Statement on IPv6 Privacy Concerns

angio writes "As a followup to the IPv6 privacy concerns (discussed in this slashdot news item), the IANA has released a statement addressing these concerns. Their major point follows the objections slashdotters raised, that is, that IPv6 does not require divulging the hadware address. Good to read. "

Comments

Where's the love?

[Plasmic]

I think the primary question everyone should be asking themselves is:

Even if IPv6 is as horrible as the most skeptical, paranoid, privacy-centric folks think it must be, how could it possibly be any worse than IPv4?

The answer is (get ready for this, cause it's a huge surprise): it couldn't be. Under IPv4, it's simple to find out the geographical location of every web surfer as well as what ISP you should contact should they be doing anything bad. If they have a static IP or they have cookies enabled, it's also simple to tell if they come to your site often. All of these can be bypassed (disabling cookies and changing your MAC address), as most of the world is aware.

Even under the guise of part of your IP address being "randomly generated," it's still traceable directly back to your ISP, for all intents and purposes.

In other words, what on earth is anyone worried about? I see comments like "Well, it sounds good, but is it really?" and "Be careful.. 128 bits is a lot of IPs.. the government must be spying on us," (among others which have no real logical basis and leave me wondering why the poster is imparting his lack of knowledge upon us).

For those of you who aren't aware, the IETF is a highly respectable organization. If you can trust them with the responsibility of making every other protocol you touch, then surely this one isn't too much of a leap. The last thing you have to worry about is that they would intentionally deceive you into adopting some sort of covertly anti-privacy concept (don't think for a second I'm asserting that everything that the IETF produces is perfect.. merely that they're honest and have genuinely good-karma-filled intentions).

It's about time!

[Ryandav]

It's almost like the author of this article _actually_reads_ this forum.

I have to say that this is one of the reasons that I like slashdot. It's a meritocracy of ideas, because the people who often best understand a technology are on hand to help explain it to those in another area of expertise. The amount of (unintentional) misinformation floating around here is uncharacteristic of the forum.

Rob, you rock. And if nobody's said that lately, it's never because you've been taken for granted...