Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Physical-layer Ethernet Encryption

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the could-be-cool dept.

Tekmage writes "Intel has just announced that they'll be shipping their ethernet encryption co-processor in their fourth quarter. Definitely a must (IMHO) for anyone considering wireless networking. "

1 of 95 comments (clear)

  1. Clues for the Clueless by the+red+pen · · Score: 5
    1. Why should we believe this is secure? Where is the spec? Read the IPSec spec. It's wide open. RSA, DH, X.509, 3DES... this is not a "black box" system.
    2. Why physical layer security? This isn't physical layer security. The poster who though it was was wrong. If you want to adhere to strict OSI layer definitions -- well, you're out of touch with modern networking reality, but if you do -- then this is a Link Layer security.
    3. Why should we trust hardware? The NSA only trusts hardware. After you verify that it performs the correct operations, then you don't have to worry about someone hacking it -- even if they 0wnZ your box. Please don't waste your time with hair-splitting "what if" scenarios; we all know there's "always a way to circumvent security," but when it requires physical access to a box, it's much, much, harder.
    4. Hasn't this been done? Yes. IPSec is a standard. Lots of people are doing it. There is IPSec technology being built into the Linux IP stack. That means you can VPN to your pals with a RedCreek VPN or a Network Alchemy gateway or one of these Intel network cards.

    Please return to your regularly scheduled rants about FBI/NSA/CIA conspiracies.