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

    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
                                    • 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange

                                      @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 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
                                      #54

                                      @0xabad1dea @slothrop 👌🏻 no worries next time I won’t reply unless to say something deep and serious which is probably once a year for me on Mastodon. You can ignore me.
                                      Have a good day

                                      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

                                        gudenau@hachyderm.ioG This user is from outside of this forum
                                        gudenau@hachyderm.ioG This user is from outside of this forum
                                        gudenau@hachyderm.io
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #55

                                        @0xabad1dea When I read the beginning of IPv8 I thought it was an April 1st one.

                                        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

                                          orb2069@mastodon.onlineO This user is from outside of this forum
                                          orb2069@mastodon.onlineO This user is from outside of this forum
                                          orb2069@mastodon.online
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #56

                                          @0xabad1dea I think the somebody in question is @mat ?

                                          0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange0 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