[saag] Re: On path Active Attackers, and Meddlers in the M iddle

Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote:
     > While I agree with you that we should mostly just stop saying "MITM",

... reasons why MITM is often imprecise.

    > With that said, I like the term "Active On-Path Attacker" for
    > capabilities.  I just think we ought to use more precise names for the
    > attacks themselves (e.g., "server impersonation") if we do that, I
    > doubt we will need to use the term MITM much if it all.

That sounds ideal.
Can we make a list of attacks that we should clarify then?

i've received unicast feedback that we should document capabilities to mount
the *attack* , rather than describe *attackers*, which seems to fit with what
you are suggesting.
And frankly, that fits the title of the document better anyway!!!

That github link:
     https://github.com/mcr/saag-onpath-attacker

--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

_______________________________________________
saag mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQFKBAEBCgA0FiEEbsyLEzg/qUTA43uogItw+93Q3WUFAmd7CU0WHG1jcitpZXRm
QHNhbmRlbG1hbi5jYQAKCRCAi3D73dDdZUv+B/9YLgDano89A01YmkniT+UnOtnN
8zrMTj+125TfhqGiu+TqMosBlIQyDDb8Sr3q4ssWBniKgsrVezLXecsD1BBVNutM
TSRjpjbazJJjtC0IV0iKNDemSb0GhQroG8PphhJTjAB3FKXQV1QzrIuCB3vk7J6U
AM8aUk0VZkMdWHsvupK8CD6lTppi7J1Yh/jM//0Xi7Tdw9cV1E8Oq7xrrJ+27/1+
f/Jpj+zEJdRtTSZ828AVxFrAgRv0VXuX7zJw5Duh15ORQCkmETav5bFU+QzsvG3x
IKFfwIPsg+Omu0aSCPQPPi6v1CYrLXbFpULw1uEomqPx/3Fn++bVJUX3E6I8
=lsr+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----