Re: [dnsext] DNS vulnerabilities
David Conrad <[email protected]> Mon, 28 Oct 2013 08:24:18 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.dnsop,gmane.ietf.dnsext |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Oct 28, 2013, at 12:07 AM, Masataka Ohta <[email protected]> wrote: > Then, plain DNS modified to have 32 (or 64?) bit messages > ID is as secure as DNSSEC. How does a 32 or 64 bit message ID protect you from on-path MITM/injection attacks? Protecting the communication channel does not equal protecting the data. Regards, -drc _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 495 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSbldyAAoJENV6ebf0/4rX6NAH/0iK7NnIaYGId8i++UFgzpDO 1+jFlw4SnJ/LAi7cru8Hz8TdC64oNQbuWgn6Vj/YbS76k6crD2A3Liunrmy1gCkh qfFFoeG44QDTw/VQ3ADzMfWKItOAHQ6NjO3yYR3+jm9jLV3PGkHUHvUK8IHRZLeo jIht8b3Bwus++LmAHYGbLa40mt6x+C30wDGYO86anT4JQ8342NLwJ4YOTeu/3hIw 8xBIllLnJpxykXxlKJN3EVECS9tVCOX5KS4QkaCGMf/gnunQ7UW17YSytNZEU/a9 7KsFqQBXTrT3+doATZVxvFRwBrPhZi7CIAwBCRS1oviNRDIXXogX1SxACJ71s6A= =1eBn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----