Abstract
I’d like to shift views a little bit, and think about the problem that we usually focus on, which is building good defences, from the point of view of how to attack effectively. We tend to focus on the defending problem, for example, the confidentiality of my traffic, and in the mainstream and conservative approach to security that we all know and love we make very generous assumptions about the adversary: we are willing to assume that the adversary gets a copy of every packet we send, it can alter some of the bits in real time, and has unlimited computational power, etc. As a result of that conservative assumption, we ask to have solutions that assume that the network is unlimitedly hostile. And, if you want security, we must accept nothing less than end-to-end security, and if we don’t have to end-to-end security we simply assume that it is insecure, because it would be very silly to depend on anything less than this very reasonable conservative assumption.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Blaze, M. (2007). Listen Too Closely and You May Be Confused. In: Christianson, B., Crispo, B., Malcolm, J.A., Roe, M. (eds) Security Protocols. Security Protocols 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4631. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77156-2_31
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77156-2_31
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-77155-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-77156-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)