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

Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com> Sat, 30 November 2013 15:56 UTC

Return-Path: <eburger@standardstrack.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 C399A1AE448 for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 07:56:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.578
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.578 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] 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 gFWXG3K9q8zv for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 07:56:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from biz104.inmotionhosting.com (biz104.inmotionhosting.com [74.124.215.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B729B1AE447 for <perpass@ietf.org>; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 07:56:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ip68-100-74-215.dc.dc.cox.net ([68.100.74.215]:52875 helo=[192.168.15.104]) by biz104.inmotionhosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from <eburger@standardstrack.com>) id 1VmmuQ-0002WU-MB for perpass@ietf.org; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 07:56:43 -0800
From: Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7BDEEDB3-9013-4D9F-B1A4-3CF9A276CD38"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
Message-Id: <9E17C7BF-FBFD-4C6C-81E9-34704FB24FC4@standardstrack.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 10:32:25 -0500
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> <CAMm+LwgEoi8o1Uc4H9sB8L7SY=XtYQYBQQD0RMXONLQXKecvEA@mail.gmail.com>
To: perpass <perpass@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwgEoi8o1Uc4H9sB8L7SY=XtYQYBQQD0RMXONLQXKecvEA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - biz104.inmotionhosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - standardstrack.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: biz104.inmotionhosting.com: authenticated_id: eburger+standardstrack.com/only user confirmed/virtual account not confirmed
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
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: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 15:56:47 -0000

In the shameless self-promotion department, this IS my day job. See http://s2erc.georgetown.edu/projects/cyberISE/ for the theoretical work and http://gcsc.georgetown.edu/ if one needs an operational venue.

On Nov 28, 2013, at 9:49 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 1:08 AM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> > Randy is quite right.
> 
> has to happen occasionally
> 
> > The attacks reported in the news article were against the private
> > optical fibers linking the geographically distributed data centers of
> > large companies like Google or Yahoo. A discussion about that should
> > start with the folks in charge of securing these data centers at
> > Google, Yahoo, Facebook, Microsoft, et cetera. I can see some
> > difficulties, because a fair bit of the data centers architectures is
> > probably treated as trade secret. And I am really not sure that the
> > IETF is the best place to conduct such discussions.
> 
> we had/have the same oroblem with datacenter* wgs.  the folk who really
> do it think of it as secret sauce.  so it becomes the vendors trying to
> sell solutions to problems they don't understand.  hell, i don't even
> know iij datacentr technology to any depth.
> 
> Just to be clear, when I said they are more willing to share than you said earlier, I was referring to a closed door sharing in some members only forum. That model definitely works.
> 
> The IETF might play a role in brokering the setting up of such an organization but any sharing is not going to take place in public and not in the IETF and it is going to take place at a certain degree of abstraction.
> 
>  
> 
> -- 
> Website: http://hallambaker.com/
> _______________________________________________
> perpass mailing list
> perpass@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass