From nobody Tue Feb 11 10:04:18 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D51B2120A35 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 10:04:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=salesforce.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u79HlY_v3rM4 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 10:04:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-il1-x133.google.com (mail-il1-x133.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 621C41209F9 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 10:04:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-il1-x133.google.com with SMTP id f10so4218264ils.8 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 10:04:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=salesforce.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hEBsdBTca2iMRT2BEbcVkEX7Px5t+cf5Kr026a7cmqQ=; b=PkMUdD564rdf4w32JzuBtVJPgzipeHkkTaxzdNLj3cVhV5w8KmWDQqlOP3qrGw+qKZ SuG7NPQr+LUqVfIRS437VLcSMiQBpbprKTBHxVAjznuOhzKhHAjSfbCkIDZ+Yrl3mLK9 IF8xPZipTLMzbYaN5A+KmSS2AhrqbswS/3AXw= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hEBsdBTca2iMRT2BEbcVkEX7Px5t+cf5Kr026a7cmqQ=; b=MCfvuXE7Y3RBPBOX2g4xkW/es8qwPBBvkjIW804iy/Yi6x5fHRBNlGXuKMKvKRXsK5 t1Pf4hQxM6TnnUSP4G2yw+PlX8W3FJmhQiTF0t41PcRnwjZM0hEe2rCqu2nQ7JEhGQkJ GNGua3aoSa3kHoM5EpAo1qb0dSRXJgI8qGNUK3vlItWdlpfPH1whAiU883aMQ0pdp8af Flk0TS17FqZToN6/odSQiQN5hia295p9HJr9CR0PD5fxPAZe/9j9oh/PEzHMuIVd8MbB 4HQsbZqcHUb1uVE9pH7LyYH3ftXiiN94kyvQ6DGFwG2HxaV7ISrbHjniXgpfbnTY54y/ e6Xg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU80bqAjolIfqZVxBQEaoxvDFiCM6yGxDS08r7nJoc/6WAZwzHC UGaKJ0QQItBVQAiLLys6qQPCo3T9G38xrsoz4z8JsUZJ5QiIjA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzbl2nt7lhAFavSy/EW78rFllsN8xhBSzFT47epAa2ubTxyJjfmVLBExsInMF6cxOYLojcuY622T2o3svX5iI0= X-Received: by 2002:a92:3a9b:: with SMTP id i27mr7851289ilf.39.1581444248447; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 10:04:08 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8db26e2a-de9f-08bf-e822-ea3093dda7cc@andersdotter.cc> In-Reply-To: From: Shivan Sahib Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 10:03:57 -0800 Message-ID: To: Christopher Wood Cc: pearg@irtf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a94b98059e50ae77" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Pearg] Call for adoption: draft-wood-pearg-website-fingerprinting-00 X-BeenThere: pearg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Privacy Enhancements and Assessment Proposed RG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 18:04:17 -0000 --000000000000a94b98059e50ae77 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, Thanks to everyone who responded. This is way overdue; Sara is out of office, but we agreed that there is clear support to adopt the document. Chris, please update the name when you submit the next version! Thanks, Shivan On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 8:33 AM Christopher Wood wrote: > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, at 2:38 AM, Amelia Andersdotter wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I support adoption. Bearing mind Stephen's comments from earlier, there > > may some work already ongoing in IPSecME: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipsecme-iptfs/ > > Thanks for raising this, Amelia! I filed an issue to cite it accordingly: > > https://github.com/chris-wood/ietf-fingerprinting/issues/4 > > Best, > Chris > > > > > Abstract: > > > > "This document describes a mechanism to enhance IPsec traffic flow > > security by adding traffic flow confidentiality to encrypted IP > > encapsulated traffic. Traffic flow confidentiality is provided by > > obscuring the size and frequency of IP traffic using a fixed-sized, > > constant-send-rate IPsec tunnel. The solution allows for congestion > > control as well." > > > > There's also a project in IEEE 802.1 (well, it's starting up at this > > time) that tries to explore ways of mitigating web traffic > > fingerprinting by ensuring packet length/timing etc. are homogeneous. I= t > > will be covered eventually here: https://1.ieee802.org/security/ > > > > best regards, > > > > Amelia > > > > On 2020-01-13 10:42, Sara Dickinson wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > > > A draft called =E2=80=98Network-Based Website Fingerprinting' ( > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wood-pearg-website-fingerprinting/= ) > has been presented twice in PEARG meetings and received positive feedback > at IETF 106. This email starts a two week Call for Adoption of this > document. > > > > > > Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for > adoption by PEARG and send comments to the list, clearly stating your vie= w. > > > > > > This call for adoption ends on 27th January 2020. > > > > > > Sara. > > > > > > -- > > Pearg mailing list > > Pearg@irtf.org > > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/pearg > > > > -- > Pearg mailing list > Pearg@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/pearg > --000000000000a94b98059e50ae77 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi all,

Thanks to everyone who responde= d. This is way overdue; Sara is out of office, but we=C2=A0 agreed that the= re is clear support to adopt the document. Chris, please update the name wh= en you submit the next version!

