RE: What do you guys think about this?
Rod Boyce <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.encryption.cipe |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I don't very often respond to this kind of stuff. When I think of Linux and VPN I consider Linux my Swiss army knife of VPN stuff. If I want a think VPN then works over UDP/IP with good enough encryption for my needs I choose CIPE. If I need to connect to a window network with an existing PPTP VPN then I use the PPTP client. If I want temporary tunnels between Linux end points that I use SSH. I have never need any thing else. CIPE is the best and easiest to set up permanent VPN I have ever come across the fact that is works well over the internet with any special route configuration is great in my opinion. When I evaluate these kind of technologies I set up a complete test environment, perform many simple test and make an informed decision. This is what I do and for my and my customers needs CIPE is the best permanent VPN I have test out. Regards, Rod Boyce > -----Original Message----- > From: Mailing Lists [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, 23 September 2003 4:16 p.m. > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: What do you guys think about this? > > How about some ranting, and raving on Slashdot.? > > On Monday, September 22, 2003, at 08:54 PM, Russell Berry wrote: > > > yeah, pissed me off too. But you hit the nail on the head with > > infantile in > > the same paragraph with Gutmann. Rant away.... > > > > ---russ > > > > Russell Berry > > Berrex Computer Solutions > > http://www.berrex.com > > [email protected] > > 1-877-558-9507 > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Damion Wilson" <[email protected]> > > To: "Groups" <[email protected]> > > Cc: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 11:20 PM > > Subject: Re: What do you guys think about this? > > > > > >> Alright. I've just seen this on Slashdot and a few things pissed me > >> off: > >> > >> 1. CIPE has apparently been declared a "dead" project. > >> > >> 2. The cursory analysis by Peter Gutmann appears to have missed subtle > > things. > >> For instance, CIPE primarily using Blowfish (and not IDEA). > >> > >> 3. The apparent zeal with which all non IPSec or SSL implementations > >> are > >> attacked as basically infantile and not worth entertaining smacks of > >> patronising. > >> > >> 4. Some issues are stated as being known "years ago" and ignored. I > >> don't > >> recall the issues he raises as having crossed my 5 year participation > >> on > > this > >> list, the "man in the middle" vulnerability notwithstanding. We > >> appear to > >> have voted for simplicity in this regard, correct me if I'm wrong. > >> It's > >> easier to believe that your ISP isn't out to get you. > >> > >> If Mr. Gutmann had bothered to peruse the mailing list archives (the > >> link > > was > >> right on the same page as the protocol description), He might have > >> had the > >> chance to determine what was important to the userbase and, instead of > >> declaring CIPE, Tinc, OpenVPN, et al. "dead", He might have realised > >> what > > was > >> important enough to them to specifically eschew IPSec, etc in > >> choosing our > >> specific flavours of VPN. > >> > >> He deems us stupid and foolhardy for making the decision to use these > >> products, develop for them, and show loyalty to them in the face of > > software > >> and techniques that he prefers. Apparently, we're all a bunch of > >> idiots > > and > >> it only took him a 30 minute or more analysis for him to determine > >> it, and > >> the other projects weren't as lucky. Let's all remember the Andrew > > Tanenbaum > >> v Linus Torvalds "discussion" over the relative technical merits of > >> Minix > >> over Linux. > >> > >> I'm still pissed. I need to rant some more later > >> > >> I'd like to know if Olaf has anything to say about it, though. Peter > > Gutmann > >> apparently attempted to contact him. > >> > >> DKW > >> On Monday 22 September 2003 08:57 pm, Groups wrote: > >>> I've been using CIPE for over a year now, and my boss just forwarded > > this > >>> link, http://www.mit.edu:8008/bloom-picayune/crypto/14238, to a > >>> posting > >>> about the security of CIPE. Does anyone have any arguments that may > > help > >>> me out? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Message sent by the [email protected] mailing list. > >>> Unsubscribe: mail [email protected], "unsubscribe cipe-l" in body > >>> Other commands available with "help" in body to the same address. > >>> CIPE info and list archive: > >>> <URL:http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/cipe.html> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Message sent by the [email protected] mailing list. > >> Unsubscribe: mail [email protected], "unsubscribe cipe-l" in body > >> Other commands available with "help" in body to the same address. > >> CIPE info and list archive: > > <URL:http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/cipe.html> > > > > > -- > Message sent by the [email protected] mailing list. > Unsubscribe: mail [email protected], "unsubscribe cipe-l" in body > Other commands available with "help" in body to the same address. > CIPE info and list archive: > <URL:http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/cipe.html> -- Message sent by the [email protected] mailing list. Unsubscribe: mail [email protected], "unsubscribe cipe-l" in body Other commands available with "help" in body to the same address. CIPE info and list archive: <URL:http://sites.inka.de/~bigred/devel/cipe.html>