Hacker News Reader

Comment by graemep | Hacker News Reader

Most home users do not have a static public IPv4 address - they have a single address that changes over time.

But most ISPs aren’t giving out static IPv6 prefixes either. Instead they are collecting logs of what addresses they’ve handed out to which customer and holding on to them for years and years in case a court requests them. Tracking visitors doesn’t need to use ip addresses simply because it’s trivial to do so with cookies or browser fingerprinting. There’s exactly zero privacy either way.

> Instead they are collecting logs of what addresses they’ve handed out to which customer and holding on to them for years and years in case a court requests them.

They are only supposed to hang on to them for a limited time according to the law where I live (six months AFAIK). Courts are also unwilling to accept IPv4 addresses as proof of identity.

> Tracking visitors doesn’t need to use ip addresses simply because it’s trivial to do so with cookies or browser fingerprinting

Cookies can be deleted. Browser fingerprinting can be made unreliable.

Its not zero privacy either way. Privacy is not a binary. Giving out more information reduces your privacy.

> Most home users do not have a static public IPv4 address - they have a single address that changes over time.

I'd be curious to know the statistics on this: I would hazard to guess that for most ISPs, if your router/modem does not reboot, your IPv4 address (and IPv6 prefix) will not change.

[flagged]

Reply on news.ycombinator.com