Tests done by a colleague show that, right now, the amount of inbound ipv6
traffic on his systems is none but I can perfectly understand your concerns
even if they should apply only to the network stack itself, as the daemons
listening to v6 should be the same that listen to v4, once configured
On 15/02/11 12:53, Ed W wrote:
>
>>> Tests done by a colleague show that, right now, the amount of inbound
>>> ipv6
>>> traffic on his systems is none but I can perfectly understand your
>>> concerns
>>> even if they should apply only to the network stack itself, as the
>>> daemons
>>> listening t
I can also verify that I used ipv6 to get the cert with he.net (with them as
the tunnel broker) for whatever that's worth.
-- Matthew Thode
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 07:17, Tom Hendrikx wrote:
> On 15/02/11 12:53, Ed W wrote:
> >
> >>> Tests done by a colleague show that, right now, the amount of
Hi!
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 06:10:52PM -0500, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> >> I don't think there are any issues with it. The only argument I know of
> >> is that it increases the attack surface for a feature that 0% + epsilon
> >> of people use.
> > Tests done by a colleague show that, right now, t
I run full dual stacked on my network at home just fine, ip6tables and
filtering at the gateway work for me. As far as IPV6 specific
vulnerabilities, I think that would be the price to pay (if we decide to go
down this route).
-- Matthew Thode
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 10:52, Alex Efros wrote:
>
On 15/02/11 16:52, Alex Efros wrote:
[...snip...]
>
> Keeping this in mind, I think it have sense to avoid enabling IPv6 by
> default on hardened until IPv6 will be wide used/tested/hacked on
> non-hardened systems for some time or until it become critical feature
> required for normal operation o
On 02/15/2011 10:52 AM, Alex Efros wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Quick Google and CVE searches shows there was many enough vulnerabilities
> in all OSes (including Linux) IPv6 stack implementations. And, as we all
> know, most of vulnerabilities will be found only after product become
> popular and wide used,
On 02/09/11 21:09, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Jan Kundrat asked on gentoo-dev why hardened removes ipv6 from its
> profiles. To be honest, I see no good reason. I want to add it back.
> Before I do, does anyone in the community know of any issues with
> hardened + ipv6? I don't
El 15/02/11 16:52, Alex Efros escribió:
> Hi!Quick Google and CVE searches shows there was many enough vulnerabilities
> in all OSes (including Linux) IPv6 stack implementations. And, as we all
> know, most of vulnerabilities will be found only after product become
> popular and wide used, which do
