[dnssec-deployment] DNSSEC for ENUM

[Michael Richardson]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


>>>>> "Lutz" == Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz at iks-jena.de> writes:
    Lutz> I'd like to inform you, that I try to get DNSSEC as a
    Lutz> requirement for an upcoming ENUM seal. The risk of modified
    Lutz> data (by hotels which want to prohibit VoIP or gouvernmental
    Lutz> intercepting dreams) is too high for unverified
    Lutz> information. OTOH ENUM is an area where DNSSEC drawbacks
    Lutz> (bogus zones caused by mismaintainance) does not harm that
    Lutz> much due to the POTS fallback.

  I'm a bit confused by this threat analysis as it relates to hotels.

  A hotel wants to prohibit VoIP/ENUM can just break the zone by
breaking DNSSEC, and that will cause a fallback to the hotels metered
PSTN.  Or do you think that breaking DNSSEC will cause sufficient
complaints that the hotel will get no money for the internet connection?

  In the case of ENUM, you don't have to break all the zones either,
just one or two.
  
  Government interception, I see the point.

- -- 
]           Bear: "Me, I'm just the shape of a bear."          |  firewalls  [
]  Michael Richardson,    Xelerance Corporation, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
]mcr at xelerance.com      http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/mcr/ |device driver[
]panic("Just another Debian GNU/Linux using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [



  
  
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Finger me for keys

iQEVAwUBR5SVcoCLcPvd0N1lAQKYUQf9GAfhs9brEiIZTAjGFVi5tapJmu9M6VLM
DT/hvO8oHvJc3pIgZlDHnFw6Rsw/nPJ6Jmy32bbEy2rUHJEUCGx7D1nhJD0NNz2t
/MIoaYHyd5yOYh+ig47TfTf6n7AdJraRu7VOMOABy6icRLE1NGDdBY9r+nPJzF3Q
45NnIw78ItDK2kBcAYgHTC7jGZBUCB1GXPLqxDSNcGlJvZzboBRbcpi1qurEMcY1
g/TjNJ+uQx2ZjU5MZW2ok6dZ1PGq7ghRexEQLMa9e98hNQUGCEicamXXDgFcj7fU
gu4aYay1VJ8AUveCxq1NcFQZWzcPKXRnFx1UZVyBNr1t/oTtjBZLFw==
=K0lG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----