William Atwood <[email protected]> wrote: >> Such a physically present attacker could learn the identity of the Pledge by simply pretending to be a Registrar-Agent, and asking the device for it's identity.
> s/it's/its/
fixed.
>> An active on-path attacker can not replace the signed objects that the
>> Pledge and Registrar-Agent exchange.
> "can not" is ambiguous. It can mean "it is impossible for the attacker to
> replace the signed objects", or it can mean "it is possible for the
attacker
> to 'not replace' (i.e., leave as-is) the signed objects".
> If the first meaning is what you intend, then you could s/can not/cannot/,
> but you should probably reword as "It is impossible for an active on-path
> attacker to replace the signed objects that the Pledge and Registrar-Agent
> exchange." If the second meaning is what you intend, then I suggest
> rewriting to express what is actually true.
I replaced the sentence as you suggest, and I extended to explain:
> Also, it would be good to add a sentence explaining why (in either case).
Now in https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/pull/151
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
