Re: CGA Use with HBA in Shim6 IETF Meeting July 10, 2006

[Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>]

On 23-jul-2006, at 17:20, Francis Dupont wrote:

> => HBAs are weaker than CGAs (which provide ownership using the  
> signature),
> and than standard strong authentication (using some kind of PKI).
> Without the hash extension IMHO they would be too weak,

Too weak for what?

I would be interested to learn what kind of attacks that could be  
carried out on the internet as we know it today you feel HBA could be  
vulnerable to.