This is pretty cybercomical. Changing the cyber-addresses all the
cybertime will cause a lot of cybertrouble, it sounds like. How a
cyberclient would manage to stay connected would be a hard thing, because
either the cyberclient would have to reestablish its connection all the
time (tcp connections are tied to a specific address/port pair), or the
cybersystem and cyberclient would have to use a proprietary cyberstack.
Besides, wouldn't the mac layer still stay the same, if it was on a LAN
segment? Wouldn't this be defeated if it were on a LAN and the attacking
machine just arped out every few seconds?
And yes, it could potentially use billions of cyber-addresses if the ip
authorities decided to give them nearly all of the available address
space. Cyberchance in hell.
Is it just me, or does the word "cyber" prepended to otherwise normal
legitimate words tend to remove large amounts of credibility? :) I don't
know why some journalists insist on adding that kind of fluff.
It's interesting, though. :)
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Eric Johnson wrote:
> From <http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,s2087257,00.html>:
>
> The new system can change the cyber-addresses
> on a network faster than once a second, cloaking
> them from all but authorized parties, said Victor
> Sheymov -- founder, president, and chief executive
> of Invicta Networks.
>
> ...
>
> Standard approaches to computer security rely on
> encryption, or data scrambling, plus devices such
> as firewalls aimed at screening out abnormal traffic
> patterns that look threatening.
>
> But any network protected this way is a sitting duck
> for a determined hacker, Invicta said. Instead, it
> puts the network in cybermotion through a
> continuous change of "Internet Protocol" addresses --
> the chain of digits underlying the Web to route traffic
> to its destination.
>
> The Invicta system uses special cards to link
> protected computers to a central control unit. It lets
> clients decide how often they wish to vary IP addresses
> and specify which applications may be accessed on
> their network. The number of IP addresses drawn on may
> be in the billions thanks to an artificial increase in
> cyberspace, Sheymov said.
>
> I've been pretty busy lately so this could have been discussed on
> this mailing list and I could easily have missed it.
>
> Anyway, changing ip addresses once a second would seem to
> make it pretty tough for DNS servers to keep up. And even tougher
> on maintaining a connection to the host.
>
> Eric Johnson
> -
> [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
>
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
