[LINK] What's a reasonable level of code-checking?

[rchirgwin at ozemail.com.au]

Rick,

A good starting point is to read the writings of Geoff Houston, 
http://www.potaroo.net/papers/index.html.

Has several commentaries on IPv6.

RC

Rick Welykochy wrote:

>--- "Darryl (Dassa) Lynch" <dassa at dhs.org> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>The more protocols available, the less secure.  To be really secure, each
>>protocol would also be locked down to specific destinations.  A stateful
>>firewall which would also inspect the packets for known issues would also be
>>required to cut down on spoofing and middle man attacks.  Still not totally
>>secure but starting to get there.  The only really secure way is to have
>>direct connections to the destination without devices belonging to others
>>anywhere in the link.
>>
>>We compromise with security and cost.
>>    
>>
>
>That we do.
>
>I am an IPv6 agnostic (well, I believe IPv6 exists, but know little about the
>protocol). Can any Linkers fill me in here? I'm wondering if the new version
>of IP will provide more security, and how. I understand that encryption 
>is built into the protocol. How about higher level things like authentication
>and/or authorisation? Or is that simply asking too much of the IP layer?
>
>What I am fishing for is a mini-panacea for our current TCP/IP woes ;)
>Or does such a thing not exist due to the nature of "consumers" who, as we
>know, are easily socially engineered into making online blunders -- something
>technology can hardly save them from.
>
>cheers
>rickw
>
>
>Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 
>_______________________________________________
>Link mailing list
>Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
>http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>
>  
>