On Wed, 2 Jan 2002, Clifton Royston wrote:

> One of the dangers of relying on INADDR, besides it becoming a nearly
> useless check with the Internet in its present state, is that if it
> *replaces* the raw IP address in logging, it allows an actual malicious
> attacker to trivially conceal their point of attack.  I'm surprised how
> many applications not only expect INADDR to be there but blindly rely
> on it if it is.

Example: sendmail. Only fixed4 years after I filed this behaviour as a
security issue.

Simlar statements can apply to the uuse of ident protocols. They are
only of use to the admin of the originating machine to determine if a
particular user has been naughty or if the machine is hacked. Anyone
relying on ident data on the receiving end is merely lucky if they
haven;t been burnt by it yet.

AB

Reply via email to