Re: [dix] Agenda bashing
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dix] Agenda bashing
Eliot Lear <lear at cisco.com> writes:
> Eric Rescorla wrote:
>> That's *one* way to attack phishing (at least the current form).
>> There are others (cf. PwdHash)
>>
>
> I'm sorry, but PwdHash is not enough of a reference for me to
> understand,
http://crypto.stanford.edu/PwdHash/
It's the first hit in Google, FWIW.
> but I claim that the most *effective* way to prevent
> phishing is to demand that the server prove its identity enough to know
> the right question to ask of the client. If PwdHash covers this ground,
> then we agree.
It doesn't. It uses an entirely different technique.
I don't think it's profitable to argue about what "most effective"
is, but I don't agree that the mechanism you describe is the only
one.
-Ekr
_______________________________________________
dix mailing list
dix at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dix
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.