News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think by jacquesm on Friday May 26, 2017 @06:36PM (#14427696)
By law you should but it will be an uphill battle.

Technically each and every advertising agency that creates a profile on you, gives you a cookie and stores your IP address is in violation of the law. (IP addresses count as PII, Personally Identifiable Information).

I don't see the legal hammer coming down on the advertising industry (of which Facebook and Google are the major players) any time soon if ever.

Re:Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think by poooogles on Friday May 26, 2017 @06:40PM (#14427711)
>IP addresses count as PII, Personally Identifiable Information.

One way hashed (that can't be rainbow tabled) are not however PII afaik however, so it's quite easy to turn an IP address into a "net location ID" or something similar that can't be tracked back to a physical IP for analytics.

Re:Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think by jacquesm on Friday May 26, 2017 @06:41PM (#14427725)
You could simply enumerate all 32 bits and end up with each and every IP reversed so that trick doesn't really hold water.

No need for rainbow tables, the search space is small enough to brute force.

Re:Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think by poooogles on Friday May 26, 2017 @06:48PM (#14427755)
Enumeration through 32 bits of bcrypt doesn't sound that feasible to me.

Given a GPU farm however I'm sure it might be feasible. However at that point surely you just add a salt?

Re:Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think by jacquesm on Friday May 26, 2017 @07:01PM (#14427810)
If you're going to add a unique salt every operation you just destroyed the value of that IP address for tracking purposes. Which was the whole point of the discussion to begin with. By your scheme you might as well store a random number. So, either you store the IP in such a way that you can later re-associate a new call with the previous IP or you might as well not have it.
Re:Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think by moefh on Friday May 26, 2017 @07:05PM (#14427832)
> However at that point surely you just add a salt?

How would that work? You'd have to use the same salt for every IP (which completely negates any benefit of the salt), otherwise how do you know that bcrypt(salt_1, IP_1), which you stored in your database yesterday, refers to the same IP as bcrypt(salt_2, IP_1) that you stored a month ago?

Re:Facebook's tentacles reach further than people think by drdaeman on Friday May 26, 2017 @06:59PM (#14427799)
It's enumeration through 32 bits of 0-4294967295. There are only so much IPv4 addresses.

If you add a salt, then that "net location ID" becomes of very limited use. You won't be able to grep through the logs for request from specific IP, you won't be able to tell how many distinct IPs are accessing your services, etc etc. The only use I can see is keeping it in the session to check if IP address had changed, as a security measure.