How far does “storing customer IP addresses” really go?

By | June 9, 2017

Deutsche Telekom has raised a fast-tracked lawsuit seeking clarification on what Germany's latest telecommunications laws want them to actually do. The problem is this: with dynamic IP addressing, an IP address alone is not sufficient to uniquely identify a user. Rather, the IP address needs to be extended to include additional details, like the internal IP address and port number,target IP address and target port number, as well as the timestamp of the address provisioning. Storing all of that information would allow a knowledgeable person to recreate a profile of the internet user and the services they retrieved.

So the question then becomes, are telecommunications companies now required to store all of this additional information in order to ensure that what they provide – should a law enforcement agency make an inquiry – is sufficient to uniquely identify a perpetrator, according to the spirit of the law? Or are telecommunications companies only required to store the external IP address, according to the text of the law?

It'll be interesting to see what side the German courts take on this matter.

Vorratsdatenspeicherung: Deutsche Telekom klagt gegen Speicherung von IP-Adressen bei Mobilfunk und WLAN (Updates)
Die Deutsche Telekom klagt gegen die Bundesnetzagentur über die Umsetzung der Vorratsdatenspeicherung. Der Internet-Anbieter will klären lassen, ob und wie IP-Adressen auch bei Mobilfunk und WLAN gespeichert werden müssen. Da die Speicherpflicht ab Juli gilt, hat der Konzern ein Eilverfahren

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *