IPv6 No Security Panacea

It seems that IPv6 has been imminent for the past decade -- just like the coming collapse of Microsoft that never happened. In fact, it's been nearly 10 years since I interviewed Vint Cerf, who pushed IT and the Internet as a whole to adopt the new protocol because we were running out of addresses. 

There has been some movement, and Microsoft support sure hasn't hurt. But those that proselytize IPv6 for its increased security might want to cool their heels: It's not radically more secure than good, old IPv4.

It seems that hackers are poring through IPv6 textbooks and technical docs (can't get a date, eh?) and finding holes. However, others argue that done right and done from scratch, IPv6 can be the platform for a more rational, secure network infrastructure. And its longer addresses should be harder to crack.

Have you moved or are you moving to IPv6? Give me the lowdown at dbarney@redmondmag.com.

Posted by Doug Barney on September 18, 2009 at 11:53 AM