[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: resistance to swamping attacks.

To: ipsec@TIS.COM
Subject: Re: resistance to swamping attacks.
From: "Kim L. Toms" <kim@morningstar.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 01:50:35 GMT
In-Reply-To: <199609200014.AA153248489@relay.hp.com>
References: <199609200000.RAA28145@toad.com><199609200014.AA153248489@relay.hp.com>
Reply-To: Kim Toms <kim@morningstar.com>
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com

I'm no expert in cryptography, but it seems to me that what is needed is
a function which is expensive for the originator of a packet to
calculate, but cheap for the receiver to verify.  This will make sure
that the source of a swamping attack must have a much larger CPU than
the receiver.  I don't know if there are any such functions, but perhaps
the cryptographically sophisticated among us could enlighten?

Follow-Ups:

Re: resistance to swamping attacks.

From: Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld@apollo.hp.com>

References:

Re: resistance to swamping attacks.

From: Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld@apollo.hp.com>

Prev by Date: Re: IPsec Minutes from Montreal
Next by Date: Re: IPSEC WG chairs unresponsive, disruptive, and biased
Prev by thread: Re: resistance to swamping attacks.
Next by thread: Re: resistance to swamping attacks.
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread