FBI wants to ban new Internet protocol

Published time: June 19, 2012 16:12
Edited time: June 19, 2012 20:12
FBI wants to ban new Internet protocol

With the recent unveiling of the newest Internet protocol system, trillions upon trillions of devices are being paved access to the Internet for the unforeseeable future. And right on cue, the FBI is already up in arms over IPv6.

With computing devices around the globe already switching from the current Internet protocol system, IPv4, the US Federal Bureau of Investigation is predictably picking a fight with the biggest names in cyberspace to ensure that the FBI and other agencies across North America will be able to inch themselves into the personal Web surfing habits of citizens across the world. Now requests from the FBI to ready a system to easily snoop through Internet traffic has proponents of IPv6 and industry reps alike scrambling to make sense of the feds’ demands.

Under the original and quickly antiquating Internet protocol system, IPv4, only 4.3 billion computers, modems, smart phones and other wired devices can send and receive information through cyberspace. When the latest rollover to IPv6 is complete, however, 340 undecillion addresses (that’s a lot) will be able to be assigned. On the plus side, trillions of more devices will able to be delivered information over the Internet. The FBI, however, wants to make sure that they can still catch cyber criminals and suggest that they might have to insist that the private sector aids them in their future endeavors.

According to report filed this week by Cnet’s Declan McCullagh, the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration and Royal Canadian Mounted Police officials have jointly asked Internet representatives that traceability features be enabled with IPv6 that will allow federal agents to identify suspected cybercriminals with the same kind of ease evident with IPv4. Given that the government is already having trouble trying to find alleged cyberterrorists over the Internet as is, though, they might seriously have their work cut out for them. That’s where McCullagh reports, “The FBI has even suggested that a new law may be necessary if the private sector doesn't do enough voluntarily.”

Speaking on condition of anonymity, an official with the FBI clues Cnet in on just why the agency is against the next-generation Internet protocol:

“An issue may also arise around the amount of registration information that is maintained by providers and the amount of historical logging that exists. Today there are complete registries of what IPv4 addresses are ‘owned’ by an operator. Depending on how the IPv6 system is rolled out, that registry may or may not be sufficient for law enforcement to identify what device is accessing the Internet.”

If hunting for cybercriminals is comparable to searching for a needle in a haystack under IPv4, with IPv6 it will be on par with scouring the stratosphere for a single molecule of oxygen.

John Curran of the American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) tells Cnet, "We're looking at a problem that's about to occur," and adds that, “as service providers start to roll out V6,” that’s exactly what they’ll receive. The answer, according to the FBI, might be a whole new set of legislation that will let them scour cyberspace for the answers for federal inquiries into alleged Internet crimes.

"We're hoping through all of this you can come up with some self-regulatory method in which you can do it," FBI supervisory special agent Bobby Flaim said at an ARIN meeting earlier this year, reports Cnet . "Because otherwise, there will be other things that people are going to consider."

Comments (39)

ArizonaPatriotAlso (unregistered) 28.06.2012 20:33

Anonymous (unregistered) wrote in #16
How to get rid of government spying on your computer:  remove system 32/command from your computer entirely
Issue  Resolved :)I suppose, technically, you are correct, but you are still going to burn in Hell.

0

Undo

xtropx (unregistered) 23.06.2012 17:04

As a person with experience with networking, most of this article and the comments are enough to get a laugh out of me. First of all those that are worried about being traced back to their device by the IPv6 address including the MAC address burned into every device need to look into EUI-64 and how it is a) optional and b) not recommended because it is a security risk. Second, IPSEC encryption, which is the encryption built into the IPv6 protocol is not "weak." I know of no security vulnerabilities with the VPN implementation of IPSEC and it is considered the most secure. We are talking about multiple authentication and encryption methods here. I highly doubt that you or I have the capabilities to break IPSEC encryption and I would even go so far as to say that the NSA has a difficult time with a lot of these things, but who knows? The FBI probably has legitimate concern not having the cryptography resources the NSA does, which is probably why they are freaking out. Like it or not, the global internet going IPv6 is a huge change - yes, IPv6 CAPABILITY has been out for a LONG time, and I agree that much of this should have been anticipated, but the entire ramifications of this massive architecture change have yet to be uncovered. Now to hell with the FBI for insisting "tracability" measures. The bugs in IPv6 - making this all work smoothly and seamlessly - has been no easy task. They have the audacity to assume they can put the whole thing on hold because they are worried about how they are going to track people. This is definately indicative of the orwellian nature of the American government and its agencies, and I dissaprove greatly. Meathods should be put in place to maintain a healthy "middle ground" that has always existed as far as gatherthering information to assist in the law enforcement process. (i.e. getting a warrant to tap phone lines v.s. intercepting every phone call.) I don't know exactly how intrusive the FBI wants to go with this. RT seems to be trying to demonize the FBI here. Personally I am going to gather more information before I pretend to know exactly what is going on.

0

Undo

Johnny (unregistered) 22.06.2012 21:02

Tracking IPv6 is no different than tracking IPv4.  The only difference is that you track down by the network portion of the address and not the entire 128-bit full address.  The standard end-user allocation is a /64 (64 bits of address, 64 bits of host), and the entity providing either a static or dynamic block of addresses can track that exactally the same as they do for a single IPv4 address currently.  If anything, IPv6 makes it _easier_ to identify exactally _which_ computer in an allocation is the suspect one -- ie: "the kid's PC" vs. "Dad's laptop", since every device gets globally-unique addresses within the assigned netblock, as opposed to the IPv4 world where you may have anywhere from one to 250 PCs behind a single public address via NAT.   NAT is no more in the IPv6 world, and end-to-end network transparency is the rule.  Firewalls can still filter traffic, but address translation basically goes bye-bye.  And the FBI and other law enforcement with any sort of technical knowledge knows all this already. 

+6

Undo

View all comments (39)
Add comment

By posting your comment, you agree to abide by our Posting rules

Log in to comment in full, or comment anonymously under character-limit restriction.

100 Text

– required fields

Register or

Name

Password

Show password

Register

or Register

Request a new password

Send

or Register

To complete a registration check
your Email:

or Register

A password has been sent to your email address

Edit profile

Name

New password

Retype new password

Current password

Save

Cancel

Follow us