IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [perpass] "Guide to intranet protection"?

Norbert Bollow <nb@bollow.ch> Thu, 28 November 2013 11:48 UTC

Return-Path: <nb@bollow.ch>
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 30CAD1AE08D for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 03:48:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 DqfxMxV-W8xH for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 03:48:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from beta.bollow.ch (beta.bollow.ch [193.37.152.11]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B0691AE086 for <perpass@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 03:48:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from quill (59-34.62-81.cust.bluewin.ch [81.62.34.59]) by beta.bollow.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 804B8140219; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 12:55:30 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 12:47:18 +0100
From: Norbert Bollow <nb@bollow.ch>
To: Eric Burger <eburger@cs.georgetown.edu>
Message-ID: <20131128124718.357ee20f@quill>
In-Reply-To: <F1E81972-34D8-419A-95D7-61060CD3C3CD@cs.georgetown.edu>
References: <5295FC4F.7060309@dcrocker.net> <5295FDE8.5000402@cs.tcd.ie> <m2mwkpgpi0.wl%randy@psg.com> <5296C8CC.2060508@dcrocker.net> <027a01ceebfb$df99f290$9ecdd7b0$@huitema.net> <m2d2llgisa.wl%randy@psg.com> <5297142D.6010101@cs.tcd.ie> <F1E81972-34D8-419A-95D7-61060CD3C3CD@cs.georgetown.edu>
Organization: ZielBaum Beratung N. Bollow
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.10; i486-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="PGP-SHA1"; boundary="Sig_/zk_hPwr0+a/SEufgvMl+iqo"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Cc: perpass <perpass@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [perpass] "Guide to intranet protection"?
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: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 11:48:02 -0000

Eric Burger <eburger@cs.georgetown.edu> wrote:

> I would offer the problem is not securing links (VPN) or backbones
> (links), but to remind people of this (seemingly obsolete) IETF
> principle called ‘end-to-end.’ In the context of security, it is that
> one cannot presume security because you happen to own the network.
> Bad things happen within a single, private network for a whole host
> of reasons. So, lock down stuff at the endpoints.

Yes, end-to-end encryption is absolutely essential.

But protecting "who communicated with whom" data, which can also be
highly sensistive, requires further steps in addition to end-to-end
encryption.

Greetings,
Norbert

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email