Re: Adding GPS location to IPv6 header

[Eugen Leitl <eugen () leitl org>]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 02:19:48PM -0800, John Adams wrote:
> Your proposal doesn't even give people a way to encrypt their location
> data;  By moving geodata to a portion of the protocol which is not covered

It's not possible to hide location. Anonymity and efficient transport
don't mix. This will become even more so at TBit/s transport rates.

That's no problem, as you can use e.g. mix networks to provide strong
anonymity for those who need at a higher layer.  

The sooner everbody realizes this, the sooner we can move on.

> by commonly used encryption methods (i.e. HTTPS, which is up a few layers
> in the stack) people can't be protected should this data be monitored by a
> malicious intermediary. Think: Syria, China, Iran, or any other government
> which will kill you for your words online.
>
> Application protocols sending GPS data under say, HTTPS protect the end
> user from revealing their location to anyone on their path, forcing an
> intermediary to look up the IP in a common geo database which will be
> mostly inaccurate in pinpointing users, and hopefully will save lives.
>
> Companies like Twitter, Facebook, and some parts of google are going HTTPS
> by default for this very reason.
>
> This proposal is dead, you don't have the sense to lie down.