White House Sounds Call For New Internet Standards
WHITE HOUSE SOUNDS CALL FOR NEW INTERNET STANDARDS The Bush administration's cyber security czar, Richard Clarke, said it might be time to replace the "creaky, cranky" 20-year-old protocols that drive the Internet with standards better able to accommodate a flood of new wireless devices. Wireless devices, it is feared, may introduce large security holes to the network. The White House is working with the private sector to draft a national plan to secure the country's most vital computer networks from cyber attack. The plan, expected to be released September 18, will include several policy recommendations for wireless security. Clarke stated that the administration had an obligation to take an active role in ensuring the security of the Internet, especially since nearly 81 percent of major businesses today use, or plan to use, wireless networks. [SOURCE: The Washington Post, AUTHOR: Brian Krebs] <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22535-2002Jul30.html>
Steve wrote:
The Bush administration's cyber security czar, Richard Clarke, said it might be time to replace the "creaky, cranky" 20-year-old protocols that drive the Internet with standards better able to accommodate a flood of new wireless devices. Wireless devices, it is feared, may introduce large security holes to the network. The White House is working with the private sector to draft a national plan to secure the country's most vital computer networks from cyber attack.
How about IPv6 with IPSEC? --Lucky
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Lucky Green wrote:
Clarke, said it might be time to replace the "creaky, cranky" 20-year-old protocols that drive the Internet with standards better able to accommodate a flood of new wireless devices. Wireless devices, it is feared, may introduce large security holes to the network. The White House is working with the private sector to draft a national plan to secure the country's most vital computer networks from cyber attack.
How about IPv6 with IPSEC?
Wireless is the canonical case for geographic routing. Addresses as static or dynamic positions in space (either mutual time of flight or deriving refinable position from connection constraints), packet routing as the crow flies, local-knowledge routing tables that only know about a few km space around you, almost no admin traffic. Plus, routing logic thin enough to fit into deep embedded footprint, or be cast in hardware for relativistic speed cut-through. IPv6 can't handle most this, especially on the scale required. There's point in going IPv6, but at the same time one must be aware that this is just a patch, not a fix.
participants (4)
-
Duncan Frissell -
Eugen Leitl -
Lucky Green -
Steve Schear