stick with "anonymous" or "authenticated" when describing attacks

At 11:27 AM 12/22/2004, Adam Shostack wrote:
> I've long advocated 'credentialed' to refer to attacks where a user of
> the system can execute the attack, and 'anonymous' or
> 'non-credentialed' to refer to refer to attacks on servers, such as
> httpd, ftpd, or named.

The word "authenticated" already has the meaning of what I think you were 
trying to express with "credentialed"; "authenticated" means that a user 
has already presented credentials of some kind (username, password, PIN, 
key, cert, token, etc.), that those credentials were accepted and that the 
user enjoyed a different level of privilege than mere "anonymous" users.

The term "credentialed" suggests that a user has been issued credentials of 
some kind, but that he/she may or may not have used them to authenticate to 
a restricted resource.  (The term "credentialed" is similar to the word 
"ticketed".)

So...I'd stick with "anonymous" or "authenticated" when describing attacks 
on servers.

-jgl

******************* PLEASE NOTE *******************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.