From owner-cvs-all Mon Jun 18 15:38:38 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from Awfulhak.org (gw.Awfulhak.org [217.204.245.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A50737B401; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 15:38:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brian@Awfulhak.org) Received: from hak.lan.Awfulhak.org (root@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org [172.16.0.12]) by Awfulhak.org (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f5IMaLF16557; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 23:36:21 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from brian@lan.Awfulhak.org) Received: from hak.lan.Awfulhak.org (brian@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hak.lan.Awfulhak.org (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f5IMaKh18305; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 23:36:20 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from brian@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org) Message-Id: <200106182236.f5IMaKh18305@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.3.1 01/18/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Robert Watson Cc: mi@aldan.algebra.com, kris@obsecurity.org, brian@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, brian@Awfulhak.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/ppp ccp.c ccp.h command.c deflate.c fsm.c fsm.h ip.c mppe.c ppp.8 pred.c In-Reply-To: Message from Robert Watson of "Mon, 18 Jun 2001 15:16:31 EDT." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 23:36:20 +0100 From: Brian Somers Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 mi@aldan.algebra.com wrote: > > > > Only if you trust microsoft not to have screwed up the crypto, like > > > they usually do with their protocols. > > > > Well, I'm only planning to use the FreeBSD implementation of the > > protocol, which, was done from scratch and audited. Or was it not? > > Security failures can happen in at least two components here: (1) protocol > design, and (2) implementation of the protocol. Microsoft was clearly > involved in step (1), and probably heavily influenced step (2) by virtue > of their own implementation choices. In the past, Microsoft has > demonstrated their ability to fail in both categories (1) and (2). That > said, both categories of failures are widespread: the SSH protocol has had > protocol design failures, and SSH implementations have likewise had > implementation errors. You're making it all sound terribly bleak... :) > Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project > robert@fledge.watson.org NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services -- Brian Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour ! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message