On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 09:41:34PM +0800, Wang Hui wrote:
>
> > > From this accident, we can see the weakness of our current network.
> > > But I wonder if in the next-generation network, we can avoid such
> > > kind of worm-attacking?
> >
> > No. Go sue Microsoft for deliberately making worm/virus
> > propagation platforms.
> >
> > Internet security is at the end-nodes, not in the network!
>
> So I think we are also in need of making the network itself safe.
Of course, but it does not make a difference for worm/virus type of
threats whether they are transported safely/securily or not. An
encrypted virus/worm is still a virus/worm.
> Why not make the transporting system more safe ?
Against what precisely? Of course, network integrity is important but
these worms/viruses operate at the application layer. So far, there is
no such thing as a virus/worm IP packet. However you may open up for
such if you make the network more complex/intelligent/active/whatever.
> I think that simple network and complex end nodes will be a big risk in the new
>world.
Sure, but that is not solved by making the network also complex.
Feico.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
