On 06/08/2012 01:59 PM, Lee Dilkie wrote:
> so you say it's not as hard to scan an IPv6 network as the raw math
> would indicate but it's still a lot harder than scanning an IPv4 network.
The point is that is *feasible*. -- Computers don't complain about doing
"harder" work.
> Still... where in the article does it say anything about "vast address
> space... enables attacks"?
>
> The title and the article don't match.
I might agree. The title was changed pre-publication. -- My original
title was something along the lines of "Host scanning in IPv6 networks".
> so you say it's not as hard to scan an IPv6 network as the raw math
> would indicate but it's still a lot harder than scanning an IPv4 network.
The point is that is *feasible*. -- Computers don't complain about doing
"harder" work.
> Still... where in the article does it say anything about "vast address
> space... enables attacks"?
>
> The title and the article don't match.
I might agree. The title was changed pre-publication. -- My original
title was something along the lines of "Host scanning in IPv6 networks".
Cheers,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont (at) si6networks (dot) com [email concealed]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
[ reply ]