BGP IP prefix hijack detection times

2017-02-26 Thread Nagarjun Govindraj via NANOG
Hi Nanog, what are the detection times for BGP IP prefix hijack detection systems adopted by community members/operators (if any) ? Regards, Nagarjun

RE: Cellular enabled console server

2017-02-26 Thread nanog_maillinglist
Hi. I use lots of opengears boxes - mainly the Console Manager range 41xx then 71xx for "big location" with more than 8 consoles needed 550x when it's less than 8. We use them only as out-of-band access when either we have inband pbm or when a intervention is risky - so no fancy feature is need

Re: Cellular enabled console server

2017-02-26 Thread David Bass
I tried to build one in the past, but didn't have much success. Anyone successfully built some and willing to give details? > On Feb 26, 2017, at 9:07 AM, nanog_maillinglist wrote: > > Hi. > > I use lots of opengears boxes - mainly the Console Manager range 41xx then > 71xx for "big location

Re: Cellular enabled console server

2017-02-26 Thread Jared Mauch
I've been toying with the FreeTSERV stuff. Ping me if you are interested in some boards Jared Mauch > On Feb 26, 2017, at 10:48 AM, David Bass wrote: > > I tried to build one in the past, but didn't have much success. Anyone > successfully built some and willing to give details? > >> On Feb

Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble

2017-02-26 Thread Patrick W. Gilmore
On Feb 25, 2017, at 17:44, Jimmy Hess wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore >> wrote: >> >> For instance, someone cannot take Verisign’s root cert and create a cert >> which collides >> on SHA-1. Or at least we do not think they can. We’ll know in 90 days when >> Google

Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble

2017-02-26 Thread Nick Hilliard
Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > I repeat something I've said a couple times in this thread: If I can > somehow create two docs with the same hash, and somehow con someone > into using one of them, chances are there are bigger problems than a > SHA1 hash collision. This collision turns a theoretical as

Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble

2017-02-26 Thread Brett Frankenberger
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:18:48PM -0500, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > > I repeat something I've said a couple times in this thread: If I can > somehow create two docs with the same hash, and somehow con someone > into using one of them, chances are there are bigger problems than a > SHA1 hash coll

Re: Cellular enabled console server

2017-02-26 Thread Mitcheltree, Harold B
http://opengear.com/solutions/smart-out-band-management Out-of-Band Management - Opengear opengear.com Smart OOB™ is out-of-band access, management, auto-response and remediation for network resilience raised to a new level. The continued

Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble

2017-02-26 Thread Matt Palmer
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 05:41:47PM -0600, Brett Frankenberger wrote: > On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:18:48PM -0500, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > > I repeat something I've said a couple times in this thread: If I can > > somehow create two docs with the same hash, and somehow con someone > > into using

RE: SHA1 collisions proven possisble

2017-02-26 Thread Keith Medcalf
On Sunday, 26 February, 2017 19:16 Matt Palmer said: > On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 05:41:47PM -0600, Brett Frankenberger wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:18:48PM -0500, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > > > I repeat something I've said a couple times in this thread: If I can > > > somehow create two

Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble

2017-02-26 Thread Randy Bush
> Git prefixes blobs with its own data. You're not going to break git with a > SHA-1 binary collision. http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2017-February/031623.html

Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble

2017-02-26 Thread Patrick W. Gilmore
Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. On Feb 26, 2017, at 21:16, Matt Palmer wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 05:41:47PM -0600, Brett Frankenberger wrote: >>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:18:48PM -0500, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: >>> I repeat something I've said a couple times in t

Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble

2017-02-26 Thread Eitan Adler
On 26 February 2017 at 22:15, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. > > On Feb 26, 2017, at 21:16, Matt Palmer wrote: >>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 05:41:47PM -0600, Brett Frankenberger wrote: On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:18:48PM -0500, Patrick W. Gilm

Re: SHA1 collisions proven possisble

2017-02-26 Thread Matt Palmer
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 01:15:28AM -0500, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > On Feb 26, 2017, at 21:16, Matt Palmer wrote: > > Even better: I want a CA cert. I convince a CA to issue me a regular, > > end-entity cert for `example.com` (which I control) in such a way that I can > > generate another cert