On 2 Feb 2012, at 21:39, <[email protected]> wrote:

> I think that's a different threat from the one addressed below in threat 6.
> 
> If in a regulatory domain the DB requires the master to provide its identity, 
> then there's nothing to be done to prevent tracking of the masters by the DB. 
> But if some other regulatory domain will not require the master to send its 
> identity when querying the DB, the master may decide not to send its 
> identity, to prevent the DB to track it.

That's precisely what I think needs to be remembered and taken into account in 
developing the protocol

> 
> We could add this as another threat.

Sure, or modify the existing one, I've no strong opinion,

S


> 
> - Gabor
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of ext 
> Stephen Farrell
> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 12:49 PM
> To: Patil Basavaraj (Nokia-CIC/Dallas)
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [paws] Threat model (Rev 2)
> 
> 
> Pretty good overall. I'll keep on my usual track since I seem stuck on it 
> here;-)
> 
> On 02/02/2012 08:37 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> 
>> Threat 6: Third party tracking of white space device location
>> 
>> 
>>        A master device needs to provide its location to the white
>>        space database in order to obtain the channel availability
>>        information at that location. Such location information can be
>>        gleaned by an eavesdropper. A master device may prefer to keep
>>        the location information secret. Hence the protocol should
>>        provide a means to protect the location information and prevent
>>        tracking of locations associated with a white space database.
> 
> What's wrong with not wanting the DB to track me (as a master device)? Could 
> be that current known regulators don't like anonymous masters, but that may 
> change. (So I think 3rd party here is wrong.)
> 
> Why is it only location tracking that's of concern? Why is exposing identity 
> not an equal deal? Same logic as above.
> 
> 
> S.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> paws mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
_______________________________________________
paws mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws

Reply via email to