also sprach Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx <Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx> [2004.03.16.2215
+0100]:
> The obvious is that the usual DNS spoofing hacks often only have a
> few milliseconds for you to stick in a bogus packet before the real DNS
> answers - here you have entire seconds to play with.
Sure, you do. However, the intersection between the set of protocols
my internal clients speak with each other and the set of protocols
allowed to leave the network by the firewall equals to SSH only. And
I have SSH configured with StrictHostKeyChecking, so I see no
danger.
> I know you well enough to know that you almost certainly Got It Right.
Thanks for the flowers.
> For every one of you, there's probably hundreds of these Getting It Wrong.
>
> Bet there's a bunch over at the Dept of the Interior. :)
Yeah sure, I see you point. I just oppose to the overgeneralised
claim that RFC 1918 in external DNS == Bad. It's a bad idea unless
you know what you are doing. And I claim the latter.
--
Martin F. Krafft Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
Ph.D. Student Department of Information Technology
Email: krafft@xxxxxxxx University of Zurich
Tel: +41.(0)1.63-54323 Andreasstrasse 15, Office 2.20
http://ailab.ch/people/krafft CH-8050 Zurich, Switzerland
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
"in just seven days, i can make you a man!"
-- the rocky horror picture show
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature