Re: [Captive-portals] [Int-area] [homenet] [EXTERNAL] Re: Evaluate impact of MAC address randomization to IP applications

[Rolf Winter]

Hi,

these pointers are very useful. Thanks. I would add one more:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8386

We know for a fact that there are protocols out there, even at the 
application layer, that would thwart efforts to randomize MAC addresses. 
Of course you'd have to be connected to the same L2 network, but the 
IETF meeting network, internet cafes, campus networks... it is not 
uncommon to be connected at L2 to devices that you probably do not 
trust, manage, know about.


I think a BoF about this general topic would be interesting, but I 
believe it should be scoped tightly, so the discussion can be focussed.


Best,

Rolf

Am 29.09.20 um 22:10 schrieb Juan Carlos Zuniga:
Indeed, this is a continuation of the work started at IEEE 802 back in 
2014 after the STRINT Workshop pre-IETF 89 [1] [2].


So far IEEE 802 has developed the (soon to be published) 802E Privacy 
Recommendations [3], the recommended use of MAC address randomization in 
802c [4], and now the work in 802.11 that Peter points out.


We carried out the experiment on the IETF (x2) and IEEE 802 Wi-Fi 
meeting networks and we published some results at the time [5]. Even 
though we found some very minor impact on DHCP, the experiment showed 
that MAC address randomization worked fine. However, as we pointed out 
the Privacy issues should not stop at L3.


If there is a good take away from that work, it is that Privacy cannot 
be solved at a single layer, and effective solutions should be system-wide.


Juan Carlos

[1] 
https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/dcn/14/ec-14-0043-01-00EC-internet-privacy-tutorial.pdf 



[2] http://www.ieee802.org/PrivRecsg/

[3] https://1.ieee802.org/security/802e/

[4] https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8016709

[5] https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7390443/  pre-print: 
https://www.it.uc3m.es/cjbc/papers/pdf/2015_bernardos_cscn_privacy.pdf



On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 3:40 PM Peter Yee > wrote:


On 29/09/2020 12:03, Stephen Farrell wrote:

 > More on-topic, I do think MAC address randomisation has a role to
play for WiFi as it does for BLE, but yes there is a lack of
guidance as to how to implement and deploy such techniques well.
It's a bit tricky though as it's fairly OS dependent so maybe not
really in scope for the IETF?
 > (For the last 3 years I've set a possible student project in this
space, but each time a student has considered it, it turned out "too
hard";-)

As I mentioned previously, IEEE 802.11 is looking into this area,
both from an operational perspective and from a privacy perspective.
New IEEE 802.11 amendments (IEEE 802.11bh and IEEE 802.11bi, if
approved) are being discussed. The (very) high-level documents
describing each can be found at [1] and [2]. I would be happy to
convey input to IEEE 802.11 regarding either document, particularly
in regards to layers 3 and above. Without wishing to open up a can
of worms about meeting fees, I will note that IEEE 802.11 is
currently not charging for its online meetings, so if anyone wishes
to take part in the random MAC address discussions directly, the
next meeting will be held in early November. The RCM Study Group met
yesterday morning (Americas) and will meet again in two weeks. See [3].

                 -Peter

[1]

https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-0742-04-0rcm-proposed-par-draft.docx
[2]

https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-0854-06-0rcm-par-proposal-for-privacy.pdf
[3]
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-0995-10-0rcm-rcm-sg-agenda.pptx



___
Int-area mailing list
int-a...@ietf.org 
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area


___
Int-area mailing list
int-a...@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area





smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Captive-portals mailing list
Captive-portals@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals

Re: [Captive-portals] [Int-area] [homenet] [EXTERNAL] Re: Evaluate impact of MAC address randomization to IP applications

[Weil, Jason]

Thank you Juan and Peter for the links to the prior work in the IEEE on this 
topic. I have been following RCM and was actually just reading one of the 
publicly available draft versions of the 802E Privacy Recommendations. This 
work will be very useful for reference once it is published.

My interest in considering this work within the IETF goes directly to the point 
stated here and in the IEEE draft work that privacy doesn’t exist at one layer 
of then network and in fact covers all of them. The IEEE is making good 
progress on changes to 802 that improve the operation of the network at the 
data link layer. I see the WiFi Alliance is also looking at options for in its 
various specifications and which use cases those specs can be applied to in the 
realm of MAC randomization impacts.

The goal of this BoF from my viewpoint is to gauge IETF community interest on 
identifying and working  on updates, new work or BCP/s that would capture the 
privacy concerns and needs of end users as well as the impact to network 
operators and local network administrators (campus networks, home networks, 
public WiFis nets, etc). A number of areas/WG work have already been brought up 
in the discussion on this list.

I think some of points that came up in the IEEE and WiFi discussions are 
equally worth discussing in this org including the periodicity of endpoint 
address (or other ‘thing’ that represents a device) change.  The impact on 
varying trust models that would allow an end user to choose between various 
levels of trust and the impact on how much the network is able to remember them 
is also an interesting discussion topic.

Jason Weil

From: Int-area  on behalf of Juan Carlos Zuniga 

Date: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 at 4:11 PM
To: Peter Yee 
Cc: "int-a...@ietf.org" , "home...@ietf.org" 
, "captive-portals@ietf.org" , 
Stephen Farrell 
Subject: Re: [Int-area] [Captive-portals] [homenet] [EXTERNAL] Re: Evaluate 
impact of MAC address randomization to IP applications

CAUTION: The e-mail below is from an external source. Please exercise caution 
before opening attachments, clicking links, or following guidance.

