Subject: [eap] Issue: Attacker or Adversary?

From: [email-masked] (DE BOURSETTY Benoît FTRD/DTL/ISS)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:52:49 +0200

Submitter name: Benoit de Boursetty
Submitter email address: [email-masked]
Date first submitted: April 25, 2003
Document: draft-ietf-eap-rfc2284bis-01.txt
Comment type: E
Priority: 1
Section: 7.1
Rationale/Explanation of issue:

In section 7.1, the word "adversary" and "attacker" are both used to =
talk about the same kind of person. It is the only place in the draft =
where "adversary" is used, every where else the word "attacker" is used. =

Also all issues are "[attacker|adversary] may" but number 4 is a "might" =
(offline attacks). Does it really seem less likely than other attacks?

Suggested Change:
Unless the above is a subtlety beyond my grasping of the English =
language:
s/adversary/attacker/
s/might/may/ in issue 4