nanog mailing list archives
Re: Network security on multiple levels (was Re: NYT covers China cyberthreat)
From: "Scott Weeks" <surfer () mauigateway com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 22:03:41 -0800
--- smb () cs columbia edu wrote: From: Steven Bellovin <smb () cs columbia edu> An amazing percentage of "private" lines are pseudowires, and neither you nor your telco salesdroid can know or tell; even the "real" circuits are routed through DACS, ATM switches, and the like. This is what link encryptors are all about; use them. --------------------------------------------------------- I would sure be interested in hearing about hands-on operational experiences with encryptors. Recent experiences have left me with a sour taste in my mouth. blech! scott
Current thread:
- Re: Network security on multiple levels (was Re: NYT covers China cyberthreat) Scott Weeks (Feb 20)
- Re: Network security on multiple levels (was Re: NYT covers China cyberthreat) Jack Bates (Feb 21)
- Re: Network security on multiple levels (was Re: NYT covers China cyberthreat) Christopher Morrow (Feb 21)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Network security on multiple levels (was Re: NYT covers China cyberthreat) Warren Bailey (Feb 21)
- Re: Network security on multiple levels (was Re: NYT covers China cyberthreat) Jack Bates (Feb 21)