Indeed, this is a continuation of the work started at IEEE 802 back in 2014 
after the STRINT Workshop pre-IETF 89 [1] [2].



So far IEEE 802 has developed the (soon to be published) 802E Privacy 
Recommendations [3], the recommended use of MAC address randomization in 802c 
[4], and now the work in 802.11 that Peter points out.



We carried out the experiment on the IETF (x2) and IEEE 802 Wi-Fi meeting 
networks and we published some results at the time [5]. Even though we found 
some very minor impact on DHCP, the experiment showed that MAC address 
randomization worked fine. However, as we pointed out the Privacy issues should 
not stop at L3.



If there is a good take away from that work, it is that Privacy cannot be 
solved at a single layer, and effective solutions should be system-wide.



Juan Carlos





[1] 
https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/dcn/14/ec-14-0043-01-00EC-internet-privacy-tutorial.pdf

[2] http://www.ieee802.org/PrivRecsg/

[3] https://1.ieee802.org/security/802e/

[4] https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8016709

[5] https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7390443/  pre-print: 
https://www.it.uc3m.es/cjbc/papers/pdf/2015_bernardos_cscn_privacy.pdf

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 3:40 PM Peter Yee 
mailto:pe...@akayla.com>> wrote:
On 29/09/2020 12:03, Stephen Farrell wrote:

> More on-topic, I do think MAC address randomisation has a role to play for 
> WiFi as it does for BLE, but yes there is a lack of guidance as to how to 
> implement and deploy such techniques well. It's a bit tricky though as it's 
> fairly OS dependent so maybe not really in scope for the IETF?
> (For the last 3 years I've set a possible student project in this space, but 
> each time a student has considered it, it turned out "too hard";-)

As I mentioned previously, IEEE 802.11 is looking into this area, both from an 
operational perspective and from a privacy perspective. New IEEE 802.11 
amendments (IEEE 802.11bh and IEEE 802.11bi, if approved) are being discussed. 
The (very) high-level documents describing each can be found at [1] and [2]. I 
would be happy to convey input to IEEE 802.11 regarding either document, 
particularly in regards to layers 3 and above. Without wishing to open up a can 
of worms about meeting fees, I will note that IEEE 802.11 is currently not 
charging for its online meetings, so if anyone wishes to take part in the 
random MAC address discussions directly, the next meeting will be held in early 
November. The RCM Study Group met yesterday morning (Americas) and will meet 
again in two weeks. See [3].

-Peter

[1] 
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-0742-04-0rcm-proposed-par-draft.docx
[2] 
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-0854-06-0rcm-par-proposal-for-privacy.pdf
[3]

Re: [Captive-portals] [Int-area] [homenet] [EXTERNAL] Re: Evaluate impact of MAC address randomization to IP applications

[Juan Carlos Zuniga]

Indeed, this is a continuation of the work started at IEEE 802 back in 2014
after the STRINT Workshop pre-IETF 89 [1] [2].



So far IEEE 802 has developed the (soon to be published) 802E Privacy
Recommendations [3], the recommended use of MAC address randomization in
802c [4], and now the work in 802.11 that Peter points out.



We carried out the experiment on the IETF (x2) and IEEE 802 Wi-Fi meeting
networks and we published some results at the time [5]. Even though we
found some very minor impact on DHCP, the experiment showed that MAC
address randomization worked fine. However, as we pointed out the Privacy
issues should not stop at L3.



If there is a good take away from that work, it is that Privacy cannot be
solved at a single layer, and effective solutions should be system-wide.



Juan Carlos





[1]
https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/dcn/14/ec-14-0043-01-00EC-internet-privacy-tutorial.pdf


[2] http://www.ieee802.org/PrivRecsg/

[3] https://1.ieee802.org/security/802e/

[4] https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8016709

[5] https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7390443/  pre-print:
https://www.it.uc3m.es/cjbc/papers/pdf/2015_bernardos_cscn_privacy.pdf

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 3:40 PM Peter Yee  wrote:

> On 29/09/2020 12:03, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>
> > More on-topic, I do think MAC address randomisation has a role to play
> for WiFi as it does for BLE, but yes there is a lack of guidance as to how
> to implement and deploy such techniques well. It's a bit tricky though as
> it's fairly OS dependent so maybe not really in scope for the IETF?
> > (For the last 3 years I've set a possible student project in this space,
> but each time a student has considered it, it turned out "too hard";-)
>
> As I mentioned previously, IEEE 802.11 is looking into this area, both
> from an operational perspective and from a privacy perspective. New IEEE
> 802.11 amendments (IEEE 802.11bh and IEEE 802.11bi, if approved) are being
> discussed. The (very) high-level documents describing each can be found at
> [1] and [2]. I would be happy to convey input to IEEE 802.11 regarding
> either document, particularly in regards to layers 3 and above. Without
> wishing to open up a can of worms about meeting fees, I will note that IEEE
> 802.11 is currently not charging for its online meetings, so if anyone
> wishes to take part in the random MAC address discussions directly, the
> next meeting will be held in early November. The RCM Study Group met
> yesterday morning (Americas) and will meet again in two weeks. See [3].
>
> -Peter
>
> [1]
> https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-0742-04-0rcm-proposed-par-draft.docx
> [2]
> https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-0854-06-0rcm-par-proposal-for-privacy.pdf
> [3]
> https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-0995-10-0rcm-rcm-sg-agenda.pptx
>
>
>
> ___
> Int-area mailing list
> int-a...@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>
___
Captive-portals mailing list
Captive-portals@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/captive-portals