swamping security
touch@isi.edu Fri, 20 September 1996 19:28 UTC
Received: from relay.hq.tis.com by neptune.TIS.COM id aa28626; 20 Sep 96 15:28 EDT
Received: by relay.hq.tis.com; id PAA18520; Fri, 20 Sep 1996 15:31:25 -0400
From: touch@isi.edu
MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at neptune.TIS.COM
Received: from sol.hq.tis.com(10.33.1.100) by relay.tis.com via smap (V3.1.1) id xmaa18506; Fri, 20 Sep 96 15:30:57 -0400
Received: from relay.hq.tis.com by tis.com (4.1/SUN-5.64) id AA29597; Fri, 20 Sep 96 15:30:07 EDT
Received: by relay.hq.tis.com; id PAA18496; Fri, 20 Sep 1996 15:30:55 -0400
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu(128.9.160.160) by relay.tis.com via smap (V3.1.1) id xma018477; Fri, 20 Sep 96 15:30:25 -0400
Received: from ash.isi.edu (ash-a.isi.edu) by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23) id <AA15780>; Fri, 20 Sep 1996 12:32:48 -0700
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 12:32:33 -0700
Posted-Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 12:32:33 -0700
Message-Id: <199609201932.AA02376@ash.isi.edu>
Received: by ash.isi.edu (5.65c/4.0.3-6) id <AA02376>; Fri, 20 Sep 1996 12:32:33 -0700
To: touch@isi.edu, kim@morningstar.com
Subject: swamping security
Cc: ipsec@TIS.COM
X-Auto-Sig-Adder-By: faber@isi.edu
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com
Precedence: bulk
So, it might be the case that, in order to avoid swamping attacks, we need two kinds of authentication: - whole packet (to keep converstations secure) - header only (for fast processing to check for swamping) If so, do we need another kind of header? (IP-AH specs only the first) Joe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joe Touch - touch@isi.edu http://www.isi.edu/~touch/ ISI / Project Leader, ATOMIC-2, LSAM http://www.isi.edu/atomic2/ USC / Research Assistant Prof. http://www.isi.edu/lsam/
- swamping security touch
- Re: swamping security Greg Minshall