[Cryptography] IPsec DH parameters, other flaws

[William Allen Simpson]

On 7/22/20 2:20 PM, William Allen Simpson wrote:
> On 7/20/20 8:09 PM, Dan McDonald wrote:
>> I was there in the mid-90s, and we IPng-ers detested NAT, and thought it was
>> our mission in life to kill it dead. NATs were middleboxes that altered
>> packets and were an extra single-point-of-failure!  Also, we though NATs were
>> going to be easy targets for... wait for it... attackers, including-and-
>> especially state-sponsored ones!
>>
> 
> But some of us were very much in favor of firewalls.  The issue with NAT
> was altering packets.  Also, distributing security secrets to the NAT.
> 
Forgot to mention, not all of us hated NAT entirely.  Paul Francis was the
originator of NAT, RFC 1631, and was actively involved in SIPP (IPv6).