On 8/15/14, Scheffenegger, Richard <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I just learned about an individual submission, which is probably of interest > not only to the members of these two WGs; > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kirsch-ietf-tcp-stealth-00 >
Hi, I'm one of the authors of the draft and I've cc'ed Christian who has been one of the driving forces behind the draft. > > On a first, casual glance, I am wondering if the authors have realized all > the implications of their suggestion; > This article we wrote may be of interest to you: http://www.heise.de/ct/artikel/NSA-GCHQ-The-HACIENDA-Program-for-Internet-Colonization-2292681.html (English) http://www.heise.de/ct/artikel/NSA-GCHQ-Das-HACIENDA-Programm-zur-Kolonisierung-des-Internet-2292574.html (German) > There seem to be at least two or three major issues that compromise either > the working and stability of TCP, or work against the intended > "stealthieness" of this modification (making it easy for an attacker to > identify such sessions, provided he is able to actively interfere with > segments in transit (ie. cause certain segments to be dropped). Could you expand on these thoughts a bit? > Nevertheless, it might be beneficial to discuss the generic idea in a wider > forum, among brighter minds than me. Thanks for bringing it up! All the best, Jacob _______________________________________________ Tcpinc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
