Subject: RE: (ngtrans) To Jim Fleming

From: Damien Mascré <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 10:25:45 +0100

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]De la part de Tom Lohdan
> Envoyé : dimanche 18 novembre 2001 09:20
> À : [email-masked]
> Cc : Jim Fleming
> Objet : Re: (ngtrans) To Jim Fleming
>
>
> >At 10:35 PM 17/11/2001 -0600, Jim Fleming wrote:
> >
> >As for what people can do with your MAC address, there have been many
> >examples cited. One of the best, in my opinion, documented by one of the
> >Harvard law professors was his realization that he could buy a
> cheap lap-top
> >from someone, get on the NGI, and be viewed by web-site operators as the
> >previous owner, with all their profiles and habits tracked.
>
> No difference to cookies or spy-ware, which exist in todays IPv4 format,
> and exist in IPv"whatever" in the future.

and the intel processor unique id

> >  Other people are
> >concerned that the MAC address can essentially describe the make
> and model
> >of the equipment, so web-site operators could start treating
> people different
> >depending on how much money they spent on their system, or when they
> >bought it.
>
> Irrelevant. A NIC can work under multiple OS's, and could have it
> installed
> in a 386. The Website owner knows nothing but the type of NIC you have.

anyway, people have sometimes had to configure their TCP/IP under windows,
why would they be too silly to not be able to configure their IPv6 by hand
??

> >People seem to want to select all of the
> >features they like from different transition plans and lump them
> together
> >and claim
> >that is the IPv6 they are talking about. In doing that, it becomes a big
> >game, sort of
> >like the childrens game with the hammer and the little moles that pop up.
>
> If it was up to the children we would still be using IPX,
> Irrelevant yet again.

do you know "IPX Privacy Problem" ?? :)

> Thanks,
> Tom...