[ipv6hackers] "Stick to limited IPv6 deployments, businesses warned"

[Karl Auer]

On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 23:39 +0200, Marc Heuse wrote:
> > In short, how likely is this particular problem, RA flooding, to
> > actually be a problem in practice?
> as long as you stay in your home or office, the chance should be
> pretty small.
> when you go to a conference, the chance rises, and if its a security
> conference, it gets pretty high ... its the mobile user who is at
> risk.

It's all about risk assessment - the interplay between the likelihood of
actual loss, the amount of likely actual loss, the cost of preventing
that loss, and the cost of making good that loss.

With this particular attack, the equation seems pretty clear. There is
low risk of the attack occurring, a low amount of loss likely even if
the attack occurs, the attack is limited to a single subnet which must
*already be compromised*, there are likely preventions in development in
the relatively short term, and the cost of repair is low even if the
attack does occur.

So lets NOT hold this one up as a shining example of why not to proceed
with IPv6 implementation and deployment.

Regards, K.

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Karl Auer (kauer at biplane.com.au)
http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer
http://www.biplane.com.au/blog

GPG fingerprint: AE1D 4868 6420 AD9A A698 5251 1699 7B78 4EEE 6017
Old fingerprint: DA41 51B1 1481 16E1 F7E2 B2E9 3007 14ED 5736 F687