4 ms·
>The issue is that IP/computer != single person. This brings up a thought I've had lately: The endgame of IPv6 -let's say, 100% adoption, and the retirement of
by 24gttghh 9y ago
>The issue is that IP/computer != single person.
This brings up a thought I've had lately: The endgame of IPv6 -let's say, 100% adoption, and the retirement of IPv4- will be IPv6=single device, no? I would think that ends (in however many years it takes to get there) what little anonymity IPv4 currently provides.
- teraflop 9y agoIn principle the situation isn't that different from IPv4. A device on an IPv6 network can cycle through a series of random "temporary addresses" which it generates itself, without contacting a DHCP server. Someone who gets your IPv6 address can track it down to a specific network, but there's no record of which device on that network initiated it, similar to IPv4+NAT. (A couple of caveats. One is that attackers can still correlate different connections within a short period of time, between temporary address rotations. Another is that temporary address support is broken on some Windows versions, so you may be leaking your MAC address all over the ace without knowing it.)
- 24gttghh 9y agoI think my idea was that IPv6 easily could be permanent per device as the address space is so enormous, for now :)
- JorgeGT 9y agoWhile this is true (although most IPv6 devices rotate addresses by default) the fact remains that a single device != single person, and this is legally a very important distinction.