bugtraq - Re: Addressing Cisco Security Issues

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20040329230037.GM24939@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 18:00:37 -0500
From: Clayton Kossmeyer <ckossmey@...co.com>
To: "Geo." <geoincident1@...info.org>
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Addressing Cisco Security Issues

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello -

I can appreciate your frustration with not being able to download
fixed software for your 678.  As you've discovered, the Cisco TAC
doesn't normally directly support DSL modems that were provided by an
ISP.  The TAC process for this is to direct customers to their ISP for
downloads.  The reasons for this are many, but one of the major ones
is that SPs/ISPs want to control what versions of software are
deployed within their networks.

Having said that, there is an exception and escalation process for
situations like yours.  If you've attempted to contact your
reseller/ISP and have been unsuccessful -- as in this case -- the TAC
can and should open a TAC case for you.  At this point, you should be
provided a TAC case number.

Cisco TAC cases are assigned priority levels that correspond to the
severity and urgency of the problem.  The priority level also
determines the amount of time in which you can expect a response from
a TAC engineer.  When you contact TAC, work with them to set the
correct priority level for your issue.  Also, make sure to ask when
you can expect a response so everyone's expectations are set up front.

If you feel as though your case is not being addressed urgently
enough, you can call the TAC at any time, referencing your case
number, to have the priority raised or the case escalated further.

In the future, if you believe you've run into a Cisco security related
issue, you can contact psirt@...co.com or security-alert@...co.com.
If needed, you can find additional ways to contact TAC here:

http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/687/Directory/DirTAC.shtml

I'll follow up with you unicast and we can figure out which image
you'll need.

Clay

- --
Clay Seaman-Kossmeyer  -   Cisco PSIRT
- --------------------------------------
    http://www.cisco.com/go/psirt

On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 01:02:25PM -0500, Geo. wrote:
>I have to post this because I consider this to be a security issue in 
>it's own right.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (SunOS)

iD8DBQFAaKpUEHa/Ybuq8nARAvI/AKCuC2ri1bltt8QgjzdDr9c5x+TMsgCfdfws
I0cTaCGL1Q9BW9Y+I+0MJLE=
=gbkK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html