On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Andrew Ayer <[email protected]> wrote:
> I. Under the "Certificates for hosts whose address was not obtained via
> DNS lookup" section, a few scenarios come to mind:
>
> 1. The host was accessed by IP address.

To expand on this: Your assumption/model here is that the DNS resolver
learns this information, but they are not otherwise on-path, correct?
That is, imagine a user using a resolver of 8.8.8.8 - presumably,
Google's not malicious, but this would disclose to them IP-based
connections?

> 2. The hostname was resolved by a SOCKS proxy server.

This is only relevant to clients that support SOCKSv5-based
resolutions, right? And is this just a specialized form of "using a
different resolver"? Or do you think it's distinct?

> I think more data is needed before concluding that this
> approach provides the desired privacy.  Could Chrome run an
> experiment which resolves a DNS record for a hostname of the form
> <client-public-IP-address>.<test-domain>, and measure how many
> different <client-public-IP-address>es per recursive server are
> observed over various time periods by the authoritative servers
> for <test-domain>?

In expanding on your hypothetical test, what's the outcome or desired
property that you're trying to measure? I imagine a total number of
distinct IPs is itself not meaningful to such an analysis.

_______________________________________________
Trans mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans

Reply via email to