[59771] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Cisco vulnerability on smaller catalyst switches
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (McBurnett, Jim)
Fri Jul 18 19:54:12 2003
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 19:52:51 -0400
From: "McBurnett, Jim" <jmcburnett@msmgmt.com>
To: <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
With the idea below. What is the current opinion about upgraded switches =
behind a firewall
on a private lan?
I suspect upgrade later or not at all.
But curious about other's opinions..
Later,
J
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Griffin [mailto:cgriffin@ufl.edu]
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 5:58 PM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Cisco vulnerability on smaller catalyst switches
As part of our vulnerability tests, we have been unable to confirm that =
the
smaller catalyst switches running IOS but without L3 capability are
vulnerable. They don't seem to react in a negative way to the same =
attacks
that lock up the other devices we have tested. Has anyone else been =
able to
verify this one way or the other?
--
Chris Griffin cgriffin@ufl.edu
Network Engineer - CCNP Phone: (352) 392-2061
OIT - Network Services Fax: (352) 392-9440
University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611