Thanks,
Shivan

On= Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 8:33 AM Christopher Wood <caw@heapingbits.net> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, at 2:38 AM, Amelia = Andersdotter wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I support adoption. Bearing mind Stephen's comments from earlier, = there
> may some work already ongoing in IPSecME:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draf= t-ietf-ipsecme-iptfs/

Thanks for raising this, Amelia! I filed an issue to cite it accordingly:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://github.com/chris-wood= /ietf-fingerprinting/issues/4

Best,
Chris

>
> Abstract:
>
> "This document describes a mechanism to enhance IPsec traffic flo= w
> security by adding traffic flow confidentiality to encrypted IP
> encapsulated traffic.=C2=A0 Traffic flow confidentiality is provided b= y
> obscuring the size and frequency of IP traffic using a fixed-sized, > constant-send-rate IPsec tunnel.=C2=A0 The solution allows for congest= ion
> control as well."
>
> There's also a project in IEEE 802.1 (well, it's starting up a= t this
> time) that tries to explore ways of mitigating web traffic
> fingerprinting by ensuring packet length/timing etc. are homogeneous. = It
> will be covered eventually here: https://1.ieee802.org/security/=
>
> best regards,
>
> Amelia
>
> On 2020-01-13 10:42, Sara Dickinson wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > A draft called =E2=80=98Network-Based Website Fingerprinting'= (https://datatracker.ietf.= org/doc/draft-wood-pearg-website-fingerprinting/) has been presented tw= ice in PEARG meetings and received positive feedback at IETF 106. This emai= l starts a two week Call for Adoption of this document.
> >
> > Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for a= doption by PEARG and send comments to the list, clearly stating your view.<= br> > >
> > This call for adoption ends on 27th January 2020.
> >
> > Sara.
>
>
> --
> Pearg mailing list
> Pearg@irtf.org=
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/pearg
>

--
Pearg mailing list
Pearg@irtf.org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/pearg
--000000000000a94b98059e50ae77-- From nobody Sat Feb 15 04:09:35 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F344D120071 for ; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 04:09:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dgFbQGxG0glz for ; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 04:09:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay10.mail.gandi.net (relay10.mail.gandi.net [217.70.178.230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A647120048 for ; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 04:08:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.60.54.202] (unknown [93.122.166.150]) (Authenticated sender: amelia@andersdotter.cc) by relay10.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AD5DE240003 for ; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 12:08:52 +0000 (UTC) To: pearg@irtf.org References: <8db26e2a-de9f-08bf-e822-ea3093dda7cc@andersdotter.cc> Reply-To: amelia.ietf@andersdotter.cc From: Amelia Andersdotter Message-ID: <543d9512-b6ae-fe9b-3354-00cf65c43605@andersdotter.cc> Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 13:08:51 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US-large Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Pearg] Call for adoption: draft-wood-pearg-website-fingerprinting-00 X-BeenThere: pearg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Privacy Enhancements and Assessment Proposed RG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 12:09:35 -0000 On 2020-01-21 17:32, Christopher Wood wrote: > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, at 2:38 AM, Amelia Andersdotter wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I support adoption. Bearing mind Stephen's comments from earlier, there >> may some work already ongoing in IPSecME: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipsecme-iptfs/ > Thanks for raising this, Amelia! I filed an issue to cite it accordingly: > > https://github.com/chris-wood/ietf-fingerprinting/issues/4 Meanwhile at IEEE: P802.1AEdk MAC Privacy protection - PAR Approved by the SASB It's following the IPTFS stuff (like they're aiming for the same category of increased privacy protection). Thought it'd be interesting! /a > Best, > Chris > >> Abstract: >> >> "This document describes a mechanism to enhance IPsec traffic flow >> security by adding traffic flow confidentiality to encrypted IP >> encapsulated traffic.  Traffic flow confidentiality is provided by >> obscuring the size and frequency of IP traffic using a fixed-sized, >> constant-send-rate IPsec tunnel.  The solution allows for congestion >> control as well." >> >> There's also a project in IEEE 802.1 (well, it's starting up at this >> time) that tries to explore ways of mitigating web traffic >> fingerprinting by ensuring packet length/timing etc. are homogeneous. It >> will be covered eventually here: https://1.ieee802.org/security/ >> >> best regards, >> >> Amelia >> >> On 2020-01-13 10:42, Sara Dickinson wrote: >>> Hi All, >>> >>> A draft called ‘Network-Based Website Fingerprinting' (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wood-pearg-website-fingerprinting/) has been presented twice in PEARG meetings and received positive feedback at IETF 106. This email starts a two week Call for Adoption of this document. >>> >>> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by PEARG and send comments to the list, clearly stating your view. >>> >>> This call for adoption ends on 27th January 2020. >>> >>> Sara. >> >> -- >> Pearg mailing list >> Pearg@irtf.org >> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/pearg >> From nobody Thu Feb 20 19:34:03 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21D1B12080E for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 19:34:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.997 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GiH1q_mXB8H4 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 19:33:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lj1-x229.google.com (mail-lj1-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA3CB120152 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 19:33:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-x229.google.com with SMTP id e18so651776ljn.12 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 19:33:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=hB2tZjpPhAQTjcPfk++cm58JgEjJ30/jvNn6rmFx4kU=; b=G85t5uyQ4r6i0Jk0+Ljv+yYW5RByshSOAMX25avzetJns3PgN4Qj3Hkd4o5bomqkGs EYhgpzBn5whL81cR8RgbxaJ88PGBXzud9cHQU2NLYTy6gcSJmImiDdpZSDLGjAA4pEwg n5uxkJuKM42yT7g9PPjYUDQjqbaBJlCwwpU6UMab6W9TJWpUiXnXSZQa5YnhH0poot86 gdKvWaMPKOE3V3VoalVqnBiy2q/kc53YBrpkZcfQGpDJ2lNeCtigCVsbiT7t94zjemWN OKC4TdGbF0n11SDlVEpdlh9Zg/L57vqgpHeaRm8dRK7kQcxcEvALEq1J6+vjT00OgNKO qgEA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=hB2tZjpPhAQTjcPfk++cm58JgEjJ30/jvNn6rmFx4kU=; b=imqqiMn88RE3rFcTUpmG1AYk8y92K/Y08OgYV/6810FvyusS5DNv2DauICuQUCHhuU npV5h+2l9voEZZYxaFyRSvDYiM22p9EOgA6ZiZO+3BGqxwoeFiNth/SA4UAV85DxRtQl mgjx9MBxJ4qgnp8B7e51+0t+giCfyopOBevIa14RhJqhME0TaONOlUxMugpfSssp1LB3 W/s2m64YXdx0hvc0g6XagNOj5ff+bwp9FwiTvJ7nrwQNc0egGpgVTAbMhcGJV/XHFHZW gpueP1jnqa4m59bWn3J1jiTVMOLIiBVdZPdet6JHMKhL6yqK/6couzTFmiwQnpRAeyoB I6tQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX85XXg57C8yoIijo8XcwVQP0P6EFUVm0/4ZJ60tVIrnq7IAkjI TEu3NnrWsc0VwEWRkajxTMqRxldtX4AGv1m7S2zj+Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwR2Hve6n8VYcjlDRKBpQAH3WNyTg3pQ1jIjkKeEuhzP1TwxYPxjh6vtO7qJYT77zKE1pw4DAYZ8YNdydYnScg= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:995a:: with SMTP id r26mr21482772ljj.78.1582256036322; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 19:33:56 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Allison Mankin Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 22:33:45 -0500 Message-ID: To: "pearg@irtf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fd24be059f0db099" Archived-At: Subject: [Pearg] Fwd: [art] Side meeting for IP address privacy on the web X-BeenThere: pearg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Privacy Enhancements and Assessment Proposed RG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 03:34:01 -0000 --000000000000fd24be059f0db099 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi PEARG, This is likely of interest to many of you. See you at IETF 107. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Paul Jensen Date: Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 14:58 Subject: [art] Side meeting for IP address privacy on the web To: I intend on holding a side meeting at IETF 107 to talk about IP address privacy on the web. As many browsers work to combat fingerprinting on the web, a user's IP address, the single most identifying fingerprintable surface, remains largely unprotected. Various browsers have acknowledged the fingerprintability of IP addresses or have proposed a solution: Chrome (https://github.com/bslassey/ip-blindness), Firefox ( https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2019/09/10/firefoxs-test-pilot-program-returns-with-firefox-private-network-beta/), Safari (https://webkit.org/tracking-prevention-policy/), Brave ( https://brave.com/vpn0-a-privacy-preserving-distributed-virtual-private-network/). I'd like to hold a side meeting on this topic to start the conversation around IP address privacy on the web. Specifically with the goal of preventing IP from being used as a tracking vector, but trying to do so without breaking beneficial use cases such as DoS, fraud, spam and other abuse prevention. Agenda might look something like this: - What IP is used for - Spam, abuse, fraud, DoS protection - Geo IP - Ad targeting - others? - Privacy research - IP reidentification - IP fingerprinting - Proposals for IP blindness - VPN0 - FPN - Willful IP Blindness If you're interested in attending please let me know which days you have conflicting obligations in the morning slot. Paul _______________________________________________ art mailing list art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/art --000000000000fd24be059f0db099 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi PEARG,

This is likely of interest to many of you.

See you at IETF 107.

---------- Forwa= rded message ---------
From: Paul Jensen <pauljensen=3D40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Date: Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 14:58
Subject: [art] Side meeting for IP= address privacy on the web
To: <art= @ietf.org>


I intend on holding a s= ide meeting at IETF 107 to talk about IP address privacy on the web.=C2=A0 = As many browsers work to combat fingerprinting on the web, a user's IP = address,=C2=A0the single most identifying fingerprintable=C2=A0surface, rem= ains largely unprotected. Various browsers have acknowledged the fingerprin= tability of IP addresses or have proposed a solution: Chrome (https://github.co= m/bslassey/ip-blindness), Firefox (https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2019/09/10/fir= efoxs-test-pilot-program-returns-with-firefox-private-network-beta/), S= afari (https://webkit.org/tracking-prevention-policy/), Brave (https://brave.com/vpn0-a-privacy-preserving-d= istributed-virtual-private-network/).=C2=A0 I'd like to hold a side= meeting on this topic to start the conversation around IP address privacy = on=C2=A0the web.=C2=A0 Specifically with the goal of preventing IP from bei= ng used as a tracking vector, but trying to do so without breaking=C2=A0ben= eficial=C2=A0use cases such as DoS, fraud, spam and other abuse prevention.= =C2=A0 Agenda might look something like this:
  • What IP is u= sed for
    • Spam, abuse, fraud, DoS prot= ection
    • Geo IP
    • Ad targeting
    • others?
    <= li style=3D"margin-left:15px">Privacy research
    • IP reidentification
    • IP finger= printing
  • Proposals for IP blindness=
    • VPN0
    • FPN
    • Willful IP Blindness
    <= /ul>
If you're interested in attending please l= et me know which days you have conflicting obligations in the morning slot.=

