From: Alex van den Bogaerdt (alexergens.op.het.net)
Date: Thu Jan 15 2004 - 06:07:29 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 12:06:35PM +0100, Pierre Beyssac wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 11:22:00AM +0100, Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote:
> > If this analogy is made, the logical conclusion is that IP datagrams
> > keep their source address while the ethernet frames, used to transport
> > those IP datagrams, are being built with the source address of the
> > forwarding gateway.
>
> And that is not known to have any beneficial effect on network
> security. So I fail to see why the equivalent in email is purported
> by some to help solve the spam problem.

Not checking the source address is known to have become a security threat.
Think man in the middle attacks, and evesdropping.

> Actually, the repeated assumption that authenticating senders would
> solve the spam problem seems logically flawed to me. The only sure
> thing in authenticating the sender is that we will get authenticated
> spam.

It does not stop spam. It stops impersonation.

cheers,
Alex
--
begin sig
http://www.googlism.com/index.htm?ism=alex+van+den+bogaerdt&type=1
This message was produced without any <iframe tags

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]