IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [homenet] Firewall hole punching [was: About Ted's naming architecture...]

Tim Coote <tim+ietf.org@coote.org> Wed, 23 November 2016 17:35 UTC

Return-Path: <tim+ietf.org@coote.org>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C006C12A190 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:35:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=coote.org header.b=fTGEWmpk; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=coote.org header.b=EqEYNTjx
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v0O9R09ZirYZ for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:35:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.coote.org (575185b4.skybroadband.com [87.81.133.180]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2542612A16B for <homenet@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:34:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mercury.coote.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 653C916C12BA; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 17:34:10 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mercury.coote.org 653C916C12BA
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=coote.org; s=default; t=1479922450; bh=TXNn9O3k/r8CpLVSztaYBvrGslnFu4Zp8aMlDi+uz5k=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To:From; b=fTGEWmpktxD3Pwdni3ws6buWCJxEBQIeYB2Pjb4ombdscCfs9O9uVmgfk46vjmG91 wBhU1TDq0vF3Tsm6kwlJcBICWbLLqwnQmMwxHtzrFh8AvPDwhJ3em9LHL5yKr9xYr5 KI1iPdVU6CXVQLd1RwMsuMSnSMrpJ8Fgr13M0/tU=
X-Original-To: homenet@ietf.org
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mercury.coote.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D70B16C100C; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 17:34:09 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mercury.coote.org 9D70B16C100C
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=coote.org; s=default; t=1479922449; bh=TXNn9O3k/r8CpLVSztaYBvrGslnFu4Zp8aMlDi+uz5k=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To:From; b=EqEYNTjxGAP5zjm/6Czm41dMlvDhy4SUAsbEzO34zy7DvEWh10AsglDgHklyeDpI0 fyaikaO46jK4QzIqecFo6NDNXr3EjHbgkVZqdx6rHI3xiMct5LzuU0uBS+4sb/xQC1 oc56TCx1y9/0Xg4WyVPysXnfJ/A0E6MCM/kFRhh4=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Tim Coote <tim+ietf.org@coote.org>
In-Reply-To: <87shqiw5ja.wl-jch@irif.fr>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 17:34:09 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <14AB75E3-C6FE-4DBD-8FDD-7B30C459473E@coote.org>
References: <871syc54d1.wl-jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> <CAPt1N1=eXRBh6UqGGqUSK9cH_jY5MvPcE4MFZUPe2Z48LF7bkA@mail.gmail.com> <87lgwj504t.wl-jch@irif.fr> <CAPt1N1kDCMDBEpt7QYhHtPYjaMJAzw8G81=2y2f=y0ZProeCPA@mail.gmail.com> <13675.1479346312@dooku.sandelman.ca> <3B35AF68-4792-4B2A-8277-A7B49206581F@google.com> <74143607-B81E-4D4C-89D3-4754E0DA7DE1@jisc.ac.uk> <790beb67-a62e-b7dc-b64e-a3fcecfbdb12@mtcc.com> <87zikrihl7.wl-jch@irif.fr> <2EEB3CCD-3C25-4844-95B5-DDE31F982EA2@iki.fi> <87oa17i9eq.wl-jch@irif.fr> <2DAA6FEB-8C87-42DA-9465-E740669C563A@iki.fi> <8C298ED7-DF92-4FB7-9D6A-C113E98CABE9@google.com> <F351E6DB-4829-4EE3-BACE-25DA543B21C5@iki.fi> <87shqiw5ja.wl-jch@irif.fr>
To: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
X-Spambayes-Classification: ham; 0.00
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/0ghPNhoB4Aj3X_qb5iNNkO1ppiw>
Cc: HOMENET <homenet@ietf.org>, Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg@iki.fi>
Subject: Re: [homenet] Firewall hole punching [was: About Ted's naming architecture...]
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 17:35:24 -0000

> On 23 Nov 2016, at 15:59, Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> wrote:
> 
>> IoT land [...] there is bit more hope
> 
> Joke, right?

Do the Security Economics need thinking about here: what are the threats and who’s best placed to confirm that some set of computers and services are safe and working correctly, how are they incentivised to behave ‘correctly’?

It would be possible to externalise this cost and say that it’s a legal or commercial issue. But wouldn’t it be sensible to at least state some security related assumptions, and maybe document an initial view of the threats and impacted stakeholders (e.g. to highlight risks to third parties that the likes of Mirai present)?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email