ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Is this true?

2010-08-27 09:52:22


On 8/26/2010 4:24 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>  On 8/26/2010 2:27 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>  why would the underlying security vulnerabilities be fundamentally
>>  different?
...
True, but the same property means that scanning attacks are infeasible
against IPv6 subnets. Attack tracking based on subnets may work
fine, though. Swings and roundabouts.

Your original comment was about differences in vulnerabilities. You asserted that there was no fundamental difference and I was observing that one difference that is clear and is already of concern to the anti-spam/anti-abuse community does quality as a fundamental difference. (It is likely to render and entire infrastructure of address-based white- and black-listing useless.)


Anyway - nobody is saying that there are no security issues with IPv6.

How is your statement, above, not saying /exactly/ that?

d/

--

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>