On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 10:14:24AM -0500, Adam Shostack wrote:
Actually, I'm unconvinced that even pipenet style padding is sufficient. Looking at the work on traffic analysis thats been done, we're in about 1970. We have one time pads (dc-nets), and some other stuff, but we don't have a DES to analyze. We have an adversary who has spent a long time learning how to do this well.
I'd prefer if people talked about PipeNet style traffic scheduling instead of PipeNet style traffic padding. What's really important to PipeNet security is that the timing of packets don't leak information, and padding is just a part of what's necessary to achieve that kind of timing. So I'd agree with you that padding by itself isn't sufficient, but I'd be interested in hearing more if you think PipeNet as a whole isn't sufficient.