Paul
_______________________________________________
art mailing list
art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/art
--000000000000fd24be059f0db099-- From nobody Sun Feb 23 18:46:02 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23A373A0827 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 18:45:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.356 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.356 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12=1.543, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wBzWEeMEQZjz for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 18:45:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8CF13A0828 for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 18:45:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.10] (unknown [181.45.84.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8288682DF1; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 03:45:47 +0100 (CET) To: Allison Mankin , "pearg@irtf.org" References: From: Fernando Gont Cc: art@ietf.org Message-ID: <7dad383b-fe17-85dd-609f-22db7f4efa55@si6networks.com> Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 12:44:46 -0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Pearg] Fwd: [art] Side meeting for IP address privacy on the web X-BeenThere: pearg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Privacy Enhancements and Assessment Proposed RG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 02:45:56 -0000 Folks, Unfortunately I will not be attending the next IETF meeting, but I felt like posting a few comments on the topic. Some of us have done a fair share of work in the area of "address privacy", among others, please see: * RFC7217/RFC8064: which replaces traditional stable IPv6 addresses with something more sensible (from a privacy point of view) * draft-ietf-6man-rfc4941bis: A revision of RFC4941 to fix a number of flaws in it. * RFC7721: Privacy analysis of IPv6 addresses. * draft-gont-6man-address-usage-recommendations: A document that, among other things identifies gaps that prevent us from doing more appropriate usage of IPv6 addresses. They try to address as much of the problem as is "addressable": Modulo the IID part of an address (which may unnecessarily leak information), all the topologically-dependent bit of an address are simply serving their purpose. Put another way, an address is a topologically-dependent identifier. So it *will* leak the position of the node in the network topology (that's why you use adressses in the first place, such that the network knows how to get packets back to you!). The browser "solutions" listed below are not really solutions: e.g., a VPN simply adds one extra layer of indirection, and essentially choose a different point in the network that gets to see all of the users' traffic, and is able to track users in a very easy way. dVPN would be, in a way, something along the lines of Tor? -- If so, why not Tor? As with DoH, relying on a single party to behave nicely, based on the (questionable) assumption that some party (in this case the local ISP) is evil, while another is just nice (in this case the VPN concentrator, or analogous for the browser extension) leads to, IMO, a more scary scary situation where a single entity could potentially go rogue, or be hacked, affecting the privacy of many more users. As with e.g. DoH, you don't really get privacy, but rather get to pick how gets to peak at your traffic. This is an important message to state clearly... and hopefully an argument such that browsers *never* enable this king of thing by default, as was the case with DoH in some cases. Thanks! Cheers, Fernando On 21/2/20 00:33, Allison Mankin wrote: > Hi PEARG, > > This is likely of interest to many of you. > > See you at IETF 107. > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: *Paul Jensen* > > Date: Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 14:58 > Subject: [art] Side meeting for IP address privacy on the web > To: > > > > I intend on holding a side meeting at IETF 107 to talk about IP address > privacy on the web.  As many browsers work to combat fingerprinting on > the web, a user's IP address, the single most identifying > fingerprintable surface, remains largely unprotected. Various browsers > have acknowledged the fingerprintability of IP addresses or have > proposed a solution: Chrome (https://github.com/bslassey/ip-blindness), > Firefox > (https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2019/09/10/firefoxs-test-pilot-program-returns-with-firefox-private-network-beta/), > Safari (https://webkit.org/tracking-prevention-policy/), Brave > (https://brave.com/vpn0-a-privacy-preserving-distributed-virtual-private-network/). > I'd like to hold a side meeting on this topic to start the conversation > around IP address privacy on the web.  Specifically with the goal of > preventing IP from being used as a tracking vector, but trying to do so > without breaking beneficial use cases such as DoS, fraud, spam and other > abuse prevention.  Agenda might look something like this: >> >> * What IP is used for >> o Spam, abuse, fraud, DoS protection >> o Geo IP >> o Ad targeting >> o others? >> * Privacy research >> o IP reidentification >> o IP fingerprinting >> * Proposals for IP blindness >> o VPN0 >> o FPN >> o Willful IP Blindness > If you're interested in attending please let me know which days you have > conflicting obligations in the morning slot. > > Paul > _______________________________________________ > art mailing list > art@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/art > -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492 From nobody Wed Feb 26 19:07:06 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pearg@irtf.org Delivered-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CAE53A0F32; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 19:06:59 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: pearg@irtf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.118.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: pearg@irtf.org Message-ID: <158277281928.2729.9964744353793228989@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 19:06:59 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Pearg] I-D Action: draft-irtf-pearg-website-fingerprinting-00.txt X-BeenThere: pearg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: Privacy Enhancements and Assessment Proposed RG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 03:07:00 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Privacy Enhancements and Assessments Research Group RG of the IRTF. Title : Network-Based Website Fingerprinting Authors : Ian Goldberg Tao Wang Christopher A. Wood Filename : draft-irtf-pearg-website-fingerprinting-00.txt Pages : 21 Date : 2020-02-26 Abstract: The IETF is well on its way to protecting connection metadata with protocols such as DNS-over-TLS and DNS-over-HTTPS, and work-in- progress towards encrypting the TLS SNI. However, more work is needed to protect traffic metadata, especially in the context of web traffic. In this document, we survey Website Fingerprinting attacks, which are a class of attacks that use machine learning techniques to attack web privacy, and highlight metadata leaks used by said attacks. We also survey proposed mitigations for such leakage and discuss their applicability to IETF protocols such as TLS, QUIC, and HTTP. We endeavor to show that Website Fingerprinting attacks are a serious problem that affect all Internet users, and we pose open problems and directions for future research in this area. