From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bifrost.lang.hm (mail.lang.hm [64.81.33.126]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FE6A20221E for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 13:16:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asgard.lang.hm (asgard.lang.hm [10.0.0.100]) by bifrost.lang.hm (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id q7KKGg5A009610; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 13:16:42 -0700 Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 13:16:42 -0700 (PDT) From: david@lang.hm X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm To: Michael Richardson In-Reply-To: <9246.1345321014@sandelman.ca> Message-ID: References: <502E064C.50305@etorok.net> <502E9609.5040800@etorok.net> <9246.1345321014@sandelman.ca> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] cerowrt 3.3.8-17: nice latency improvements, some issues with bind X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 20:16:45 -0000 On Sat, 18 Aug 2012, Michael Richardson wrote: > If we are writing the file system such that time can really never go > backwards, then we are pretty much immune to most replay attacks If time cannot go backwards, what do you do if someone accidently sets the time in the future? David Lang