[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?
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010, Matthew Kaufman 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.
or troll popular IPv6 bittorent end points when that becomes popular.
Adrian
- References:
- 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)
- the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
- From: matthew at matthew.at (Matthew Kaufman)