Hi, Fernando I guess it all depends on the TV? e.g., I for one I'm not planning to throw it out just because Sony decided to quit pushing updates (which were never automatic for my set).I don't have a Sony TV, so I have a slightly different perspective.The essence of
Speaking of sales pitches (and IMHO): "Zero trust" is an oxymoron in all but
trivial operating environments.
(That's a blasé assertion anyway ... we're on to "observability" now!)
BobN
-Original Message-
From: OPSEC On Behalf Of Manfredi (US), Albert E
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2023
-Original Message-
From: Brian E Carpenter
> It's perfectly fine if a host chooses to block incoming packets for any
> reason whatever, including unknown extension headers. That's quite consistent
> with the *network* allowing permissionless innovation.
Right, but, as others
On 26-May-23 08:33, Manfredi (US), Albert E wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Tom Herbert
It's more than a preference to have host security, it is an absolute
requirement that each host provides security for its applications and users.
This requirement applies to SmartTVs,
On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 1:34 PM Manfredi (US), Albert E
wrote:
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Herbert
>
> > It's more than a preference to have host security, it is an absolute
> > requirement that each host provides security for its applications and
> > users. This requirement
-Original Message-
From: Tom Herbert
> It's more than a preference to have host security, it is an absolute
> requirement that each host provides security for its applications and users.
> This requirement applies to SmartTVs, SmartPhones, home computers, and pretty
> much all the
Tom,
> We've already had an attempt at IPv10 :-)
Indeed, we have!
Thanks,
Nalini Elkins
CEO and Founder
Inside Products, Inc.
www.insidethestack.com
(831) 659-8360
On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 08:15:33 AM PDT, Tom Herbert
wrote:
On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 7:05 AM
On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 7:05 AM nalini.elk...@insidethestack.com
wrote:
>
> Arnaud,
>
> First, nice to hear from you.
>
> Next, I think blocking EH without nuance or care is throwing out the baby
> with the bathwater.
>
> IMHO, if we have problems with EH because people have not carefully
>
On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 6:02 PM Manfredi (US), Albert E
wrote:
>
> -Original Message-
> From: ipv6 On Behalf Of Fernando Gont
>
> > Given the amount of things that get connected to the Net (smart bulbs,
> > refrigerators, etc.) -- and that will super-likely never receive security
> >
Arnaud,
First, nice to hear from you.
Next, I think blocking EH without nuance or care is throwing out the baby with
the bathwater.
IMHO, if we have problems with EH because people have not carefully considered
their use. I think if we do not make IPv6 an extensible and flexible
protocol, we
The IESG has received a request from the Operational Security Capabilities
for IP Network Infrastructure WG (opsec) to consider the following document:
- 'Attribution of Internet Probes'
as Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments
Hi Warren,
The new version is online, hope it addresses all your comments
(especially the security question).
Thanks again,
Justin
Forwarded Message
Subject: [OPSEC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsec-probe-attribution-05.txt
Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 02:52:05 -0700
From:
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories. This Internet-Draft is a work item of the Operational Security
Capabilities for IP Network Infrastructure (OPSEC) WG of the IETF.
Title : Attribution of Internet Probes
Authors : Éric Vyncke
Ok Eduard I recognise a bit of the epidermic reaction (after all I am half
latin blood) and missed the telco context because I see the drama in enterprise
context every single day!
Now ironically the example I took below was a telco!
But I buy your point … all good
> On 25 May 2023, at 07:58,
14 matches
Mail list logo
