2017
DOI: 10.1504/ijsn.2017.10004577
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Survey of security issues in IPv4 to IPv6 tunnel transition mechanisms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, some research works suggest the usage of separate rewall lters, one for IPv4 packets and another for IPv6 packets, in order to make sure that every packet is being ltered and examined [23].…”
Section: Mitigation Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Furthermore, some research works suggest the usage of separate rewall lters, one for IPv4 packets and another for IPv6 packets, in order to make sure that every packet is being ltered and examined [23].…”
Section: Mitigation Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another method is to deny the IPv6 tunnel by blocking a speci c protocol and its associated ports [23]. In case of 6in4 tunnel, an attacker might inject an already encapsulated packet within the tunnel, that's why rewalls can be enabled to inspect tunneled packets and the rewall should also permit any 6in4 tra c which is generated from the same segment or from outside it as well, in order to be able to lter tra c behind the segment as well [23]. Finally, IPsec has the ability to block any tra c that didn't pass the authentication phase [23].…”
Section: Mitigation Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations