[arin-announce] IPv4 Address Space (fwd)

Tue Oct 28 23:21:11 UTC 2003

I think if program design criterion would change, to coding secure applications then
the problem would be reduced dramatically

-Henry

Petri Helenius <pete at he.iki.fi> wrote:

Matthew Kaufman wrote:

>End-to-end requires that people writing the software at the end learn about
>buffer overruns (and other data-driven access violations) or program using
>tools that prevent such things. It is otherwise an excellent idea.
>
> 
>
There is supposedly some magic going into this in the next "Service 
Pack" of a mentioned
major exploding Pinto. Not sure if it´s just flipping the joke of 
firewall on by default or something
more comprehensive/destructive like non-executable stack. Or a 
completely new invention like
bug free code :-)

>Unfortunately, the day that someone decided their poorly-designed machine
>and operating system would be safer sitting behind a "firewall" pretty much
>marked the end of universal end-to-end connectivity, and I don't see it
>coming back for a long long time. Probably not on this Internet. IPv6 or
>not.
> 
>
Last I checked most "firewall"s don´t make these machines safe, it might 
make them safer,
so only two out of three malwares hit them. Does not really help too much.

>Combine that with ISP pricing models (helped by registry policy) that
>encourage <=1 IP address per household, and the subsequent boom in NAT
>boxes, and the fate is probably sealed. 
>
> 
>
Here I´ve observed opposite trend, most ISP´s are getting rid of NATting 
because it´s failure
prone and expensive to implement and keep running.

Pete

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20031028/8390f002/attachment.html>