[148059] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Cryptography] DNSSEC = completely unnecessary?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Wouters)
Wed Nov 6 17:39:04 2013
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 17:02:10 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Wouters <paul@cypherpunks.ca>
To: Ben Laurie <ben@links.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAG5KPzzk7w627w5y9dvsL-Xb=svBOJ-s=Kce_x=RxEuuH8CqzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Cryptography Mailing List <cryptography@metzdowd.com>,
Kelly John Rose <iam@kjro.se>
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
On Wed, 6 Nov 2013, Ben Laurie wrote:
>>> How did DNS get this magic un-MITM-able property?
>>>
>>> Surely if the GoC wants to cause nohats.ca to be modified, for some
>>> specific target(s), they can do that?
>>
>> He didn't say it isn't MITM-able. He said that it cannot do so
>> invisibly. In his model Eve would be able to perform a MITM attack, but
>> it would be immediately apparent to any party since the public
>> information would have to change.
>
> I got what he said. Its not true.
I could send my DNS queries over tor or over an IPsec VPN to some resolver.
You are asuming my DNS goes out my network port in a way you can read
it and with private key of the root or TLD sent me custom answers.
Paul
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
