PogoWasRight.org

Menu
  • About
  • Privacy
Menu

Article: The Number is Me: Why Internet Protocol (IP) Addresses Should Be Protected as Personally Identifiable Information

Posted on September 15, 2010 by pogowasright.org

Joshua J. McIntyre of DePaul University College of Law has an article in an upcoming issue of the DePaul Law Review (Vol. 60, No. 3, 2011), “The Number is Me: Why Internet Protocol (IP) Addresses Should Be Protected as Personally Identifiable Information.”   Here’s the abstract:

Although computer logs typically correlate online activity only to Internet Protocol (IP) addresses, those addresses can be used to expose the individuals behind the computers. While various federal statutes protect similar data, such as telephone numbers and mailing addresses, as Personally Identifiable Information, federal privacy law does not sufficiently protect IP addresses. It has become commonplace for litigants to subpoena Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to unmask online speakers, and, because many ISPs have no reason to fight these subpoenas, they readily give up their subscribers’ names, addresses, telephone numbers, and other identifying data without demanding any court oversight or providing any notice to those identified. Left unchecked, such reporting could undermine free speech and the free exchange of ideas by encouraging users to censor their own online conduct.

This Comment explores the possibility of protecting the IP address itself as Personally Identifiable Information (PII). It explores the various definitions of PII and the relevant technical aspects of IP addressing. It concludes that, despite some technical shortcomings, IP addresses are functionally similar to other types of PII and should be similarly protected in order to protect online privacy.

You can download the free full-text article from SSRN.

The notion of IP as PII was recently in the news again when a Swiss court held that a company hired to investigate alleged pirates, Logistep,  had violated the users’ privacy because IPs are considered PII in Switzerland.  Not all countries take that position, however.

Category: Misc

Post navigation

← Government Cloud Computing Privacy Recommendations Privacy Thresholds
Article: Pseudonymous Litigation →

Now more than ever

Search

Contact Me

Email: [email protected]

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Categories

Recent Posts

  • Widow of slain Saudi journalist can’t pursue surveillance claims against Israeli spyware firm
  • Researchers Scrape 2 Billion Discord Messages and Publish Them Online
  • GDPR is cracking: Brussels rewrites its prized privacy law
  • Telegram Gave Authorities Data on More than 20,000 Users
  • Police secretly monitored New Orleans with facial recognition cameras
  • Cocospy stalkerware apps go offline after data breach
  • Drugmaker Regeneron to acquire 23andMe out of bankruptcy

RSS Recent Posts on DataBreaches.net

  • 16 Defendants Federally Charged in Connection with DanaBot Malware Scheme That Infected Computers Worldwide
  • Russian national and leader of Qakbot malware conspiracy indicted in long-running global ransomware scheme
  • Texas Doctor Who Falsely Diagnosed Patients as Part of Insurance Fraud Scheme Sentenced to 10 Years’ Imprisonment
  • VanHelsing ransomware builder leaked on hacking forum
  • Hack of Opexus Was at Root of Massive Federal Data Breach
©2025 PogoWasRight.org. All rights reserved.