0

I have been reading up about IPv6 and given that the number of available addresses in in the trillions upon trillions for each household on the internet, could we get to the stage where each computer in a household would have an IP that is unique to that computer, rather than the router that is next to the internet?

With that in mind, could a webserver (that is IPv6 Compatible) be used to track a specific computer's traffic through a website without using any session cookies, such as repeat viewing or if the website is visited in something like incognito mode?

topherg
  • 4,203
  • 4
  • 37
  • 72
  • 1
    Yes, but even if it's discouraged, the one IPv6 address *could* have an enormous number of other addresses (IPv4 and IPv6) behind it. – cnicutar Oct 10 '11 at 16:32
  • but it does allow for the possibility? but that's unlikely i suppose – topherg Oct 10 '11 at 16:35
  • I wouldn't count on it. 20 people logged onto a big Sun box is here to stay as a usage pattern. – Flexo Oct 11 '11 at 15:30
  • and between reboots having the same address is very unlikely: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4941 is enabled by default on windows for example. – Flexo Oct 11 '11 at 15:31

1 Answers1

0

each computer in a household would have an IP that is unique to that computer, rather than the router that is next to the internet?

If you mean no more Network Address Translation, yes, that is possible. Whether or not that actually happens for the internet connection in your house is a different question.

With that in mind, could a webserver (that is IPv6 Compatible) be used to track a specific computer's traffic through a website without using any session cookies

That could happen (that could happen to some extent with IPv4 now), but as mobile devices become more and more prevalent, tracking via this method would become less useful (as devices would switch IP addresses frequently).

Jumbogram
  • 2,249
  • 1
  • 20
  • 24
  • cool, tah bud. NAT was the bit I was wondering about, but couldnt recall the name – topherg Oct 10 '11 at 23:00
  • I *really* hope it does happen. Stateful firewall that lets nothing inbound, but everything outbound is no harder to configure or implement than NAT. – Flexo Oct 11 '11 at 15:33