ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Overcoming IPv6 Security Threat


Get it straight I do not care what Dr. Joe says.  The system is flawed and insecure.
ISPs are bought and sold so their endorsement does nothing to enhance credibility.
I believe that since we have been around since 1993 as an ISP we are entitled to a
position in this matter.
Is Worldcom a largest ISP?  Einstein and Edison and Ford were laughed out of such
pigheaded groups.
OOPs I forgot Bill Gates being laughed at in college.  Nanog is silly.  Oh yeah I forgot
again about the Atomic scientist that were laughed at and ousted by a certain country.

Allan pull your head out of wherever it is, ostrich behaviour is unbecoming.

Eric

Allan Liska wrote:

> Eric and Others,
>
> Please keep in mind that Joe Baptista was laughed off Nanog when he
> presented his paper there.  If the network operators for the world's
> largest ISPs don't feel there are serious security flaws in IPv6, then
> perhaps the work of Mr. Baptista should be viewes as suspect.
>
> allan
> --
> Allan Liska
> allan@allan.org
> htt://www.allan.org
>
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2002 eric@hi-tek.com wrote:
>
> > Dear Dr. Joe and Alexander,
> >
> > It is completely and directly our responsibility to address these issues.
> > IPv6 is a dangerous and onerous debacle thrust upon us by people who could not
> > recognize failure and then when they did, covered it up with lies and deceit.  How
> > addresses resolve and our security is completely within our purview.
> > Alexander, who is paying you?  Or are you just ignorant?  How could resolutions of
> > domain names not be within the GA mandate?  Why don't you just get a IPv6 and
> > check out your security levels and let someone hack you in ten minutes or monitor
> > your connection.  Is security of domain names germane to the DNSO?
> >
> > Yikes!
> > eric
> >
> > Joe Baptista wrote:
> >
> > > Alexander I disagree - these issues of are importance to the GA.
> > >
> > > As a member I'm concerned about whats happening to internet protocol
> > > number - the attempted commercialization etc.  So should the membership of
> > > the GA be very concerned - the ASO lists amount to not much more then
> > > window dressing.  the people who these changes will afect are here.
> > >
> > > regards
> > > joe baptista
> > >
> > > On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Alexander Svensson wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello Joe,
> > > >
> > > > this is stuff for the ASO policy mailing list.
> > > > Please stick to DNSO issues on the DNSO list.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > /// Alexander
> > > >
> > > > At 12.09.2002 10:37, Joe Baptista wrote:
> > > > >Thanks to everyone who helped out.
> > > > >
> > > > >cheers
> > > > >joe baptista
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>http://www.circleid.com/articles/2533.asp
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Overcoming IPv6 Security Threat
> > > > >>
> > > > >>September 12, 2002  |  By Joe Baptista
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Technology rags and industry pundits see IPv6 (Internet Protocol version
> > > > >>6) as the future of networking, but Daniel Golding a participant of the
> > > > >>North American Network Operators' Group (NANOG) thinks it's a "solution in
> > > > >>search of a problem". Many others have argued IPv6 is a problem in itself
> > > > >>and it is unlikely the protocol will gain wide acceptance in the short
> > > > >>term.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>IPv6 does solve many of the problems with the current version of IPv4
> > > > >>(Internet Protocol version 4). Its purpose is to expand address space and
> > > > >>fix the IPv4 address depletion problem, which many techies claim, was due
> > > > >>to mismanagement. The industry's goal is to use the very large address
> > > > >>allocation pool in IPv6 to expand the capabilities of the Internet to
> > > > >>enable a variety of peer-to-peer and mobile applications including
> > > > >>cellular phone technology and home networking.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>IPv6, a suite of protocols for the network layer, uses IPv4 gateways to
> > > > >>interconnect IPv6 nodes and comes prepackaged with some popular operating
> > > > >>systems. This includes almost all Unix flavors, some Windows versions and
> > > > >>Mac OS. Some vendors offer upgrades to older operating systems. Trumpet
> > > > >>Software International in Tasmania Australia manufactures a Trumpet
> > > > >>Winsock version that upgrades old Windows 95/98 and NT systems to the
> > > > >>current IPv6 standard.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>IPv6 has suffered bad press over privacy issues. Jim Fleming, the inventor
> > > > >>of IPv8, a competing protocol, sees many hazards and privacy flaws in
> > > > >>existing IPv6 implementations. IPv6 address space in some cases uses an ID
> > > > >>(identifier) derived from your hardware or phone "that allows your packets
> > > > >>to be traced back to your PC or cell-phone" said Fleming. Potential abuse
> > > > >>to user privacy exists as a hardware ID wired into the IPv6 protocol can
> > > > >>be used to determine the manufacturer, make and model number, and value of
> > > > >>the hardware equipment being used. Fleming warns users to think twice
> > > > >>before they buy themselves a used Laptop computer and inherit all the
> > > > >>prior surfing history of the previous user!
> > > > >>
> > > > >>IPv6 uses 128 bits to provide addressing, routing, and identification
> > > > >>information on a computer interface or network card. The 128 bits are
> > > > >>divided into the left 64 and the right 64. Some IPv6 systems use the right
