Reply to post: Re: CGNAT is a problem for home servers on IPv4, issues with security on IPv6

IPv6 is built to be better, but that's not the route to success

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: CGNAT is a problem for home servers on IPv4, issues with security on IPv6

To run some minor server from your home you still need a static IPv4 which still allows tracking. Sure, you can use some DDNS server - you're still giving the DDNS provider the history of your IP changes (are you sure that is not sold to someone?), and you may not be able to reach your network if the DDNS system has issues.

With IPv6, your clients have 2^64 IPs to choose from for each /64 prefix. A good DHCPv6/SLAAC implementation will exploit it to give clients "random" addresses each time, making a single client hard to track. The prefix can still be tracked, but that's not much different from a static public IPv4 address.

Anyway, your internet activities contains a lot of data that can be used for "fingerprint" the client unless you just send some random packets.

"my users can't be easily traced by foreign powers"

"Foreign powers"? Do them include the worst commercial data hoarder? Because it's funny when people fear their are tracked by CIA, MI5, Mossad, FSB and forget they are routinely tracked by Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon, Apple... which controlling OS and applications doesn't really need the source IP to know which client is which "product". And they can still need to give access to some "foreign powers".

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon