TCP/IP daddy Cerf: 'Don't rewrite the internet for security'
Sage advice: 'Shoot the patent lawyer'
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Google Atmosphere There is no need to rewrite the basic internet protocols to beef up security, Vint Cerf has said. He also warned that governments are making increasingly heavy-handed attempts to take control of the interwebs.
Cerf, co-creator of TCP/IP and currently chief internet evangelist at Google, told delegates at the Atmosphere conference in Mountain View, California, that it was perfectly possible to add security features to the basic internet protocols without requiring a ground-up rewrite, simply by using currently available technology.
“The technology is available to do the job, it can be adapted,” he explained. “Don’t listen to those who tell you it can’t be adapted.”
He said that he’d built a secure version of the internet back in 1975 for the American military, but because the work was classified he couldn’t share the technology. However, as moves like DNSSec showed, the basic open internet structure could be adapted.
It is important that we don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater, Cerf warned, particularly on the identity front. There should always be a place for anonymous use of the internet, although tougher security protocols should be available for situations that warranted them – with Cerf highlighting two-factor authentication as a useful example.
However, the role of certification authorities has shown that there is significant room for improvement. Today’s internet is a “hostile environment,” he warned, and the hacking of certification authorities has shown that the model needs serious revision.
Some of the voices calling for change have come from governments that are seeking a greater level of control over the internet, a development of great concern to Cerf. He described the seizure of domains by the US Department of Homeland Security as an example of heavy-handed control, and said that some of the measures being introduced to protect intellectual property were similarly over the top.
“Historically, governments have felt in control on communications mediums,” he explained. “But internet packets don’t recognize borders, and this generates a lot of tension. Governments that feel fragile are concerned, and this is emerging in form of countries seeking control over internet.”
Looking ahead, Cerf acknowledged that there may be a replacement for the internet, which could do a similar job in a more efficient way. But any solution should be open, he said. When asked if the inventor of a better internet would be advised to open source their code, or hire a patent attorney and get copyright, Cerf’s answer was simplicity itself.
“Shoot the patent lawyer,” he joked. “Bob [Kahn] and I knew we would not succeed if we tried to protect our internet design and we published openly to remove any barrier, or excuse for adoption. It worked out pretty well.” ®
COMMENTS
It's not the governments people should worry about, it's the media rights holders. A secure internet isn't a big worry, but a DRM-ridden one is.
Well that would depend on how you define "secure Internet" then wouldn't it.
To you "secure" probably means "all my stuff is secured with encryption" whereas your common or garden government type would define secure as "the proles are not able to hide behind encryption and make snooping on them difficult"
No, it's wide open by design
Buggy implementations just cause more problems. The basic design of TCP/IP is that every node can reach every other node, and scan its ports for that matter. It was not designed to be open to the public. Think of a giant motel where every single room faces a street in a very bad neighborhood. Not nearly as secure as a building with a lobby, halls, etc., but IP is a motel.

IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
Requirements Checklist for Choosing a Cloud Backup and Recovery Service Provider
Data control in the cloud
Cloud based data management
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth