this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2024
4 points (59.1% liked)

Privacy

32165 readers
193 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
4
Privacy concerns with DHCP (DHCP fingerprinting) (lemmy.zip)
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
40 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

So many people here will go though great lengths to protect themselves from fingerprinting and snooping. However, one thing tends to get overlooked is DHCP and other layer 3 holes. When your device requests an IP it sends over a significant amount of data. DHCP fingerprinting is very similar to browser fingerprinting but unlike the browser there does not seem to be a lot of resources to defend against it. You would need to make changes to the underlying OS components to spoof it.

What are everyone's thoughts on this? Did we miss the obvious?

https://www.arubanetworks.com/vrd/AOSDHCPFPAppNote/wwhelp/wwhimpl/common/html/wwhelp.htm#href=Chap2.html&single=true

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I feel like I'm missing something here...

Who's going to be fingerprinting DHCP messages on your home network?

Outside of that, fingerprinting or tracking any DHCP info would be the least of my concerns. You have 0 control over any data the moment your devices connect to a public network. What use is DHCP info when you can person-in-the middle all the traffic anyway?

And anyway, what info are you concerned about? Having had a VERY quick browse of RFC2131 the worst thing would be "leaking" the device MAC address which can be discovered via several other means anyway

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (3 children)

I guess the hostname could be used to defeat MAC randomization if you use public WiFi like hotels, airports and coffee shops. You could probably identify repeat users if you cared enough.

But then your worry should be the security cameras not the WiFi, because that's what's gonna tie you personally to your device connecting.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Your router always knows your Mac address, no matter how you got your ip assigned. And yes, you can use it to identify the client - that is why it is there. This whole post is nonsense written by someone who doesn't really understand what dhcp is or how it works. Long story short, don't look for privacy on local Ethernet segment :D

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Most modern operating systems randomize the MAC. DHCP does have extra fields such as the device's hostname that can be used to counter that.

But as I said, that's unlikely to be the weakest link. If you don't trust the network you're also likely in a public environment where people can just see you anyway.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Most modern operating systems randomize the MAC.

[citation needed]
having the option to randomize the MAC is not the same as actually doing that. There are also a few downsides to random MACs, like captive portals not remembering you on public WiFis.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

The default on android is to give every wifi network its own random but static mac.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Captive portals not remembering you between sessions is a huge bonus for captive portals with time limits.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Most modern operating systems randomize the MAC.

that doesn't seem to be uniform behaviour. but i think we agree on the merit. if you are this paranoid, you just don't use networks where you don't have control over the local segment.

[admin@MikroTik] > ip arp print 
Flags: X - disabled, I - invalid, H - DHCP, D - dynamic, P - published, C - complete 
 #    ADDRESS         MAC-ADDRESS       INTERFACE                                                    
 0 DC 192.168.88.160  A2:35:xx:xx:xx:xx bridge                                                       
 1 DC 192.168.88.159  F4:60:xx:xx:xx:xx bridge                                                       
 2 DC 192.168.0.1     44:32:xx:xx:xx:xx ether1                                                       
 3 DC 192.168.88.168  18:3D:xx:xx:xx:xx bridge                                                       
 4 DC 192.168.88.156  70:BB:xx:xx:xx:xx bridge

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Wear a mask and sunglasses so you just blend in.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

See the linked page

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

You need to say more than that about what your concern is, especially on devices configured for Mac randomization and other privacy features.

Aruba is looking at the dhcp traffic and inferring information about the device. The device is not sending all of this data.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You can't easily man in the middle https with encrypted DNS

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Why would encrypted DNS help here? HTTP(S) uses IPs

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

IPs are arbitrary