[OpenWireless Tech] A small question about tracking

[Natanael]

Android now supports VPN clients without root. And you can take a look at
my suggestions about WiFi Direct initiated connections. The idea would be
that you have a client that does all this for you, automatically. Maybe
such a client would require root for some parts (VPN on/off, WiFi Direct
on/off, router config setup?), but it would be worth it.

With my scheme, the user wouldn't even have to click a thing unless no
router accepts his default settings (such as maybe lack of VPN).
Den 5 nov 2012 03:14 skrev "Christian Huitema" <huitema at huitema.net>:

> That might work for laptops, but that feels rather hard to implement on a
> smartphone. And it seems a bit far from the model of “open wireless.” Can’t
> we think of a solution that does not require the visitor to do anything
> special? A true “open wireless” should mean just that, click connect and be
> there.****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Natanael [mailto:natanael.l at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, November 04, 2012 6:09 PM
> *To:* Christian Huitema
> *Cc:* tech at srv1.openwireless.org
> *Subject:* RE: [OpenWireless Tech] A small question about tracking****
>
> ** **
>
> I did suggest a possible solution before - allow access to only one IP,
> specified vy the client. Maybe some kind of VPN detection too.****
>
> In other words, we ask the client to specify what VPN it will use and
> limits it to that one.****
>
> If he has none, we can provide tunneling to a 3rd party service that lets
> the user set up a VPN (listing paid ones along free low bandwidth ones and
> free-for-a-day VPN:s, etc). Then the connection resets and this time the
> user has a VPN to specify.****
>
> Den 5 nov 2012 03:02 skrev "Christian Huitema" <huitema at huitema.net>:****
>
> Germany definitely puts the onus on the router owner, and it is not hard
> to imagine other European countries following Germany’s example in the
> future. It is also not hard to imagine “the police”  conducting a smear
> campaign against open wireless with that argument. At a minimum, that’s a
> point that should be discussed in the FAQ.****
>
>  ****
>
> I did actually study the scenario in details when I was in charge of Wi-Fi
> development for Microsoft Windows. We looked at the various objections to
> connection sharing, which we wanted to make easy. Most could be solved
> convincingly, security of the local provider network, bandwidth
> utilization, security of the visitor using the open access. But the
> accountability issue was really what prevented the vision of “free, open
> network.” The best we could do was “almost free,” i.e. requiring some kind
> of explicit registration.****
>
>  ****
>
> The VPN is an interesting mitigation, as it shifts the burden away from
> the local provider. But how would we implement that exactly? With a filter
> on packet type? With a “white list” of accepted VPN provider addresses?***
> *
>
>  ****
>
> *From:* Natanael [mailto:natanael.l at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, November 04, 2012 5:48 PM
> *To:* Christian Huitema
> *Cc:* tech at srv1.openwireless.org
> *Subject:* Re: [OpenWireless Tech] A small question about tracking****
>
>  ****
>
> This has been dealt with before.****
>
> Only very few countries put the responsibility on the router owner. And
> you can route everything through Tor anyway. We might also let router
> owners require VPN:s.****
>
> Den 5 nov 2012 02:40 skrev "Christian Huitema" <huitema at huitema.net>:****
>
> I love the idea of open wireless access, but I have a what if question.
> What happens if someone uses my open access point to connect to the
> Internet and commit some sort of crime? Isn’t the police going to trace
> that back to my home, and accuse me of doing it? ****
>
>  ****
>
> -- Christian Huitema****
>
>  ****
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tech mailing list
> Tech at srv1.openwireless.org
> https://srv1.openwireless.org/mailman/listinfo/tech****
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.eff.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20121105/160c8fe3/attachment.html>