I don't think that is quite what Kaminsky was referring to. His methods were to detect when an ISP was altering data that went to its customers in ways that would benefit the ISP. In this case, unless only AT&T subscribers got the censored feed, it was just plain censorship, not "provider hostility," which I think is the phrase Kaminsky used. I do believe the worst case was when it would take some network insanity on the level of what Kaminsky was suggesting to even detect the censorship. Muted audio in a webcast isn't exactly subtle, so at least we know that some censoring is going on.

 - Nexox

Stack Smasher wrote:

If anyone out there was doubting Dan Kaminsky at Blackhat/DefCon this year, it has already started.

http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSN091821320070809?feedType=RSS&rpc=22&sp=true

--
"If you see me laughing, you better have backups"


_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/



_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Reply via email to