| 1 |
Hi Florian, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
As I understand it, this 'rediscovery' is more to do with the research |
| 4 |
indicating that previous estimates of the time required to carry out a |
| 5 |
RST attack were over-estimated. This paper suggests the attack can be |
| 6 |
completed in a matter of minutes / hours rather than years. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
-Ronan |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Florian Weimer wrote: |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> Devon <devon@×××××.org> writes: |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> > Perhaps I am missing something obvious, but how do others rehashing prior |
| 16 |
> > research make one not want to publish their new original research? |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> It goes unnoticed the first time, so no countermeasures are |
| 19 |
> implemented. The second time, there is a media frenzy, with rather |
| 20 |
> aimless reconfiguring etc. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> However, I'm sure that most of this rediscovery is truly indepedent. |
| 23 |
> So holding back the information doesn't help much. But the situation |
| 24 |
> is surely frustrating. If you don't present your discovery as the end |
| 25 |
> of the Net as we know it, hardly anyone will listen. If you |
| 26 |
> exaggerate a bit, things go out quickly out of control. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> -- |
| 29 |
> Current mail filters: many dial-up/DSL/cable modem hosts, and the |
| 30 |
> following domains: atlas.cz, bigpond.com, postino.it, tiscali.co.uk, |
| 31 |
> tiscali.cz, tiscali.it, voila.fr. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> -- |
| 34 |
> gentoo-security@g.o mailing list |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
______________________________________________________________________ |
| 40 |
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. |
| 41 |
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email |
| 42 |
______________________________________________________________________ |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
gentoo-security@g.o mailing list |
Archives