IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [perpass] New Version Notification for draft-barnes-pervasive-problem-00.txt

Sean Turner <TurnerS@ieca.com> Wed, 08 January 2014 08:08 UTC

Return-Path: <TurnerS@ieca.com>
X-Original-To: perpass@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: perpass@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E85C1AE31C for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 00:08:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.567
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.567 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 AgNwAY5_Ypd6 for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 00:08:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gateway09.websitewelcome.com (gateway09.websitewelcome.com [69.93.164.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F5A41AE321 for <perpass@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 00:08:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: by gateway09.websitewelcome.com (Postfix, from userid 507) id 319843C29AC78; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 02:08:29 -0600 (CST)
Received: from gator3286.hostgator.com (gator3286.hostgator.com [198.57.247.250]) by gateway09.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 196933C29AC31 for <perpass@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 02:08:29 -0600 (CST)
Received: from [173.73.130.192] (port=53195 helo=[192.168.1.4]) by gator3286.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <TurnerS@ieca.com>) id 1W0oBg-0006dj-8z; Wed, 08 Jan 2014 02:08:28 -0600
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_BD7C77BE-2DB2-4125-98CC-FD9D9C0207DD"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Sean Turner <TurnerS@ieca.com>
In-Reply-To: <87lhys1cvj.fsf@nordberg.se>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 03:08:25 -0500
Message-Id: <E8F0EAFB-8CB9-497B-8662-87D2C003CCAD@ieca.com>
References: <20140107021702.7140.81609.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAL02cgRsBQNYd2n05548ZbK-ciPkSNJ=U2V0iv+080p9-1gQbA@mail.gmail.com> <7BAC95F5A7E67643AAFB2C31BEE662D018B7D6E1E4@SC-VEXCH2.marvell.com> <CAL02cgT5u1w-MJfxWHZOdiDQRU_Ov_wGYf7=0O-BH_td-Nis8Q@mail.gmail.com> <87lhys1cvj.fsf@nordberg.se>
To: Linus Nordberg <linus@nordberg.se>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator3286.hostgator.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - ieca.com
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 173.73.130.192
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: ([192.168.1.4]) [173.73.130.192]:53195
X-Source-Auth: sean.turner@ieca.com
X-Email-Count: 2
X-Source-Cap: ZG9tbWdyNDg7ZG9tbWdyNDg7Z2F0b3IzMjg2Lmhvc3RnYXRvci5jb20=
Cc: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>, Paul Lambert <paul@marvell.com>, perpass <perpass@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [perpass] New Version Notification for draft-barnes-pervasive-problem-00.txt
X-BeenThere: perpass@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The perpass list is for IETF discussion of pervasive monitoring. " <perpass.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/perpass>, <mailto:perpass-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/perpass/>
List-Post: <mailto:perpass@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:perpass-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass>, <mailto:perpass-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 08:08:39 -0000

On Jan 07, 2014, at 02:15, Linus Nordberg <linus@nordberg.se> wrote:

> Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> wrote
> Mon, 6 Jan 2014 22:01:03 -0500:
> 
> | I also wonder to what degree this is a "pervasive attack" issue.  If the
> | attack involves being physically close to the victim, it's hard to see how
> | the attacker would achieve a pervasive scale.
> 
> An attacker could control a large number of "home routers".
> 
> Do we need stronger indications that's actually being done at a large
> scale before we consider strengthening L2 protocols and best practices?
> If so, what is "large scale" and "pervasive”?

I’m in the camp that we don’t.

spt

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status