[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
James Hess wrote:
>
>
> Fortunately, the IPv6 address space is so large and sparse, that
> scanning it would be quite a feat, even if a random outside attacker
> already knew for a fact that a certain /64 probably contains a
> vulnerable host.
All I need to do is run a popular web site on the IPv6 Internet, and I
get all the addresses of connected hosts I want. That
address-space-scanning is hard is nearly irrelevant.
Matthew Kaufman
- References:
- Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
- From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
- the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
- From: johnl at iecc.com (John R. Levine)
- the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
- From: andy at nosignal.org (Andy Davidson)
- the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
- From: matthew at matthew.at (Matthew Kaufman)
- the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
- From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu)
- the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
- From: jlewis at lewis.org (Jon Lewis)
- the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
- From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu)
- the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
- From: jlewis at lewis.org (Jon Lewis)
- the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
- From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu)
- the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
- From: jlewis at lewis.org (Jon Lewis)
- the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
- From: mysidia at gmail.com (James Hess)