From owner-freebsd-security  Mon Feb 27 02:03:10 1995
Return-Path: security-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id CAA14177 for security-outgoing; Mon, 27 Feb 1995 02:03:10 -0800
Received: from UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU (root@UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU [129.7.1.11]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with SMTP id CAA14040; Mon, 27 Feb 1995 02:01:31 -0800
Received: from Taronga.COM by UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU with UUCP id AA21725
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5); Mon, 27 Feb 1995 03:48:59 -0600
Received: by bonkers.taronga.com (smail2.5p) id AA21807; 27 Feb 95 01:24:13 CST (Mon)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bonkers.taronga.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) with SMTP id BAA21804; Mon, 27 Feb 1995 01:24:12 -0600
Message-Id: <199502270724.BAA21804@bonkers.taronga.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: bonkers.taronga.com: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@freefall.cdrom.com>
Cc: Mike Grupenhoff <kashmir@umiacs.UMD.EDU>, hackers@freefall.cdrom.com,
        security@freefall.cdrom.com
Subject: Re: key exchange for rlogin/telnet services? 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 26 Feb 95 21:20:34 PST."
             <28195.793862434@freefall.cdrom.com> 
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.4.1 7/21/94
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 1995 01:24:08 -0600
From: Peter da Silva <peter@bonkers.taronga.com>
Sender: security-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> I won't have control over all the sites I want to use.  Encrypting my
> entire session gives me much more flexibility over what I can do
> during that session, and it means I only have to really have it set up
> on two reasonably secure hosts to buy a large measure of security for
> that "first hop" I've so little control over.  I have considered S/key
> and the other currently available options.  They're truly
> insufficient.

How about my second suggestion then... swIPe? It'll even generate fake
traffic to keep people from doing traffic analysis on you.