[ppml] Nasty business with 2003-3

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Thu Feb 12 21:21:55 EST 2004

You also fail to address that the 6 character Canadian Postal codes are
equivalent to ZIP+4 and are considered required for Canada.


--On Thursday, February 12, 2004 8:52 -0800 "william<at>elan.net" 
<william at elan.net> wrote:

> USPS codes can only narrow down the search to very small area if the last
> 4 digits are includes (i.e. ZIP+4 as you indicate), but last 4 digits are
> not considered to be required part of zip or postal code - it is optional
> and used and added primarily by postal carriers to help in mail routing,
> most people omit it when just casually writing the address and I would
> suspect ISPs and customers that care about privacy will omit this last 4
> digits.
> Just zip code itself (5 digits) is usually wide enough (size of small
> city) and is not a violation of prvicay - while at the other hand it
> comes very  useful in identifying statistical distribution of
> assignments, particulary by automated means (its a lot easier to automate
> system to obtain and use  database ofall zip codes then for all cities
> and villages, large and  small in the US).
> Now this does not mean I agree with the policy - I'm opposed to it as I
> do  not believe the kind of privacy requirements that are being asked are
> necessary and their ppresencecauses problems for those investigating
> incidents of abuse and allow for much more abuse directly from ISPs.
> However not passing policy just because of presence of zip code is just
> complete nonsence. If city name is there, the address might as well
> include zip and make statistic analysis easier.
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 Michael.Dillon at radianz.com wrote:
>> There is a policy proposal that, on the face of it, is about improving
>> the  privacy of residential customers. It allows an ISP to remove a
>> customer's  name and street address from a whois entry. But it says
>> nothing about zip  codes. And that is the root of the problem...
>> Here are some references that show how a Zip+4 code or a Postal Code can
>> be used to narrow down the physical location of a person to a small
>> enough  area to make it easy to stalk someone or burn down their house
>> in the  middle of the night.
>> USA
>> http://www.usps.com/zip4/zipfaq.htm
>> http://www.usps.com/history/history/his3_5.htm
>> Canada
>> http://www.infinitegravity.ca/postalcodeformat.htm
>> http://www.canadapost.ca/personal/tools/pg/preparation/mpp6-02-e.asp
>> Now the board of trustees did note this as an issue and referred the
>> policy proposal back to the AC. But the AC did not address the privacy
>> issue at all. They simply bounced it back to the BoT with a note that
>> they  had "discussed" the issue.
>> This is a flawed policy proposal. It claims to improve residential
>> privacy  and yet it does not remove all the data which identifies the
>> residential  user.
>> --Michael Dillon

If this message was not signed with gpg key 0FE2AA3D, it's probably
a forgery.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20040212/bdfeb769/attachment.sig>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list