Re: Security statement

ike relucio (ike_relucio@cyberdude.com)
Tue, 2 Dec 1997 23:02:57 +0800


in order for anyone to be able to intercept any of your transmission from
point A to point B, they would need to know before hand the path that your
packets would take to reach your destination. But the path is only
determined when the packet it sent, doesn't it ? The protocols do not state
or guarantee that each packet will take the same route -- only that the
packet will reach the destination. This was one of the main considerations
when the internet was designed.

So the only points where your packets could conceivably be intercepted in
it's entirety would be that portion of the path that is fixed --- possibly
the first few legs of the journey as the packet leaves your computer and
goes to your ISP as well as the last few legs of the journey just before
reaching the destination.

Example, if, everytime a router received a packet, the router can choose to
pass it to one of two possible paths and the router does a good job at load
balancing, then the first router in the path gets 100% of the packets, the
second router gets only 50% because the packets are split between two
routers, the third gets only 25% because there are 4 possible routers that
could receive the packet, and so on .....Nice theory if it actually works
that way :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Hsiung <dr-bob@uchicago.edu>
To: CU-SEEME-L@cornell.edu <CU-SEEME-L@cornell.edu>
Date: Tuesday, December 02, 1997 3:04 PM
Subject: Security statement

>Listmates,
>
>Here's what I've drafted for a research protocol of ours. It's meant to
>address both email and CU-SeeMe security. We would only be connecting
>point-to-point. Would you consider this both accurate and understandable?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Bob
>
>>>>>
>Copies of e-mail might be saved on computers en route, and though it is
>understood that the privacy of e-mail should be respected, people with
>access (authorized or not) to those files would have access to the contents
>of those e-mails. Logs of the senders and recipients of e-mail may also be
>kept. With CU-SeeMe, however, data is not saved en route and logs of
>transmissions are not kept.
>
>Regular mail and telephone conversations might potentially be intercepted
>during the process of transmission. This is also true of Internet-based
>communications, even when they are not saved en route. Access to
>intermediary computers, as well as relatively sophisticated software,
>would, however, be required. Videoconferences must be segmented and
>digitized in order to be transmitted, so even if intercepted, they still
>would need to be re-transformed into audiovisual data and re-assembled in
>the correct sequence.
><<<<
>
>