Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. it seems someone decided to prove you really can just publish any nonsense protocol draft with the IETF https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-meow-mrrp-00.html

it seems someone decided to prove you really can just publish any nonsense protocol draft with the IETF https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-meow-mrrp-00.html

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
63 Posts 50 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

    it seems someone decided to prove you really can just publish any nonsense protocol draft with the IETF https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-meow-mrrp-00.html

    ghostinthenet@hachyderm.ioG This user is from outside of this forum
    ghostinthenet@hachyderm.ioG This user is from outside of this forum
    ghostinthenet@hachyderm.io
    wrote last edited by
    #34

    @0xabad1dea Well, this explains that late April Fool’s day draft. #IPv8

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

      it seems someone decided to prove you really can just publish any nonsense protocol draft with the IETF https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-meow-mrrp-00.html

      evoscale@c.imE This user is from outside of this forum
      evoscale@c.imE This user is from outside of this forum
      evoscale@c.im
      wrote last edited by
      #35

      @0xabad1dea But is this just a... ruff draft?..

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • infoseepage@mastodon.socialI infoseepage@mastodon.social

        @0xabad1dea Is this MEOW protocol compatible with IPoAC? Seems like there might be interpretability issues.

        Link Preview Image
        IP over Avian Carriers - Wikipedia

        favicon

        (en.wikipedia.org)

        toadjaune@hostux.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
        toadjaune@hostux.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
        toadjaune@hostux.social
        wrote last edited by
        #36

        @Infoseepage @0xabad1dea the MEOW designers definitely desire and planned for this interoperability, however, for some reason, existing IPoAC implementations tend to be unhappy with the interaction and deny further service !

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

          if you have no idea what this is about: a very official-looking "IPv8" draft appeared that was an absolute fever dream of and-a-pony wishlist features for a censorious regime, down to using json web tokens at the hardware level for some reason

          kasperd@westergaard.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
          kasperd@westergaard.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
          kasperd@westergaard.social
          wrote last edited by
          #37

          Before I viewed the link in your post I thought you were talking about that "IPv8" draft. I have some experience writing networking code, and based on my experience I will say that the meow draft has a slightly better chance of resulting in a useful implementation than the "IPv8" draft.

          I didn't read enough of the "IPv8" draft to make it to the parts you are referring to. I didn't need to read that far to figure out that it was worthless.

          The meow draft I can see is based on TCP. But I think before it can be implemented IANA would have to allocate a protocol number. And the meow draft seems to fall short of the requirements for such an allocation.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • infoseepage@mastodon.socialI infoseepage@mastodon.social

            @0xabad1dea Is this MEOW protocol compatible with IPoAC? Seems like there might be interpretability issues.

            Link Preview Image
            IP over Avian Carriers - Wikipedia

            favicon

            (en.wikipedia.org)

            fuzzyfuzzyfungus@cyberplace.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
            fuzzyfuzzyfungus@cyberplace.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
            fuzzyfuzzyfungus@cyberplace.social
            wrote last edited by
            #38

            @Infoseepage @0xabad1dea "Come see the violence inherent in the OSI 7 layer model!"

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

              it seems someone decided to prove you really can just publish any nonsense protocol draft with the IETF https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-meow-mrrp-00.html

              kasperd@westergaard.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
              kasperd@westergaard.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
              kasperd@westergaard.social
              wrote last edited by
              #39

              When I visited that link I was reminded of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yL_-1d9OSdk

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

                it seems someone decided to prove you really can just publish any nonsense protocol draft with the IETF https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-meow-mrrp-00.html

                nila@infosec.exchangeN This user is from outside of this forum
                nila@infosec.exchangeN This user is from outside of this forum
                nila@infosec.exchange
                wrote last edited by
                #40

                @0xabad1dea I wonder how interesting of an attack vector that could be in real life scenarios. How about having an LLM generate 500 drafts with non-obvious misinformation and watch crawlers crawl it, models being trained with the data and then people citing the resulting misinformation?

                Or, more wildly: what's the authN process for working groups? I wonder how far a swarm of agent sock puppets could get in the RFC process...

                ratsnakegames@mastodon.socialR 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

                  it seems someone decided to prove you really can just publish any nonsense protocol draft with the IETF https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-meow-mrrp-00.html

                  shwell@mastodon.auS This user is from outside of this forum
                  shwell@mastodon.auS This user is from outside of this forum
                  shwell@mastodon.au
                  wrote last edited by
                  #41

                  @0xabad1dea Bluesky?

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

                    @hugo @slothrop check the replies, this is not the post that was posted on the wrong day

                    hugo@someone.elses.computerH This user is from outside of this forum
                    hugo@someone.elses.computerH This user is from outside of this forum
                    hugo@someone.elses.computer
                    wrote last edited by
                    #42

                    @0xabad1dea @slothrop ? Am just saying it d be a good April’s Fools thing to do. Don’t see replies on my fedi client.

                    0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • hugo@someone.elses.computerH hugo@someone.elses.computer

                      @0xabad1dea @slothrop ? Am just saying it d be a good April’s Fools thing to do. Don’t see replies on my fedi client.

