Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Risk

1/29/2008
12:00 AM
Commentary
Commentary
Commentary
50%
50%

Should Your IP Address Be Private?

The European Union has just ruled that Spain's Telefonica SA doesn't have to hand over the identities of file sharers on its networks . At least, not simply because the allegedly aggrieved party asks for such information.  

The European Union has just ruled that Spain's Telefonica SA doesn't have to hand over the identities of file sharers on its networks . At least, not simply because the allegedly aggrieved party asks for such information.

 

The case involves Promusicae, a group representing film and music producers, who had asked for the names and addresses of KaZaA users on Spanish telecom Telefonica SA's network who it believed were sharing copyrighted works. Telefonica SA essentially responded by saying "Nuh-uh. We only have to do that if it's a criminal prosecution or a matter of national security ." Promusicae said "We'll see you in court."

The Spanish courts passed it up the chain to the EU's highest court, which has sided with Telefonica SA.

Central to this whole mess is the question of how private one's IP address should be. Well, let's clarify: not how private one's IP address should be, but how private the link between one's IP address and one's personally identifying details should be. Most of us go around with our IP addresses hanging out for all to see. Few people bother to use an anonymizing proxy for simple web browsing or file sharing.

So how sacred should we make this identifying link? My instinct is that it should be very private, right up to the point where you commit a crime. Yet even this maxim represents a simplification of the issue. Who gets to determine when you've committed a crime? Surely not third parties who have a profit motive, or some even less noble motive to stop you from doing what you're doing. I'm not being anti-capitalist here—I believe in the right to profit from intellectual property. But the question of whether or not someone has committed a crime, and therefore forfeited the right to privacy, can not, and must not, be left in the hands of those responsible to no one but their own shareholders.

Even in the hands of governmental powers, this power is abused. But at least there is some semblance of responsibility to the general public when public officials must make these determinations. You can argue, of course, that this responsibility is not taken seriously, but that's not a reason to hand over the power to private parties.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Cybersecurity Industry: It's Time to Stop the Victim Blame Game
Jessica Smith, Senior Vice President, The Crypsis Group,  2/25/2020
Google Adds More Security Features Via Chronicle Division
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  2/25/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
6 Emerging Cyber Threats That Enterprises Face in 2020
This Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at six emerging cyber threats that enterprises could face in 2020. Download your copy today!
Flash Poll
How Enterprises Are Developing and Maintaining Secure Applications
How Enterprises Are Developing and Maintaining Secure Applications
The concept of application security is well known, but application security testing and remediation processes remain unbalanced. Most organizations are confident in their approach to AppSec, although others seem to have no approach at all. Read this report to find out more.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-9431
PUBLISHED: 2020-02-27
In Wireshark 3.2.0 to 3.2.1, 3.0.0 to 3.0.8, and 2.6.0 to 2.6.14, the LTE RRC dissector could leak memory. This was addressed in epan/dissectors/packet-lte-rrc.c by adjusting certain append operations.
CVE-2020-9432
PUBLISHED: 2020-02-27
openssl_x509_check_host in lua-openssl 0.7.7-1 mishandles X.509 certificate validation because it uses lua_pushboolean for certain non-boolean return values.
CVE-2020-9433
PUBLISHED: 2020-02-27
openssl_x509_check_email in lua-openssl 0.7.7-1 mishandles X.509 certificate validation because it uses lua_pushboolean for certain non-boolean return values.
CVE-2020-9434
PUBLISHED: 2020-02-27
openssl_x509_check_ip_asc in lua-openssl 0.7.7-1 mishandles X.509 certificate validation because it uses lua_pushboolean for certain non-boolean return values.
CVE-2020-6383
PUBLISHED: 2020-02-27
Type confusion in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 80.0.3987.116 allowed a remote attacker to potentially exploit heap corruption via a crafted HTML page.