Re: [RPSEC] comments on draft-beard-rpsec-routing-threats-01.txt

At 5:30 PM -0500 3/11/03, sandy@tislabs.com wrote:
>I'm attempting to send some comments on the threats draft.  I've tried
>to organize them so it's not so daunting to read through.
>
>There are 10 (most are real small, don't despair)
>Topic 1: Section 3.1 Threat Sources
>Topic 2: Section 4.5 Underclaiming - is this a legitimate threat?
>Topic 3:  Section 4.4 Spoofing
>Topic 4: Section 4.5 terminology - "Ownership"
>Topic 5:  4.3 Traffic Analysis - really a threat against routing protocol?
>Topic 6: Section 4.1 Deliberate Exposure
>Topic 7: Section 4.8 Byzantine Failures
>Topic 8: Section 4.9 Discarding of Control Packets (aka underclaiming?)
>Topic 9:  Section 4.10 Network Mapping Threat
>Topic 10:  Section 4.7 Overload
>Topic 11: Section 3.2 Threat Actions vs Section 4 "Generally...Threat Actions"
>
>--Sandy

BTW, these are attacks, not threats. (not your fault, Sandy.)  I 
still maintain that we need a threat model, not just a list of 
attacks. As I noted some time ago, this list does not persuade anyone 
that we have performed a top-down analysis of the problem space and 
are in a position to generate requirements as a result.

Steve
_______________________________________________
RPSEC mailing list
RPSEC@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec