cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1995-02-06 - Re: “encrypt tcp connections” hacks

Header Data

From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@imsi.com>
To: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
Message Hash: 2feaff6e5a369b22ca5ade7e23e5ae9e0267400730b8805468d3c6107c902118
Message ID: <9502061025.AA03724@snark.imsi.com>
Reply To: <199502060431.UAA18798@largo.remailer.net>
UTC Datetime: 1995-02-06 10:26:23 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 02:26:23 PST

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 02:26:23 PST
To: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
Subject: Re: "encrypt tcp connections" hacks
In-Reply-To: <199502060431.UAA18798@largo.remailer.net>
Message-ID: <9502061025.AA03724@snark.imsi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Eric Hughes says:
> Perry advocates IPSP as an almost-panacea for Internet security.  I
> disagree.

Well, no; it doesn't fix things like mail for which the data needs to
be protected but not the link. However, I think I can answer some of
your other objections...

> TIA on netcom.

TIA is sort of a short term hack people are using to get around having
to have their administrators manage SLIP or PPP properly; I suspect
this difficulty will vanish with time.

> It's fallacious to argue simply that everyone's going to be _on_ the
> Internet soon enough anyway,

Well, IBM of all firms is trying very hard to make sure you are, and
Microsoft is even investing in UUNet to try to make sure of it, too.

Remember, by the way, that PPP is far cheaper per customer than shell
accounts, even though moronic providers right now don't make it look
that way.

IP is ultimately designed to be a proxy protocol that will work over
anything -- stuff like TIA simply gets around temporary mental
difficulties among providers in seeing things that way...<

Perry

Thread