> > > > >>64 bits to store an IEEE defined global identifier (EUI64). This
> > > > >>identifier is composed of company id value assigned to a manufacturer by
> > > > >>the IEEE Registration Authority. The 64-bit identifier is a concatenation
> > > > >>of the 24-bit company identification value and a 40-bit extension
> > > > >>identifier assigned by the organization with that company identification
> > > > >>assignment. The 48-bit MAC address of your network interface card may also
> > > > >>be used to make up the EUI64.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>In the early stages of IPv6 development, Bill Frezza a General Partner
> > > > >>with the venture capital firm, Adams Capital Management warned software
> > > > >>developers that if privacy issues are not properly addressed, the
> > > > >>migration to IPv6 "will blow up in their face"! Leah Gallegos agrees that
> > > > >>while "expanding the address space is necessary the use of the address for
> > > > >>ID and tracking is horrific". Gallegos the operator of the top-level
> > > > >>domain .BIZ and a Director of the Top Level Domain Association cautions
> > > > >>network administrators that they should refuse to implement IPv6 unless
> > > > >>these issues are properly addressed.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Privacy concerns prompted the creation of new standards, which provide
> > > > >>privacy extensions to IPv6 devices. Thomas Narten and Track Draves of
> > > > >>Microsoft Research published a procedure to ensure privacy of IPv6 users.
> > > > >>Narten, IBM's technical lead on IPv6 and an Area Director for the Internet
> > > > >>Engineering Task Force (IETF), agrees "IPv6 address can, in some cases,
> > > > >>include an identifier derived from a hardware address". But Narten points
> > > > >>out that a hardware address is not required. "In cases where using a
> > > > >>permanent identifier is a problem", said Narten "RFC 3041 addresses should
> > > > >>be used".
> > > > >>
> > > > >>RFC 3041 titled "Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address
> > > > >>Autoconfiguration in IPv6" was published this past January 2001 by the
> > > > >>IETF. It is an algorithm developed jointly by Narten and Draves which
> > > > >>generates randomized interface identifiers and temporary addressees during
> > > > >>a user session. This would eliminate the concerns privacy advocates have
> > > > >>with IPv6.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Unfortunately RFC 3041 is not widely implemented. But Narten expects major
> > > > >>vendors to incorporate his privacy standard and offered that Microsoft
> > > > >>implemented privacy extensions "and apparently intends to make it part of
> > > > >>their standard stuff". Narten also assisted in the drafting of
> > > > >>recommendations for some second and third generation cellular phones
> > > > >>recently approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering
> > > > >>Group. That document recommends that RFC 3041 be implemented as part of
> > > > >>cellular phone technology but he did not know what direction cell phones
> > > > >>manufacturers were taking. "I suspect that client vendors will generally
> > > > >>implement it because of the potential bad PR if they don't" said Narten.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Another obstacle raised by NANOG operators is that there is currently no
> > > > >>commercial demand for IPv6 at this time. Dave Israel, a Data Network
> > > > >>Engineer and regular participant on NANOG lists, sees no immediate demand
> > > > >>for IPv6 services. "The only people who ask me about IPv6", said Israel
> > > > >>"are people who have heard something about it from some tech-magazine and
> > > > >>want the newest thing". Israel says he sees no commercial demand for a v6
> > > > >>backbone.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Daniel Golding, another NANOG participant agrees, "v6 deployment is being
> > > > >>encouraged by some countries, and the spread of 3G (cellular technology)
> > > > >>is helping things along, but we have yet to see really widespread v6
> > > > >>deployments anywhere". Golding sees major backbone networks deploying IPv6
> > > > >>when it makes economic sense for them to do so. "Right now", said Golding
> > > > >>"there is no demand and no revenue upside. I don't expect this to change
> > > > >>in the near future".
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Most on NANOG agree the roadblock seems to be a lack of ISPs that offer
> > > > >>IPv6 services. Stephen Sprunk, a Network Design Consultant with Cisco's
> > > > >>Advanced Services group sees the "greater adoption of always-on broadband
> > > > >>access will be the necessary push" to get IPv6 off the ground. "Enterprise
> > > > >>networks will not be the driver for ISPs to go to IPv6" said Sprunk and
> > > > >>"NAT is too entrenched". Network Address Translation (NAT) is a method of
> > > > >>connecting multiple computers to the Internet (or any other IP network)
> > > > >>using one IPv4 address.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Vint Cerf senior vice president of architecture & technology at WorldCom
> > > > >>has been using IPv6 for about four years. IPv6 has been a key element for
> > > > >>some of WorldCom's Government customers. Cerf thinks IPv6 supporters have
> > > > >>a lot of work ahead to achieve successful deployment of the protocol. He
> > > > >>expects "that over the next several years we will see a lot of consumer
> > > > >>devices set up to work with IPv6" and "cell phones are likely candidates,
> > > > >>as are radio-enabled PDAs".
> > > > >>
> > > > >>-EOF
> > > > >
> > > > >The dot.GOD Registry, Limited
> > > > >http://www.dot-god.com/
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> >

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>