                      0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 This user is from outside of this forum
                      0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 This user is from outside of this forum
                      0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange
                      wrote last edited by
                      #43

                      @hugo @slothrop I’m saying it’s a pointed political statement and not a random joke https://infosec.exchange/@0xabad1dea/116419619962656186

                      hugo@someone.elses.computerH 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

                        if you have no idea what this is about: a very official-looking "IPv8" draft appeared that was an absolute fever dream of and-a-pony wishlist features for a censorious regime, down to using json web tokens at the hardware level for some reason

                        itnomad@ruhr.socialI This user is from outside of this forum
                        itnomad@ruhr.socialI This user is from outside of this forum
                        itnomad@ruhr.social
                        wrote last edited by
                        #44

                        @0xabad1dea I, for one, would rather welcome our feline overlords.
                        (Edit: remove the URL)

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

                          it seems someone decided to prove you really can just publish any nonsense protocol draft with the IETF https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-meow-mrrp-00.html

                          zackrobbin@mstdn.socialZ This user is from outside of this forum
                          zackrobbin@mstdn.socialZ This user is from outside of this forum
                          zackrobbin@mstdn.social
                          wrote last edited by
                          #45

                          @0xabad1dea

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • ohir@social.vivaldi.netO This user is from outside of this forum
                            ohir@social.vivaldi.netO This user is from outside of this forum
                            ohir@social.vivaldi.net
                            wrote last edited by
                            #46

                            @cinnamon @0xabad1dea
                            > about time to have a standard for some kinds of communication

                            There is one 😉

                            Link Preview Image
                            Toki Pona (official site)

                            favicon

                            (tokipona.org)

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

                              if you have no idea what this is about: a very official-looking "IPv8" draft appeared that was an absolute fever dream of and-a-pony wishlist features for a censorious regime, down to using json web tokens at the hardware level for some reason

                              ddgulledge@social.linux.pizzaD This user is from outside of this forum
                              ddgulledge@social.linux.pizzaD This user is from outside of this forum
                              ddgulledge@social.linux.pizza
                              wrote last edited by
                              #47

                              @0xabad1dea I hadn't heard about it before, but assuming it was an April Fool's Day RFC, I just searched for the ones that were published on Apr 1, 2026 and it wasn't there. A little more searching found it, and it seems to have been intended as one, but was still in a draft state. The delay in the joke feels like meta-humor and works well considering the context of IPv4 address space exhaustion and the slow implementation of IPv6.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

                                if you have no idea what this is about: a very official-looking "IPv8" draft appeared that was an absolute fever dream of and-a-pony wishlist features for a censorious regime, down to using json web tokens at the hardware level for some reason

                                jelu@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                jelu@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                jelu@mastodon.social
                                wrote last edited by
                                #48

                                @0xabad1dea I hope people learn a little bit about the IETF draft process also: https://www.ietf.org/participate/ids/

                                Yes, anyone can submit a draft. It does not mean anything beside showing how strong what-ever they just took is...

                                Link Preview Image
                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • nila@infosec.exchangeN nila@infosec.exchange

                                  @0xabad1dea I wonder how interesting of an attack vector that could be in real life scenarios. How about having an LLM generate 500 drafts with non-obvious misinformation and watch crawlers crawl it, models being trained with the data and then people citing the resulting misinformation?

                                  Or, more wildly: what's the authN process for working groups? I wonder how far a swarm of agent sock puppets could get in the RFC process...

                                  ratsnakegames@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                  ratsnakegames@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                  ratsnakegames@mastodon.social
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #49

                                  @nila @0xabad1dea the auth process is "if the IETF isn't interested, it doesn't proceed to the RFC stage", apparently.

                                  You can't just post a standard, but you CAN just post a draft/proposal, which is what both this and "IPv8" are.

                                  ratsnakegames@mastodon.socialR nila@infosec.exchangeN 2 Replies Last reply
                                  0
                                  • ratsnakegames@mastodon.socialR ratsnakegames@mastodon.social

                                    @nila @0xabad1dea the auth process is "if the IETF isn't interested, it doesn't proceed to the RFC stage", apparently.

                                    You can't just post a standard, but you CAN just post a draft/proposal, which is what both this and "IPv8" are.

                                    ratsnakegames@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                    ratsnakegames@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                    ratsnakegames@mastodon.social
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #50

                                    @nila @0xabad1dea as long as crawlers correctly interpret the draft as a draft and journos / wiki editors etc do their due diligence (which, i am told, they always do), there is no attack vector

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • ratsnakegames@mastodon.socialR ratsnakegames@mastodon.social

                                      @nila @0xabad1dea the auth process is "if the IETF isn't interested, it doesn't proceed to the RFC stage", apparently.

                                      You can't just post a standard, but you CAN just post a draft/proposal, which is what both this and "IPv8" are.

                                      nila@infosec.exchangeN This user is from outside of this forum
                                      nila@infosec.exchangeN This user is from outside of this forum
                                      nila@infosec.exchange
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #51

                                      @ratsnakegames @0xabad1dea Do you think an agent swarm led by an APT could social engineer its way into "the IETF"? Setting up web pages, blogs, arXiv submissions etc. for a network of sock puppets definitely seems within reach of such actors.

                                      (And, come to think of it, any other standards body...)

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

                                        it seems someone decided to prove you really can just publish any nonsense protocol draft with the IETF https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-meow-mrrp-00.html

                                        thelancashireman@hostux.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                                        thelancashireman@hostux.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                                        thelancashireman@hostux.social
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #52

                                        @0xabad1dea

                                        Reminds me of Doug Zongker's publication:
                                        http://isotropic.org/papers/chicken.pdf
                                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yL_-1d9OSdk

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

                                          it seems someone decided to prove you really can just publish any nonsense protocol draft with the IETF https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-meow-mrrp-00.html

                                          raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                                          raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                                          raymaccarthy@mastodon.ie
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #53

                                          @0xabad1dea
                                          Cat5e or Cat6 cable isn't good enough.
                                          You need Cat9 cable,

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups