[dtn-security] Re(2): Traffic Analysis Protection

"Peter Lovell" <peter.lovell@sparta.com> Thu, 13 March 2008 20:09 UTC

From: Peter Lovell <peter.lovell@sparta.com>
To: dtn security <dtn-security@mailman.dtnrg.org>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, M.Bhutta@surrey.ac.uk
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:14:14 -0500
Message-Id: <20080313201414.439710226@127.0.0.1>
In-Reply-To: <47D98561.901@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <676D5FD21A8EEC4591C13839BF2A14B9F166D6@EVS-EC1-NODE4.surrey.ac.uk> <47D98561.901@cs.tcd.ie>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: [dtn-security] Re(2): Traffic Analysis Protection
Precedence: list
Reply-To: DTN Security Discussion <dtn-security@mailman.dtnrg.org>

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:

>The BP's not that good in this respect, since we can't encrypt
>the primary bundle,

Hi Stephen,

minor terminology correction. It's the "primary block" that we can't
encrypt -- the one containing addresses etc.

As you say, bundle-in-bundle encapsulation is a solution but ... you
have to have *some* addressing *somewhere*.  Were I a professor, I'd
assign that as an advanced exercise for the class :)

Cheers.....Peter

p.s. I listened on the audio feed and thought it was a good session --
well done.

Re: [dtn-security] Traffic Analysis Protection HUANG, CHIN-TSER
Re: [dtn-security] Traffic Analysis Protection Weiss, Howard
Re: [dtn-security] Re(2): Traffic Analysis Protec… Rajesh Krishnan
[dtn-security] Re(2): Traffic Analysis Protection Peter Lovell
Re: [dtn-security] Traffic Analysis Protection Stephen Farrell
Re: [dtn-security] Traffic Analysis Protection Urs Hengartner
[dtn-security] Traffic Analysis Protection M.Bhutta