Question of privacy with reassigned resources

ML ml at kenweb.org
Thu Aug 5 07:54:34 CDT 2010


On 8/5/2010 8:04 AM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:25 AM, Steven Bellovin <smb at cs.columbia.edu> wrote:
>> Clearly, the apartment complex owners could do that if
>> they so choose.  I'm not sure who you suggest should
>> "buy a box from mail boxes etc. yourself and set up
>> mail forwarding each time you set up a new apartment
>> complex" -- the ISP?  How does that help?  This is, as
>> you say, a way to contact the apartment complex owners, right?
> 
> Steven,
> 
> Getting a post office box is a standard and widely accepted way to
> receive mail when for any reason you don't want the mail addressed to
> your physical location. Companies like Mail Boxes Etc. take the
> service one step further - they'll repackage the received mail and
> send it to your physical address so you don't have to stop by and
> check the box. Essentially, they provide a second postal address for
> the recipient unbound from the recipient's physical address.
> 
> That's what you wanted, right? To avoid revealing the resource
> consumer's physical address?
> 
> 
>> The issues have to do with knowledge and expenditure.
>> For the most part, consumers and apartment complex
>> owners have no knowledge of IP geolocation or SWIP.
>> It is consumer privacy at risk here, but consumers have
>> no opportunity to opt out of this scheme even if they
>> knew about it.  "Discuss it with the apartment complex"
>> is generally null advice; apart from the fact that consumers
>> have exactly zero leverage in many markets, the apartment
>> managers (a) don't know about it, either, and (b) can't be
>> bothered to get a PO box and collect the (rare) mail from it.
> 
> If you feel that way, I suggest you take the issue up on the ARIN
> public policy mailing list. Solicit public consensus for a change in
> handling for SWIPs for "apartment complexes as ISP resellers." Absent
> such a change, redacting identity and contact info for the apartment
> management company remains simple fraud.
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin


There's usually a 50/50 split between the HOA (Home Owners Association)
and the individual that are our customers.  In the case of a HOA it's
not that the HOA is reselling it's that we are contracted to service
every member of the HOA and the HOA gives us one check for everyone.







More information about the NANOG mailing list