Re: Need for HW-clock independent timestamps

[Axel Neumann <neumann@cgws.de>]

Am 17=2E Mai 2018 07:53:17 MESZ schrieb Matthias Urlichs <matthias@urlichs=
=2Ede>:
>On 17=2E05=2E2018 07:03, Roman Mamedov wrote:
>> Personally I am puzzled this is even an issue in WG=2E Not a single
>other VPN
>> protocol mandates every node to keep a monotonically increasing
>counter,
>> including even over reboots=2E
>
>Wireguard's connection setup is a whole lot simpler than most other

But only if you ignore the implications coming with NTP transmissions=2E
its like Outsourcing some state transfer to another service and then claim=
 that remaining procedures are most simple=2E=20
/axel

>protocols=2E It basically doesn't require a "real" handshake, just a
>request/reply pair=2E Thus it's vulnerable against disruption by replay
>attacks =E2=80=93 a replayed rekey packet would disrupt conversation unti=
l the
>real sender times out, a minute later=2E
>
>--=20
>-- Matthias Urlichs
>
>_______________________________________________
>WireGuard mailing list
>WireGuard@lists=2Ezx2c4=2Ecom
>https://lists=2Ezx2c4=2Ecom/mailman/listinfo/wireguard

--=20
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Ger=C3=A4t mit K-9 Mail gesendet=
=2E