In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Dawson, Peter D" writes:
>
>
>->-----Original Message-----
>->From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>->Sent: Friday, May 26, 2000 6:27 PM
>->To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>->Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>->Subject: RE: Storage over Ethernet/IP
>
>->The point being made, remade and made again here is:
>->- Any protocol that offers no means of countering such
>->security threats is
>->broken, and should not be considered for standardization.
>
>->It is perfectly possible that after conducting a threat and modality
>->analysis, one ends up with saying that hardware-accelerated
>->IPsec using
>->host identities is adequate for the scenarios involving
>->otherwise-unprotected Internet links, and that a mode with no
>->protection is
>->adequate when the media is physically secured.
>->
>->But the analysis MUST BE DONE.
>->
>
>is vulnerability and threat analysis part of the
>standardization process ??
>
Yes, in order to come up with a reasonable security considerations
section. (Clearly, much of it is site-specific. But the protocol
developers can't ignore it.)
--Steve Bellovin
