[FoRK] [External] : Re: Is this a dumb question?

Aaron Burt aaron at bavariati.org
Thu Mar 18 08:22:27 PDT 2021


Add physical cryptographic tokens and you have .mil or eop.gov 
basically.

On 2021-03-18 06:58, Gregory Alan Bolcer wrote:
> I'm guessing it'd be verticalized task specific access rather than
> geographic.  As there would be so many of them, there'd be no reason
> to only think of access at the big granular level.
> 
> Different virtualinterwebs could have different terms of service for
> using them including use and types of software, apps, content, QoS,
> etc.  If you don't obey the ToS then your next little emphemeral,
> contemporaneously generated crypto access is not renewed.
> 
> Greg
> 
> On 3/10/2021 9:48 PM, Reza B'Far wrote:
>> Interesting... so, how would that work in practice from Nation/State
>> sponsored attacks?  As in where would you restrict things? You would
>> restrict, say *.cn?
>> 
>> I like Network/Hardware solutions over software solutions because they
>> erect physical barriers that have a much higher cost.  Bunch of dudes 
>> in
>> a basement can't access satellites or subterranean cables (well, not
>> easily and at low cost).  I think you could really fight things like
>> IP-theft which seem to be a big focus of the recent attacks by just
>> "cutting off" the hose.
>> 
>> On 3/10/21 3:45 PM, Gregory Alan Bolcer wrote:
>>> I like the idea of having a gTLD that you can only get on with 
>>> proper,
>>> time based, ephemeral certificates.
>>> 
>>> Greg
>>> 
>>> On 3/8/2021 11:21 AM, Reza B'Far wrote:
>>>> Reading the details of the Chinese attack... and the Russian 
>>>> attack...
>>>> 
>>>> Why would the western world not just go to a model where bit hoses 
>>>> of
>>>> internet are closed to those countries?  I mean, I understand there 
>>>> is
>>>> really no effective way of "cutting off" networks globally... but 
>>>> there
>>>> are ways to basically restrict bandwidth and that would really 
>>>> create
>>>> problems for those countries.  Why would we not do that?  Like why 
>>>> would
>>>> NATO for example have a wing that can just limit the bandwidth to a
>>>> point where it becomes very "expensive" to mount large attacks?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FoRK mailing list
>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!MpcwtB_41r7tNYNgvsLt6a3mXDs4TEKQbhPI3FT_ZFW1xhUBzLTc-ziNgD2WXUoR$
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FoRK mailing list
>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!MpcwtB_41r7tNYNgvsLt6a3mXDs4TEKQbhPI3FT_ZFW1xhUBzLTc-ziNgD2WXUoR$
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> FoRK mailing list
>> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> FoRK mailing list
> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork


More information about the FoRK mailing list