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-pearg-website-fingerprinting/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-pearg-website-fingerprinting-00 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-irtf-pearg-website-fingerprinting-00 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Wed Feb 26 19:33:28 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pearg@irtf.org Delivered-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 470FF3A0FA3; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 19:33:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: pearg@irtf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.118.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: pearg@irtf.org Message-ID: <158277440020.2611.10922944719808246318@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 19:33:20 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Pearg] I-D Action: draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation-01.txt X-BeenThere: pearg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: Privacy Enhancements and Assessment Proposed RG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 03:33:21 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Privacy Enhancements and Assessments Research Group RG of the IRTF. Title : On the Generation of Transient Numeric Identifiers Authors : Fernando Gont Ivan Arce Filename : draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation-01.txt Pages : 34 Date : 2020-02-26 Abstract: This document performs an analysis of the security and privacy implications of different types of "numeric identifiers" used in IETF protocols, and tries to categorize them based on their interoperability requirements and the associated failure severity when such requirements are not met. Subsequently, it provides advice on possible algorithms that could be employed to satisfy the interoperability requirements of each identifier category, while minimizing the security and privacy implications, thus providing guidance to protocol designers and protocol implementers. Finally, this describes a number of algorithms that have been employed in real implementations to generate transient numeric identifiers and analyzes their security and privacy properties. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation-01 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation-01 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation-01 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Wed Feb 26 19:59:45 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B1F53A1065; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 19:59:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hc-OZ60GkSsG; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 19:59:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8F093A105F; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 19:59:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.10] (unknown [181.45.84.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2C77B82D29; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 04:59:32 +0100 (CET) To: pearg@irtf.org References: <158277440020.2611.10922944719808246318@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Fernando Gont Cc: "pearg-chairs@irtf.org" Message-ID: <2567a3b6-cae5-fef7-b85a-111ef513bd8b@si6networks.com> Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 00:59:10 -0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <158277440020.2611.10922944719808246318@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Pearg] I-D Action: draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation-01.txt X-BeenThere: pearg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Privacy Enhancements and Assessment Proposed RG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 03:59:45 -0000 Folks, FWIW, we have posted a revision of: draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation. We believe this rev should be ready to be progressed. Your feedback and reviews will be highly appreciated! Thanks, Fernando On 27/2/20 00:33, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > This draft is a work item of the Privacy Enhancements and Assessments Research Group RG of the IRTF. > > Title : On the Generation of Transient Numeric Identifiers > Authors : Fernando Gont > Ivan Arce > Filename : draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation-01.txt > Pages : 34 > Date : 2020-02-26 > > Abstract: > This document performs an analysis of the security and privacy > implications of different types of "numeric identifiers" used in IETF > protocols, and tries to categorize them based on their > interoperability requirements and the associated failure severity > when such requirements are not met. Subsequently, it provides advice > on possible algorithms that could be employed to satisfy the > interoperability requirements of each identifier category, while > minimizing the security and privacy implications, thus providing > guidance to protocol designers and protocol implementers. Finally, > this describes a number of algorithms that have been employed in real > implementations to generate transient numeric identifiers and > analyzes their security and privacy properties. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation/ > > There are also htmlized versions available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation-01 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation-01 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation-01 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492 From nobody Fri Feb 28 14:37:31 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pearg@irtf.org Delivered-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC1303A1F51; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 14:35:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "\"IETF Secretariat\"" To: , Cc: pearg@irtf.org, irtf-chair@irtf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.119.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <158292931181.19931.11286034653422627168@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 14:35:11 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Pearg] pearg - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 107 X-BeenThere: pearg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: Privacy Enhancements and Assessment Proposed RG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 22:35:18 -0000 Dear Christopher Wood, The session(s) that you have requested have been scheduled. Below is the scheduled session information followed by the original request. pearg Session 1 (2:00 requested) Monday, 23 March 2020, Morning Session I 1000-1200 Room Name: Plaza B/C size: 300 --------------------------------------------- iCalendar: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/107/sessions/pearg.ics Request Information: --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: Privacy Enhancements and Assessments Research Group Area Name: IRTF Session Requester: Christopher Wood Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 2 Hours Number of Attendees: 120 Conflicts to Avoid: Chair Conflict: hrpc cfrg irtfopen qirg tls git Technology Overlap: dprive mls httpbis quic dnssd saag dnsop People who must be present: Sara Dickinson Christopher A. Wood Shivan Kaul Sahib Resources Requested: Special Requests: We'd like this meeting to take place on Monday or Tuesday, if possible. ---------------------------------------------------------