[Ntp] Antwort: An RFC6921-compliant NTP implementation
kristof.teichel@ptb.de Fri, 23 April 2021 12:25 UTC
Return-Path: <kristof.teichel@ptb.de>
X-Original-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B40863A1B50 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 05:25:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.42
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.42 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_MIME_NO_HTML_TAG=0.377, HTML_NONELEMENT_30_40=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 Gb4324_S658a for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 05:25:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.bs.ptb.de (mx1.bs.ptb.de [192.53.103.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEAB33A1B4F for <ntp@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 05:25:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-hub.bs.ptb.de (smtpint01.bs.ptb.de [141.25.87.32]) by mx1.bs.ptb.de with ESMTP id 13NCPN90029681-13NCPN92029681 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 23 Apr 2021 14:25:23 +0200
Received: from lotus.bs.ptb.de (lotus.bs.ptb.de [141.25.85.200]) by smtp-hub.bs.ptb.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BCD3B3B7DE; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 14:25:23 +0200 (CEST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sensitivity:
Importance: Normal
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
In-Reply-To: <CAJm83bAQgRKNEdaOcNvSkL1OF-xOd8T_5AYfwJCXtpZifUAVSQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJm83bAQgRKNEdaOcNvSkL1OF-xOd8T_5AYfwJCXtpZifUAVSQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: kristof.teichel@ptb.de
To: Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com>
Cc: NTP WG <ntp@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 14:25:20 +0200
Message-ID: <OF1BA72A99.13DC4340-ONC12586C0.00443CDE-C12586C0.00443CDF@ptb.de>
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/1o2LAGwaTCna9NjiKdEFESSlwsI>
Subject: [Ntp] Antwort: An RFC6921-compliant NTP implementation
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ntp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 12:25:31 -0000
Von: "Daniel Franke"
Gesendet von: "ntp"
Datum: 01.04.2021 02:02
Kopie: bob.hinden@gmail.com
Betreff: [Ntp] An RFC6921-compliant NTP implementation
1. The aforementioned requirement to store an unbounded number of unauthenticated server packets until the client can determine whether it willan on-generate a matching origin timestamp constitutes an unfixable DoS vulnerability, and releasing known-vulnerable code would be irresponsible.
2. I no longer have it available, because when the returning client struck Earth's atmosphere at relativistic speed, the fireball destroyed the experimental apparatus, the server hosting my git repo, and most of Antarctica. Sorry about that.
ntp mailing list
ntp@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp" rel="nofollow">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp
- [Ntp] An RFC6921-compliant NTP implementation Daniel Franke
- Re: [Ntp] An RFC6921-compliant NTP implementation Martin Burnicki
- Re: [Ntp] An RFC6921-compliant NTP implementation Daniel Franke
- [Ntp] Antwort: An RFC6921-compliant NTP implement… kristof.teichel