> In practice, for both methods it is probably easier to attack the
> client by forcing them to use a valid generated token via one of
the
> attack schemes already discussed.
>
What attack methods do you refer to, which are applicable to my
algorithm?
What? Let me rephrase. There are two ways to attack the defenses that
have been proposed on this thread (regardless of the token generator):
attack the token itself or attack the token handling in transit or on
the client side. What I'm saying is that if the encrypted token is
generated securely (non-trivial), then no matter which method is
chosen then it is probably easier to attack the token handling than to
try to pre-generate a valid token.
In essence, in current practical terms it doesn't really matter if you
use a computed token or a random nonce if the token generation process
is secure enough; that's not the weak link. However, the devil is in
the details. State management isn't without its pitfalls, either
(resource starvation, overhead, etc.), but the theory of state
management is a lot easier for the typical developer to grasp than
strong encryption.