Pretty good overall. I'll keep on my usual track since I seem
stuck on it here;-)
On 02/02/2012 08:37 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Threat 6: Third party tracking of white space device location
A master device needs to provide its location to the white
space database in order to obtain the channel availability
information at that location. Such location information can be
gleaned by an eavesdropper. A master device may prefer to keep
the location information secret. Hence the protocol should
provide a means to protect the location information and prevent
tracking of locations associated with a white space database.
What's wrong with not wanting the DB to track me (as a master
device)? Could be that current known regulators don't like
anonymous masters, but that may change. (So I think 3rd party
here is wrong.)
Why is it only location tracking that's of concern? Why is
exposing identity not an equal deal? Same logic as above.
S.
_______________________________________________
paws mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
