, or for a Wi-Fi network list in the user interface, or for location based services like maps.
2. Re:Passive scanning by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 05:59 · Score: 0
  
  Do you know if there's a way to configure this in Android? Or would it require a rooted phone?
3. Re:Passive scanning by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 13:01 · Score: 0
  
  10 times as long? How so? Every AP is broadcasting all you need to know unless some idiot admin disabled SSID broadcasting, 10 times a second.
4. Re:Passive scanning by AmiMoJo · 2016-01-20 01:06 · Score: 1
  
  Smarter Wifi Manager for Android uses your location to keep the wifi turned off until you get to a place where you were previously connected to a known network. It saves a lot of battery power, and protects your privacy.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
wpa_supplicant already does this by arw · 2016-01-19 05:55 · Score: 1

Screw NetworkManager, its broken anyways and wpa_supplicant can already do everything one might want there:
Add 'mac_addr=1' and 'preassoc_mac_addr=1' to your /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf. Then your MAC-address will be randomized during the Scanning/Preassociation phase and afterwards.
For networks that need a static MAC address for filtering, add 'mac_addr=0' in the appropriate 'network' section. You also want to make sure you are using 'dhcpcd' instead of 'dhclient' (alias isc-dhcp-client). The latter can't deal with changing MAC addresses, it seems.
IPv6 SLAAC without EUI-64 by buchanmilne · 2016-01-19 05:57 · Score: 1

The summary was maybe bit misleading
This is not actually abput changing your MAC address, but using a different algorithm for IPv6 StateLess Address Auto Configuration than the EUI-64 method (which is "ef80${MAC}").
This doesn't impact IPv4 DHCP or AP MAC address filters at all, and if your routers are configured to send the right eouter advertisements in response to IPv6 router solicitation, will have no impact on DHCPv6.
1. Re: IPv6 SLAAC without EUI-64 by buchanmilne · 2016-01-19 06:12 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, eui-64 format for host identifier is roughly "${MAC:0:7}:ff:fe:${MAC:8:15}".
2. Re:IPv6 SLAAC without EUI-64 by UberLord · 2016-01-19 08:53 · Score: 1
  
  dhcpcd (which also works on BSD) has had support for this (RFC7217) for almost a year now, but it's now news when NetworkManager (Linux only) get's it?
3. Re:IPv6 SLAAC without EUI-64 by UberLord · 2016-01-19 08:57 · Score: 1
  
  EDIT: over a year and a half .... can't read dates in my own source repo ...
4. Re: IPv6 SLAAC without EUI-64 by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 09:17 · Score: 0
  
  Since exactly when does dhcpcd handle wlan discovery?
5. Re: IPv6 SLAAC without EUI-64 by UberLord · 2016-01-19 10:07 · Score: 1
  
  It doesn't, it relies on a 3rd party like wpa_supplicant or the kernel for that.
  My initial reply to the parent was NOT about wlan discovery.
6. Re:IPv6 SLAAC without EUI-64 by Peter+H.S. · 2016-01-19 11:55 · Score: 1
  
  dhcpcd (which also works on BSD) has had support for this (RFC7217) for almost a year now, but it's now news when NetworkManager (Linux only) get's it?
  RFC7217 has been in NM for some time. The news regarding this is that it now is upstream default for IPv6 connections when using NM 1.2.
  The other feature, that is the real news, is a kind of MAC randomization feature that uses the real HW MAC for connection, but "fake" MAC's for scanning for AP's. This is also default now.
  NM can also randomize and spoof MAC's like the decade old GNU MAC Changer, but it isn't default since that may give problems with connecting to certain devices and services.
Already covered by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 05:58 · Score: 0

You can already do this in linux via macchanger
1. Re:Already covered by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 06:52 · Score: 0
  
  thank you. seems everyone is forgetting this. macchanger -A wlan0 ... and your done.
Already Done by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 06:28 · Score: 0

BTDT. I have been randomizing my mac address in Linux for years.
Privacy? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 06:33 · Score: 0

We were a lot more private when there were open access points that didn't have security enabled. If you want to allow truly anonymous a communication, letting random people access the internet with no paper trail (logs) is the only way that it will work.
But, 10 years ago, the tech community shunned the freeloaders and people connecting to unsecure wifi. They had it all locked down, and now they are complaining about the tracking problem they created.
Business as usual... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 07:53 · Score: 0

Open Sores playing catch-up again.
already works on Linux by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-19 08:56 · Score: 0

Already works fine on Linux. Especially useful for places that have "1 hour free wifi", based on MAC address.
and dhcpcd already handles SLAAC randomisation by UberLord · 2016-01-19 08:56 · Score: 0

for over a year and a half now!
What is more, both products also work on BSDs with GTK+ and Qt front ends.
Who needs this NetworkManager anyway?
Go to war! by emil · 2016-01-19 09:45 · Score: 1

I don't like being tracked, so I randomize my MAC with Pry-Fi. If you would be so kind to tell us who you work for, we can all enable the "Go to war!" mode to flood you with bogus MACs. Game?
Re:Turn it off. Why, what do we gain? by KGIII · 2016-01-19 11:54 · Score: 1

As someone who has modeled pedestrian traffic, specifically for retail outlets - including stores. Well, you get things optimized and more easily found. Of course, you're rooted through the store like cattle. Ever notice how almost everyone goes in the same direction and the people who don't go the "right" way get ugly looks. There's a reason for that but, alas, I'm too ill to explain it and, frankly, I don't like you that much.
Hmm... They said this Prednizone (sp) would make me grumpy. They're right. So, seeing as I have a perfectly fine excuse - fuck you. (Don't take it personal.)

--
"So long and thanks for all the fish."