Re: timestamp based protocol
- From: stan <stan@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 08:29:34 -0800
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:55:27 +0100, "cicap" <cicap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>In a session-key distribution protocol, Bob should check that:
>1) "tB - tA" is in the acceptance window range.
>2) tA is different from all other received timestamps.
>
>I don't understand point 2!
>
>What could do an enemy without point 2??
>
>(I ask that because I am a student and my book is not very clear at this
>point..)
>
>Thanks..
>
Possibly they are using the timestamp tA in the generation of a nonce
or IV, although this seems ill-advised.
Or they are trying to avoid some type of replay attack.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: timestamp based protocol
- From: cicap
- Re: timestamp based protocol
- References:
- timestamp based protocol
- From: cicap
- timestamp based protocol
- Prev by Date: timestamp based protocol
- Next by Date: Re: timestamp based protocol
- Previous by thread: timestamp based protocol
- Next by thread: Re: timestamp based protocol
- Index(es):