Re: [sunset4] to summarize Lorzeno's "drive-by" attack on draft-ietf-sunset4-noipv4
Simon Perreault <sperreault@jive.com> Mon, 28 July 2014 20:22 UTC
Return-Path: <sperreault@jive.com>
X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D8001A00EB for <sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Jul 2014 13:22:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 v9TKK7HkLrSs for <sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Jul 2014 13:22:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qa0-f41.google.com (mail-qa0-f41.google.com [209.85.216.41]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1287F1A00C0 for <sunset4@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Jul 2014 13:22:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id j7so8788228qaq.14 for <sunset4@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Jul 2014 13:22:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZR6NV4Kj8CrwebEkInhurRYLZWQjKGya62CqhM5CDiw=; b=WuuLc+YyISphcQtifWPQnYCPCTkFsaofSoS52vhHmxFGo0MW7yXqWcGaqfrvqX1iok rh3dAg53VIgAe/d4sd0qvVU1t1+7Xv98uYZcpu2qL0Fl6xT7uWJLPCvY551AFAmOWW5W dU0yMjY31xb61i1GUfUT08hums7+FuRCL6GcW7s9DL0+6tx/ER+8nG0u8RE5cPT2ihn7 2QR3Nknb4/p6jPSZACZxicYlb4xlIPES+c622taOqj/ZNyUuKE5MWJKK68Fo8CddYy2T /bMrp3+6gC4TefxtvqeXXcGn2/acqq/GNFJAWr19BJhW0rPKmSA4PKeDujeL9J3Qx8Od CBTA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmQg+gCEr1zC1hVm5BSz89fkjL9M82ypMFLNucJf9CQRfDhCkC6Bq+9L9BEp2e99xC5WN3P
X-Received: by 10.140.95.241 with SMTP id i104mr65822361qge.6.1406578948191; Mon, 28 Jul 2014 13:22:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.96] (modemcable233.42-178-173.mc.videotron.ca. [173.178.42.233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id l8sm31353042qao.10.2014.07.28.13.22.26 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 28 Jul 2014 13:22:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <53D6B101.7060303@jive.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 16:22:25 -0400
From: Simon Perreault <sperreault@jive.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>, Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
References: <11190.1406240244@sandelman.ca> <C12A07EA-E27A-4EAF-A9DE-536FF22A0395@cisco.com> <3B647D53-0E22-43C3-892D-319C9109248C@nominum.com> <53D6559B.2090300@jive.com> <C38ED5E4-5088-4877-9A9F-160EAFCA9938@nominum.com> <6D291158-F0C6-4BE4-851B-366B2F0B2540@cisco.com> <13154328-4C85-4E8D-850A-8E5498E5276B@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <13154328-4C85-4E8D-850A-8E5498E5276B@nominum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sunset4/BvavirjpFxeACpbBAvm-AMBzcCs
Cc: sunset4@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sunset4] to summarize Lorzeno's "drive-by" attack on draft-ietf-sunset4-noipv4
X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list <sunset4.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sunset4>, <mailto:sunset4-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sunset4/>
List-Post: <mailto:sunset4@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sunset4-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4>, <mailto:sunset4-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 20:22:30 -0000
Le 2014-07-28 16:16, Ted Lemon a écrit : > On Jul 28, 2014, at 9:26 AM, Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com> wrote: >> Simon bought up an interesting point that an attacker abusing NOIPV4 needs only send a few packets and would have a lasting impact. The attacker need not stay on the network to have a lasting impact. > > Yup, that's what I said too. Dunno why we're still talking about it! :) Because communication is hard! :) Simon
- [sunset4] to summarize Lorzeno's "drive-by" attac… Michael Richardson
- Re: [sunset4] to summarize Lorzeno's "drive-by" a… Dan Wing
- Re: [sunset4] to summarize Lorzeno's "drive-by" a… Ted Lemon
- Re: [sunset4] to summarize Lorzeno's "drive-by" a… Simon Perreault
- Re: [sunset4] to summarize Lorzeno's "drive-by" a… Ted Lemon
- Re: [sunset4] to summarize Lorzeno's "drive-by" a… Dan Wing
- Re: [sunset4] to summarize Lorzeno's "drive-by" a… Ted Lemon
- Re: [sunset4] to summarize Lorzeno's "drive-by" a… Simon Perreault
- Re: [sunset4] to summarize Lorzeno's "drive-by" a… Michael Richardson
- Re: [sunset4] to summarize Lorzeno's "drive-by" a… Simon Perreault