Re: timestamp based protocol
- From: "cicap" <cicap@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:35:23 +0100
"stan" <stan@xxxxxxxxxx> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:2r3vt1drfcd3lohr2r3f8e3qtc5mlbg67b@xxxxxxxxxx
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:55:27 +0100, "cicap" <cicap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Possibly they are using the timestamp tA in the generation of a nonce
> or IV, although this seems ill-advised.
hmmm...no I don't think this simply because nonce are intriduced in the next
chapter :)
>
> Or they are trying to avoid some type of replay attack.
>
>
If acceptance window is slightly greater then "skew"+"netword
delay"+"message processing delay" it is impossible a reply attach, isn't it?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: timestamp based protocol
- From: stan
- Re: timestamp based protocol
- References:
- timestamp based protocol
- From: cicap
- Re: timestamp based protocol
- From: stan
- timestamp based protocol
- Prev by Date: Re: timestamp based protocol
- Next by Date: Re: Get Rich
- Previous by thread: Re: timestamp based protocol
- Next by thread: Re: timestamp based protocol
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|