Masataka Ohta пишет:
Yes.Basil Dolmatov wrote:There are a lot of deficiencies in PKI, but at present time I can see no alternative for establishing trust in loosely connected and large systems. If there is one, please advise.The problem of PKI is that its security socially depends on a loose connection of a chain of adjacent CAs. In other word, PKI, including DNSSEC, is not secure end to end. As the chain is breakable at component CAs (trusted third parties are not very trustable), there is no point to work unreasonably hard to cryptographically strengthen links between adjacent CAs. So, PKI is useless when there already are loose but reasonable social security.There are no trust relationships between my ISP and your ISP.Your and my ISPs are loosely connected by a chain of social trust relationships between adjacent ISPs, which is why we can exchange packets over the Internet No. Without any security at all.with reasonable security. No garanties of delivery, no origin validation, no path validation, etc. "social trust relationship" can arrange packet delivery but cannot arrange any responsibility for proper delivery. I as have said before the picture you are drawing reflects Internet 20 years ago, when all participants cooperated and worked on the benefit of the network. No _not_all_ participants have this paradigm in the network and the share of those who do not participate in any "social trust relationships" but simply use the network in the manner they feel good for achieving their goals (sometimes criminal ones) is increasing continuously. With no security at all. Otherwise we would have never heard about "cache poisoning".Adjacent zones have reasonable social trust relationships between them, through which network, your resolver and my server are loosely connected with reasonable security. dol@ P.S. Just to mention: I liked Internet 20 years ago much more and a bit nostalgic about it. |
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf