%% You should probably cite rfc7132 instead of this I-D. @techreport{ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-07, number = {draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-07}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats/07/}, author = {Stephen Kent and Andrew Chi}, title = {{Threat Model for BGP Path Security}}, pagetotal = 19, year = 2013, month = oct, day = 8, abstract = {This document describes a threat model for the context in which (E)BGP path security mechanisms will be developed. The threat model includes an analysis of the RPKI, and focuses on the ability of an AS to verify the authenticity of the AS path info received in a BGP update. We use the term PATHSEC to refer to any BGP path security technology that makes use of the RPKI. PATHSEC will secure BGP {[}RFC4271{]}, consistent with the inter-AS security focus of the RPKI {[}RFC6480{]}. The document characterizes classes of potential adversaries that are considered to be threats, and examines classes of attacks that might be launched against PATHSEC. It does not revisit attacks against unprotected BGP, as that topic has already been addressed in {[}RFC4271{]}. It concludes with brief discussion of residual vulnerabilities.}, }